UN Report Suggests USD $240 Per Gallon Gasoline Tax to Fight Global Warming

On 10/9/2018 at 10:37 AM, WaytoPeace said:

This is no joke. The sooner we begin taking serious actions, such as adopting a carbon tax, the cheaper it will be.  If we are foolish enough to wait until 2030, the cost will be very high. 

You are right, WaytoPeace!  We need to get serious.  Like, Now!  So, the article says that the carbon tax should be $27,000 per CO2 ton released into the atmosphere.  Well, since we are now serious, and since a single cow releases 4 tons worth of CO2 equivalent greenhouse gases (in their methane-filled farts) per year, and considering it takes two years to raise a cow for slaughter, that means the farmer should be paying $27k x8 = $216,000 in taxes per head of cattle.  Since the average cow produces around 440 lbs of meat, that means you can theoretically get about 1,760 quarterpounders out of one cow...which means a McDonald's hamburger ought to cost around $122.22 more in carbon taxes alone!    

However, it is not just cows that produce methane.  All livestock do!  So, since we are now serious about climate change, the most efficient (and therefore most logical) way to save the planet is to have the government outlaw farming.  

Now, I know what you are thinking: if we outlaw farming, wouldn't a lot of people starve to death???  But I've already thought about this!  You see, livestock aren't the only thing that farts out methane.  People do too!  If we outlaw farming, then we also can starve-off a lot of those evil methane-producing people!  At $27,000 per carbon credit, human beings collectively produce over $25.5 billion dollars worth of pollution just by farting and exhaling EACH YEAR! 

Imagine how far a little bit of starvation could go toward saving the planet!

Seriously.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Epic said:

 Imagine how far a little bit of starvation could go toward saving the planet!

and imagine how much better everyone will look in a bikini. 

$240/gallon is nonsensical. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rodent said:

and imagine how much better everyone will look in a bikini. 

$240/gallon is nonsensical. 

It is not nonsensical if my electric bill is kept to a maximum $6,672/month in my bunker.  In fact, if I'm in my bunker (I don't have one) send all the climate controlled bills you want.  We will need to have a steady supply of toilet paper and we won't be going out much.  Hey, what was that?  In the sky, over there!  Did you see it?  Dive, dive, dive!  Katy, bar the door and LAGNAF one last time!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind, the high tax on fuel could replace income tax or be used to pay off government debt, also the taxes are discussed on page 2-79 of Chapter 2

http://report.ipcc.ch/sr15/pdf/sr15_chapter2.pdf

The tax in 2100 depends on the scenario and has a range of 690 to 27000 per tonne of CO2 ($112/gallon at $14000/tonne).

In 2030 the price is 45 to 960 per tonne of CO2 ($8/gallon at $500/tonne).

Also keep in mind that the sooner we start lowering emissions the closer we are to the low price ($45/ton in 2030 and $690/tonne in 2100 or $0.36/gallon in 2030 and $5.52/gallon in 2100).

In addition the higher prices on fossil fuels simply mean we will replace coal, oil, and natural gas more quickly and reduce risks of floods, droughts, hurricanes, and other severe weather.

Also keep in mind taxes can be revenue neutral, so increased carbon taxes can be used to reduce income tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dennis Coyne said:

In addition the higher prices on fossil fuels simply mean we will replace coal, oil, and natural gas more quickly and reduce risks of floods, droughts, hurricanes, and other severe weather.

< sigh >

United Nations: A $240 Per Gallon Gas Tax Is Needed To Fight Climate Change

The IPCC’s report is meant to solidify political support for the Paris climate accord ahead of a U.N. climate summit scheduled for December. The report calls for societal changes that are “unprecedented in terms of scale” in order to limit future global warming to below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the stretch goal of the Paris accord.

But, according to their own report, there is very little evidence that global warming has caused many types of extreme weather events to increase.  “The IPCC once again reports that there is little basis for claiming that drought, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes have increased, much less increased due to” greenhouse gases, University of Colorado professor Roger Pielke, Jr. tweeted Sunday night pointing out this “inconvenient truth.”  For example, the IPCC’s report noted that “there is only low confidence regarding changes in global tropical cyclone numbers under global warming over the last four decades.”

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corrupt politicians, governments with debt that will never be paid or are simply broke/bankrupt and whose citizens can't pay for college let alone pay HUGE(!) taxes for the next (blank) they can't see or understand, Scientists who need grants, world bodies whose continued relevancy are under question, etc. etc. etc.

Those are the people we are asked to simply believe as much as the Pope!  At least the Pope leaves us alone and doesn't ask for a HUGE tax to pay for the coming of the Lord!  Which, by the way (didn't I tell you?), won't happen until long after you're dead and gone!  Praise the Lord, and pass the ammunition! 

Do you know why people like it when they hear such terms as "drain the swamp" and "America First"?  It's because they are saying enough of this shit.  Bring me facts, prove it to me, prove it to me again, prove to me that you actually have a plan that make sense to deal with these issues.  NO Guesses!  No "we could be wrong, but what if we're right?!?!!!!  Reality.  Otherwise, stick it up your ass and get off my lawn!  NOW!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

18 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

< sigh >

United Nations: A $240 Per Gallon Gas Tax Is Needed To Fight Climate Change

The IPCC’s report is meant to solidify political support for the Paris climate accord ahead of a U.N. climate summit scheduled for December. The report calls for societal changes that are “unprecedented in terms of scale” in order to limit future global warming to below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the stretch goal of the Paris accord.

But, according to their own report, there is very little evidence that global warming has caused many types of extreme weather events to increase.  “The IPCC once again reports that there is little basis for claiming that drought, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes have increased, much less increased due to” greenhouse gases, University of Colorado professor Roger Pielke, Jr. tweeted Sunday night pointing out this “inconvenient truth.”  For example, the IPCC’s report noted that “there is only low confidence regarding changes in global tropical cyclone numbers under global warming over the last four decades.”

Hi Tom,

Try reading the report, and judge for yourself.  There are a variety of opinions, about 7.5 billion of them (at least one per person).

For the impact of 1.5 C or 2 C of warming try page 10 at link below.

http://report.ipcc.ch/sr15/pdf/sr15_faq.pdf

Also I said nothing about the number of hurricanes, it is the severity of the effects from droughts, floods, and other severe weather events.  The science shows that the risk of increased flooding, droughts, storm surges during hurricanes due to sea level rise will all be exacerbated by higher Global average temperatures.

Pielke has given us a red herring, which is standard practice.  I said nothing about the number of tropical cyclones, it is the devastating effect of more powerful cyclones due to higher sea surface temperatures and higher sea level that result from higher Global average temperature that is the problem.  Also note that Professor Pielke is not a climate scientist he is a political scientist

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_A._Pielke_Jr.

Edited by Dennis Coyne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"97% of scientists" claim is nonsense.

If you unthinkingly parrot the absurd claim that 97% of scientists agree that climate change is caused by humans, and you refuse to even take a look at the questions presented by climate skeptics, then perhaps you might be a climate change cultist... ?  

More in the link, here is a taste:

Independent Audit Exposes The Fraud In Global Warming Data

An independent audit of the key temperature dataset that is being used by climate models has exposed more than 70 problems with the data which render it “unfit for global studies.”  Problems include zero degree temperatures in the Caribbean, 82 degree C temperatures in Colombia and ship-based recordings taken 100km inland.  The audit has concluded that the studies are deliberately exaggerating temperatures to support a theory of global warming utilizing global averages that are far less certain than what is being forecast.

The audit has revealed that “that climate models have been tuned to match incorrect data, which would render incorrect their predictions of future temperatures and estimates of the human influence of temperatures.”  Furthermore, the Paris Climate Agreement adopted 1850-1899 averages as “indicative” of pre-industrial temperatures is “fatally flawed.”  The entire Paris Climate Agreement has an agenda to eliminate effectively the advancement of society and attempt to reset the clock to the pre-Industrial Revolution.  This entire theory that before the Industrial Revolution, our planet’s atmosphere was somehow pristine and uncontaminated by human-made pollutants has been also proven to be completely bogus.

Bubbles trapped in Greenland’s ice has revealed that we began emitting greenhouse gases at least 2,000 years ago.  The Romans even constructed the first aqueduct was built in 312 BC because there was a serious problem with water pollution.  Seneca (c 4BC-65AD), the adviser to Nero, wrote in 61AD: “No sooner had I left behind the oppressive atmosphere of the city [Rome] and that reek of smoking cookers which pour out, along with clouds of ashes, all the poisonous fumes they’ve accumulated in their interiors whenever they’re started up, then I noticed the change in my condition.”

... The audit has exposed the dishonesty in this entire scheme and it appears to be directed at the goal of reducing the population.  Anomalies it has identified include at St Kitts in the Caribbean, the average temperature for December 1981 was zero degrees, normally it’s 26C.  For three months in 1978, one place in Colombia reported an 82 degrees Celsius average – hotter than the hottest day on Earth.  Then in Romania, one September the average temperature was reported as minus 46°C, which has never happened.  The data showed that supposedly ships would report ocean temperatures from places up to 100km inland.  The paper also points out that the most serious flaws identified was the shortage of data.  For the first two years, from 1850 onwards, the only land-based reporting station in the Southern Hemisphere was in Indonesia.  Then there were ship observations at the time but Australian records had not started until 1855 in Melbourne, behind Auckland which started in 1853.  This data appears to have been just made up.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Darth would say:   "The Force is strong in this one." 

Watch out for people who absolutely insist that only they know how to run the world. Give that crowd "emergency powers" by a vote of the Senate and it won't be long before you have the First Galactic Empire.  And you know the punishment for the Resistance. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Makes me have a good 😆 laugh...Please read your Holy Books... It has been foretold... Our world will be DESTROYED.... THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The entire thing is a sham and a shakedown. The people pushing it would make billions. The looney left has no interest in real scientific research and evidence, just emotional irrational outrage. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Aziz Ahmad Siddiqui said:

Makes me have a good 😆 laugh...Please read your Holy Books... It has been foretold... Our world will be DESTROYED.... THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT... 

Please read your refrigerator manual...It has been foretold... The refrigerator will NOT WORK if unplugged... So sayeth the MANUFACTURER...  THE DAY OF SPOILED MEATS...

And both were written by men...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2018 at 4:03 AM, Dennis Coyne said:

Also keep in mind taxes can be revenue neutral, so increased carbon taxes can be used to reduce income tax.

Wow, now that is truly one of the most nieve things ever written. 

 

The entire thing is a sham. Selective data to bolster a false narrative created by the people who want funding and people who will make money from ridiculous amounts of taxes and regulations. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites