Competitive Enterprise Institute | 1899 L ST NW Floor 12, Washington, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-331-1010 | Fax: 202-331-0640
NASA’s James Hansen tried this week to surf the 20th anniversary of
his famous congressional testimony that launched global warming
hysteria. Apparently not wanting to be left out of the green hoopla,
John McCain tried to catch Hansen’s wave.
Both wiped out with embarrassing proposals.
You might have thought that Hansen’s main talking point this week
would have been, "See, I was right." But, of course, he wasn’t, so he
couldn’t take any credit.
With 20 years of real-life data to compare against Hansen’s 1988
predictions, it’s clear that reality has way underperformed on his
fantasy of carbon-dioxide-stoked warming .
No doubt this is in large part due to Hansen’s yet-to-be-validated assumption  that manmade CO2 emissions drive global climate in a meaningful way.
Hansen has been so far off the mark in forecasting global warming
that he seems to have forsaken it altogether in favor of simply
declaring that atmospheric CO2 levels must be reduced from the current
level of about 380 parts per million to less than 350 ppm "to preserve
creation, the planet on which civilization developed."
But there is no scientific analysis to support 350 ppm or any other
specific target as the preferred level of atmospheric CO2; moreover,
350 ppm also is not something likely to happen in our lifetimes no
matter what we do.
The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projects that
atmospheric CO2 concentrations will climb to around 700 ppm if no
action is taken to curb CO2 emissions as compared to around 500 ppm
under a maximum regulation scenario. Some in the alarmist community doubt  that the latter level can be achieved without dramatic and as-yet-unimagined advances in technology.
Bereft of science, Hansen was left to do what he does best — act the drama queen, as he did in 2006 when he likened  the Bush administration to Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union for reviewing his public presentations before he made them.
"CEOs of fossil energy companies know what they are doing and are
aware of the long-term consequences of continued business as usual. In
my opinion, these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity
and nature," Hansen said this week.
"Since his appearance on the Hill 20 years ago, Hansen had lost most
of his hair; the few remaining strands, suspended over his head by
static electricity or some other force, gave him a crazy-professor
look," the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank reported after Hansen’s
Hey, Dana, it might not just be a "look."
Meanwhile, John McCain, who fancies himself as the taxpayer’s knight
in shining armor, tried to color himself green by proposing to gouge
taxpayers for CO2 emission reductions that may never happen.
Earlier this week, as part of his proposal that taxpayers award $300
million to the developer of the next generation auto battery that would
leapfrog hybrid and electric car technology, McCain also proposed that
auto manufacturers be given a $5,000 tax credit for every
zero-emissions vehicle they sell.
But when you do the math, McCain’s proposal turns out to be little more than a taxpayer rip-off in favor of ZEV makers.
Given that the average car emits about 6 tons of CO2 annually and
has a lifetime of about nine years, replacing a regular car with a ZEV
would eliminate about 54 tons of tailpipe CO2 emissions. With the tax
credit, this works out to taxpayers paying ZEV makers about $92.60 per
ton of tailpipe CO2 emissions avoided.
A cheaper way to reduce CO2 emissions, however, would be to purchase
carbon credits on, say, the Chicago Climate Exchange, where they cost
about $5.30 per ton – more than a 94 percent savings over the McCain
Additionally, these credits can be purchased and emissions could be
reduced now — which would make Hansen happy — rather than at some
future point if ZEVs ever catch on with consumers.
Keep in mind that General Motors cancelled its ZEV program in 2003
because it could not sell enough of the vehicles to make it profitable.
Despite the millions of Americans who either belong to or donate to
environmental groups, GM only sold about 1,100 ZEVs after spending
about $500 million to develop the vehicle.
Adding insult to injury is the illusory nature of ZEVs.
Even if they caught on with consumers, it’s not clear they would
meaningfully reduce CO2 emissions. While CO2 wouldn’t be emitted from
ZEVs, it would be emitted from the smokestacks of the power plants
supplying the electricity used to charge ZEV batteries.
Later in the week, McCain proposed to green the government by buying
more fuel-efficient vehicles. But while fuel-efficient vehicles
certainly exist, they tend to cost much more than the fuel savings they
Hybrid cars aren’t cost-effective unless gas costs around $10 per gallon or the cars are driven more than 65,000 miles per year .
FedEx Corp., owner of the largest fleet of hybrid trucks, has publicly
admitted that the trucks aren’t cost-effective. The cost of Santa
Clara, Calif.'s fuel cell buses is a staggering $51.66 per mile as
compared to $1.61 per mile for a diesel bus .
Perhaps McCain should put his money where his mouth is and get a
fuel cell model for his Straight Talk Express campaign bus. Let’s see
if he’s willing to spend his limited campaign funds living up to his
Steven Milloy publishes JunkScience.com  and DemandDebate.com . He is a junk science expert , advocate of free enterprise  and an adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.