Climate Change Bills in Austin and Washington

Climate change bills before Congress propose regulating energy use intrusively and massively - at great cost and with little benefit. Heritage notes:

The current upward trend in temperatures is not unprecedented and will not lead to unprecedented catastrophes unless a very unlikely pattern appears, and this view is supported by the scientific evidence. Indeed, vir­tually all of the alarming rhetoric surrounding glo­bal warming--a massive rise in the sea level, deadlier hurricanes, the spread of tropical diseases, and other calamities--lies outside the scientific consensus. These climate bills would address real concerns, but these concerns are not catastrophic.

In addition, whatever the adverse consequences of warming, even the most stringent of the pending bills would reduce only a fraction of those conse­quences at a large cost. ... Ironically, carbon dioxide emissions in several Kyoto nations have risen faster in recent years than U.S. emissions. This raises serious questions about the efficacy of bills that mimic the Kyoto approach.

Climate legislation runs the real risk of doing more economic harm than environmental good. Congress should carefully weigh the costs of these proposed measures against the likely benefits.

This claim could be lobbed even more so against the foolish attempt by Mayor Wynn and the Austin city council to over-regulate housing construction, demanding drastic changes in energy use not only in new homes but even in existing homes that are sold.

The Austin proposal represents huge regulatory over-reach on the part of climate-crazed liberals, eager to stamp out the use of energy. Here's a simple "zero carbon footprint" solution - go nuclear for all Austin's electric needs. Then there is no reason or excuse to browbeat people into turning off their ACs or putting expensive solar panels on their house.