Green Subsidies don’t reduce carbon emissions much if at all.

Brookswood

Brookswood

Senior Member
Green-energy subsidies, in the first instance, subsidize extra fossilfuel consumption to produce battery minerals, wind turbines and solar panels. U.S. policies particularly incentivize oversize SUVs whose net emissions are greater than any gasoline- fueled miles they could possibly displace.

When Washington spends hundreds of billions to lure some drivers to use EVs, guess what? It ends up making gasoline cheaper and more available for other consumers around the world to use.
Click to expand...
Government subsidies of ”green” technology is probably not doing much to lower carbon emissions.

Studies have found that most new green energy does not replace energy from fossil fuels. Rather it provides more energy for people to consume.

What worked to reduce carbon emissions? A carbon tax. The financial incentive to reduce carbon emissions is what makes people reduce them.
 

We've just learned that burning mountains of coal and oceans of oil is going to change our climate. From what we know, with climate change, especially abrupt ones like now, plants and animals don't fair that well. All the great empires of that past shriveled away when climates changed. We are groping around trying to find a good alternative non-destructive energy source, and no one seems to have one in their back pocket. So we're try anything that might work.
 

Yep, typical "Symbolism over Substance"...something Mr. Rush Limbaugh talked to us about many times!

He referred to this as a "tactic" used by Liberals...
 
dilettante said:
Why have yet another economic intervention that punishes poor and working people and elevates the rich?
Click to expand...
In Canada, we've had a carbon tax for several years now. And because some industries pay a carbon tax too, they actually collect more than we consumers pay. And then, we consumers get a rebate to cover the amount of carbon tax that we've paid and for many(maybe the majority) of us, we get back more than we paid out. My husband and I are examples of that. It's a reminder of the cost of polluting and an incentive (with a 'carrot' of more money) to clean up our carbon foot print.

We have solar panels on our roof that power our EV and home electricity use. We also put more insulation in our roof so haven't needed to air condition our house. And we had our 30 year old windows replaced with triple glazed windows that prevent our heat from leaking out like it used to do. We did all that with a no interest loan from the federal government.

So we spend less money on natural gas to heat the house, our home has gone up in value because of the improvements. And looking at my heat bill, we spend around $185 a year on the carbon tax but we get back $1200 a year on the carbon rebate. The carbon rebate is a fixed amount per person so even though we pay less, we still get the same amount back.

I also read an article about a woman in Saskatchewan, low income with a couple little kids who commented that if the future new PM eliminates the carbon tax, she will actually suffer because she relies on that rebate to cover some of her kids shoe and birthday and Christmas costs. So while we pay it up front, we get that money back and then some in most cases. But it serves as a reminder to folks, that we're all polluting and 'it comes at a cost', which we'll pay more and more as time goes by. And I'm not just referring to the rising carbon tax, but how much damage our world and infrastructure is going to be subjected to.
 
Timewise 60+ said:
Yep, typical "Symbolism over Substance"...something Mr. Rush Limbaugh talked to us about many times!

He referred to this as a "tactic" used by Liberals...
Click to expand...
I think it's fair to say that his bias was definitely showing here. A refusal to acknowledge or maybe even make an effort to understand the purpose of any and all efforts to transition to a cleaner and more sustainable way for 9 billion human beings to live on a finite planet.
 
Brookswood said:
Government subsidies of ”green” technology is probably not doing much to lower carbon emissions.

Studies have found that most new green energy does not replace energy from fossil fuels. Rather it provides more energy for people to consume.

What worked to reduce carbon emissions? A carbon tax. The financial incentive to reduce carbon emissions is what makes people reduce them.
Click to expand...
What most North Americans don't seem to comprehend is that in the rest of the world, there is a great adoption of green technologies going on. And Brookswood, you should feel good here while personally, I'm embarrassed as a Canadian.

I came across a news page that compared the emissions of the world G7 countries and every country except Canada has seen its emissions from transportation come down. The exclusion was electricity, so green technologies are helping and not just encouraging people to 'burn more gas'.

Fill ’er up. Burn it down

We talk a lot about loving the outdoors, our beautiful country, the amazing outdoors, but when push comes to shove, Canadians just don't care about the environment apparently. Doesn't help either that Alberta's premier was a lobbyist for the oil industry.
 
IMO it’s a global issue and it needs a global approach to solve/change.

A globally regulated carbon tax might help encourage the development of clean energy around the world and encourage developing nations to preserve their natural resources as they pursue a better standard of living.

I very much doubt that will happen.

The good news is that the world got along without the dinosaurs and it will get along without us. 😉🤭😂

statue-of-liberty-found-in-the-forest-v0-k5m16t8mvcsc1.jpeg
 
dilettante said:
Why have yet another economic intervention that punishes poor and working people and elevates the rich?
Click to expand...
I agree with your sentiment. Any carbon tax needs to be offset with cuts in other taxes and fees paid by common folk. Dollar for dollar. My state has a carbon tax and there is no offset. That has done exactly what you fear above.

Hopefully, other states and the Feds will Learn from that.
 
Last edited:
Paco Dennis said:
As a conservative commentator, Limbaugh had an incentive to portray liberal tactics negatively, which may have influenced this characterization.
Click to expand...
If people want to discuss various political entertainers, may I suggest they start a separate thread for that.
 
Debrah N. said:
What most North Americans don't seem to comprehend is that in the rest of the world, there is a great adoption of green technologies going on. And Brookswood, you should feel good here while personally, I'm embarrassed as a Canadian.

I came across a news page that compared the emissions of the world G7 countries and every country except Canada has seen its emissions from transportation come down. The exclusion was electricity, so green technologies are helping and not just encouraging people to 'burn more gas'.

Fill ’er up. Burn it down

We talk a lot about loving the outdoors, our beautiful country, the amazing outdoors, but when push comes to shove, Canadians just don't care about the environment apparently. Doesn't help either that Alberta's premier was a lobbyist for the oil industry.
Click to expand...
It is a global problem. Many less developed countries need cheap power to advance. Alas, that is usually coal powered electrical generation. More advanced countries should be offering them help to develop and build cheaper solar and wind generation.
 
Brookswood said:
Studies have found that most new green energy does not replace energy from fossil fuels. Rather it provides more energy for people to consume.
Click to expand...
Some of us knew that. Those studies go back a ways.
Brookswood said:
What worked to reduce carbon emissions? A carbon tax. The financial incentive to reduce carbon emissions is what makes people reduce them.
Click to expand...
That should work! It'll be like when alcohol was taxed and everybody quit drinking!
 
Raise taxes on things you don’t want. Lower taxes on things you want. It really does work.
 
Debrah N. said:
What do you mean 'to all others' you apologize? You're going to hold onto the rudeness for paladin who has a different opinion than yours? Kind of reinforces his opinion of conservatives doesn't it?
Click to expand...
It's not the opinion I disagree with.
I dislike being told that by somehow being conservative, I'm considered a liar and an idiot. If you can't understand that.... well nothing to add here, except I guess you belong in that column.
 
Here's a thing. If you could do your bit, protect the environment whatever, yet you knew that in the grand scheme of things you weren't going to be able to save the world, would you a) Choose to do the least amount of harm and keep your own conscious clean; b) Say, oh well, China are polluting anyway, so I'll pollute?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top