The Horrific Cost of Cap and Trade

Doctor Steven Chu, Obama's pick for Energy Secretary, said, "The American public…just like your teenage kids, aren’t acting in a way that they should act." (1)

But the government has a fix for that -- education. They are targeting kids to teach them about "climate change", energy efficiency and pollution. The EPA has partnered with the Boys & Girls Clubs of America (BGCA) and Parent Teacher Organizations Today (PTO Today) (2). Our tax dollars at work, folks.

"We’re showing people across the country how energy efficiency can be part of what they do every day," said EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson. "Confronting climate change, saving money on our utility bills, and reducing our use of heavily-polluting energy can be as easy as making a few small changes." (3)

The government is doing all it can to push cap and trade when health care is not stealing the spotlight. Asked if he expected a town-hall style pushback on cap and trade, Dr. Chu said, "I don’t think so…maybe I’m optimistic, but there’s very little debate" that a new green energy economy will bring economic prosperity, Mr. Chu told reporters. Very little debate among the politicians, maybe, but not among the citizens once they get wind of how much this will cost.

Global warming cap and trade costs could hit $300 billion annually, the Treasury Department admitted in documents released recently (4). You can see the documents from the Treasury Department here (PDF).

But those are big numbers. Let's break it down to something we can all relate to. Ben Lieberman, in testifying before Congress, said:

"For a household of four, energy costs go up $436 that year, and they eventually reach $1,241 in 2035 and average $829 annually over that span. Electricity costs go up 90 percent by 2035, gasoline by 58 percent, and natural gas by 55 percent by 2035. The cumulative higher energy costs for a family of four by then will be nearly $20,000.

"But direct energy costs are only part of the consumer impact. Nearly everything goes up, since higher energy costs raise production costs. If you look at the total cost of Waxman-Markey, it works out to an average of $2,979 annually from 2012-2035 for a household of four. By 2035 alone, the total cost is over $4,600." (5)

And that's not including impact to employment. He continues:

"We estimate job losses averaging 1,145,000 at any given time from 2012-2035. And note that those are net job losses, after the much-hyped green jobs are taken into account. Some of the lost jobs will be destroyed entirely, while others will be outsourced to nations like China and India that have repeatedly stated that they'll never hamper their own economic growth with energy-cost boosting global warming measures like Waxman-Markey." (6)

You can find the Waxman-Markey bill, HR 2454, here (PDF).
======================
1. Talley, Ian (2009, September 21). "Steven Chu: Americans Are Like ‘Teenage Kids’ When It Comes to Energy". Wall Street Journal.
Retrieved September 22, 2009, from WSJ.com

2. Jones, Enesta (2009, September 17). "EPA Launches Fall Tour to Help Americans Fight Climate Change and Save Money". The EPA.
Retrieved September 22, 2009, from EPA

3. Talley, Ian (2009, September 21). "Steven Chu: Americans Are Like ‘Teenage Kids’ When It Comes to Energy". Wall Street Journal.
Retrieved September 22, 2009, from WSJ.com

4. Hall, Christine (2009, September 18). "Breaking News: Treasury Admits Global Warming Cap-and-Trade Costs Could Hit $300 Billion Annually". Competitive Enterprise Institute.
Retrieved September 22, 2009, from CEI

5. Lieberman, Ben (2009, June 22). "The Economic Impact of the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade Bill". The Heritage Foundation.
Retrieved September 22, 2009, from The Heritage Foundation

6. Lieberman, Ben (2009, June 22). "The Economic Impact of the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade Bill". The Heritage Foundation.
Retrieved September 22, 2009, from The Heritage Foundation