3 ms·

The Inflation Reduction Act Does Little to Reduce Climate Change

1 points by Bostonian 4y ago

Bostonian 4y ago
https://archive.ph/Yra4u https://archive.ph/Yra4u "If you plug the predicted emissions decline into the climate model used for all major United Nations climate reports, it turns out the global temperature will be cut by only 0.0009 degree Fahrenheit by the end of the century. This is assuming the law’s emission reductions end when its funding does after 2030. But even if you charitably assume they’ll somehow be sustained through 2100 without any interruption, the impact on global temperature will still be almost unnoticeable, at 0.028 degree Fahrenheit. The law will similarly have little effect on the sea level. A model that calculates changes in ocean levels predicts waters will be somewhere between 0.006 and 0.08 inch lower in 2100 than they would have been without the Inflation Reduction Act. To reach even this minuscule climate impact, the law would have to be kept intact over the rest of the decade, across four more Congresses and two presidential terms. Given the $369 billion price tag on the act’s climate policies, it’s hard to imagine the Inflation Reduction Act surviving a Republican majority. It might not even survive sustained Democratic rule."
- smt88 4y ago
  As you would expect from the cynical, far-right WSJ editorial section, the author is cherry-picked as one of the few people who would make this claim with a straight face: > Lomborg's views and work have attracted scrutiny in the scientific community; he was formally accused of scientific misconduct over The Skeptical Environmentalist, and the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty concluded in an evaluation of the book that "one couldn't prove that Lomborg had deliberately been scientifically dishonest, although he had broken the rules of scientific practice in that he interpreted results beyond the conclusions of the authors he cited."[1] Tellingly, the author isn't arguing the bill should have done more or that the US should do more to fight climate change in general. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lomborg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lomborg

1 points by Bostonian 4y ago

https://archive.ph/Yra4u https://archive.ph/Yra4u "If you plug the predicted emissions decline into the climate model used for all major United Nations climate reports, it turns out the global temperature will be cut by only 0.0009 degree Fahrenheit by the end of the century. This is assuming the law’s emission reductions end when its funding does after 2030. But even if you charitably assume they’ll somehow be sustained through 2100 without any interruption, the impact on global temperature will still be almost unnoticeable, at 0.028 degree Fahrenheit. The law will similarly have little effect on the sea level. A model that calculates changes in ocean levels predicts waters will be somewhere between 0.006 and 0.08 inch lower in 2100 than they would have been without the Inflation Reduction Act. To reach even this minuscule climate impact, the law would have to be kept intact over the rest of the decade, across four more Congresses and two presidential terms. Given the $369 billion price tag on the act’s climate policies, it’s hard to imagine the Inflation Reduction Act surviving a Republican majority. It might not even survive sustained Democratic rule."

smt88 4y ago
As you would expect from the cynical, far-right WSJ editorial section, the author is cherry-picked as one of the few people who would make this claim with a straight face: > Lomborg's views and work have attracted scrutiny in the scientific community; he was formally accused of scientific misconduct over The Skeptical Environmentalist, and the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty concluded in an evaluation of the book that "one couldn't prove that Lomborg had deliberately been scientifically dishonest, although he had broken the rules of scientific practice in that he interpreted results beyond the conclusions of the authors he cited."[1] Tellingly, the author isn't arguing the bill should have done more or that the US should do more to fight climate change in general. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lomborg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lomborg