Domenici Acknowledges Warming, Plans Testimony By "Skeptics" - WP

[hatrack]

After listening to some of the world's preeminent climate researchers yesterday, a bipartisan group of senators said they saw the need to take quick action on global warming but were struggling to reach consensus on what policy to adopt. Several Republicans on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee said during the two-hour hearing that they would consider adopting mandatory limits on emissions of heat-trapping gases but that they prefer the approach of promoting new technologies that do not contribute to the problem.

"I don't think the issue is whether we have a major international problem; the question is: How do we solve it?" said the panel's chairman, Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.). "I'm looking for a solution, but I'm not going to join the crowd that thinks it's simple."

EDIT

Several committee Republicans, including some who had questioned climate change predictions in the past, said they agree the world has reached a scientific consensus on global warming. "I have come to believe, along with many of my colleagues, that there is a substantial human effect on the environment," said Sen. Larry E. Craig (R-Idaho), who has opposed mandatory curbs on greenhouse gas emissions and voted against last month's "sense of the Senate" resolution on climate change. Some GOP senators, such as Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), went further. In an interview, Murkowski said that "there's an emerging consensus we've got to deal" with climate change, adding it would be "tough" to cut greenhouse gases sufficiently through voluntary programs alone. "I'd rather we don't have to , but we know what happens when we leave it to our good judgment. Sometimes we don't see the benefits," she said.

EDIT

It remains unclear how quickly lawmakers would be willing to act on climate change proposals. Domenici said in an interview that he plans to bring in a group of global warming skeptics to testify, and he would prefer requiring that American companies install cleaner technology, rather than setting specific targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. (emphasis added)

EDIT

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/21/AR2005072102235.html

And the point would be . . . what, Pete? Exactly FUCKING WHAT?!?!?!?!?

[acmejack]

1. That installing the "cleaner technologies" would require massive subsidies

give aways, and tax incentives to the poor presecuted corporations thus required.

[dcfirefighter]

2. The solution is simple to describe

Tax greenhouse gas emissions.

Set the tax initially at $25 / ton of carbon. This would raise the average annual cost of living per person by $100.

Allow credits and trading permits for permanent biological sequestration.

Concurrently, lower the payroll tax by 0.6%. This would lower the average cost of living per person by $100. The revenue from the two taxes would be equal.

Increase the tax by $5 / ton for the first 5 years.
Increase the tax by $10 / ton for the next 5 years.
Increase the tax by $20 / ton for the next 5 years.
Increase the tax by $50 / ton for the next 5 years.
Increase the tax by $100 / ton for the next 5 years.
Double the annual increase per each 5 years thereafter.
Eventually the net carbon emissions will be zero.