Quantcast

New Green New Deal ‘model’ crashes the economy and doesn’t fix climate change

Reaching the Green New Deal goal of drastically reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 is practically impossible, according to an analysis using the government’s own economic modeling. Despite the hysterics from the plans architect, New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or Vermont Bernie Sanders, the incredible taxation would only cripple the economy, punish the middle class and not move the thermometer.

earth fireball destruction photo/ Bela Geletneky aka photoshopper24 via pixabay.com

The Heritage Foundation attempted to use the Energy Information Administration’s National Energy Model to forecast the impact of steep carbon taxes aimed at reaching the net-zero greenhouse gas emissions goal that’s supported Cortez, House Democrats, and a host of 2020 presidential candidates.

“Carbon taxes above $300 (resulting in slightly above 50 percent CO2 reductions by 2050) cause the model to crash, and thus a 58 percent CO2 reduction from 2010 levels is the largest level we are able to model,” the study’s authors, Nicolas D. Loris and Kevin D. Dayaratna, wrote in the study published on Wednesday.

Just a 58 percent reduction would, by 2040, cost the economy $15 trillion in lost gross domestic product and an average of 1.1 million jobs per year. The average family of four would also see a total income loss of $165,000, or nearly $8,000 each year.

Energy prices for every home would jump 30%.

The Heritage’s analysis assumed emissions reductions would be twice as effective as former President Obama’s Interagency Working Group assumed in changing the climate. Yet and still, “the world would only be less than 0.2 degree Celsius cooler by the year 2100, and sea-level rise would be slowed by less than 2 centimeters.”

Trying to include “high-quality health care,” affordable housing, and “economic security,” analysis by the right-leaning American Action Forum (AAF) incorporated other aspects of the plan and found that it could cost as much as $94 trillion.

“Our cost estimates constitute a significant underestimate of the true costs of the Green New Deal as the carbon tax and regulations do not completely achieve the policy objectives outlined in the non-binding resolution,” the study read.

“Furthermore, the analysis does not account for the direct taxpayer costs, as advocates want to pay for the Green New Deal through a massive stimulus-style package. Layers of additional regulations and mandates, such as the proposal’s objective to maximize energy efficiency for every new and existing building in the U.S., would drive costs even higher.”

Scientists now claim earthworms causing climate change

Global Warming hysteria: Britain’s milk production will go down, so there will be a ‘shortage’ in 70 years

What Happens to Single-Family Homes under the Green New Deal?

On the DISPATCH: Headlines  Local  Opinion

Subscribe to Weekly Newsletter

* indicates required
/ ( mm / dd ) [ALL INFO CONFIDENTIAL]

About the Author

- Roxanne "Butter" Bracco began with the Dispatch as Pittsburgh Correspondent, but will be providing reports and insights from Washington DC, Maryland and the surrounding region. Contact Roxie aka "Butter" at [email protected] ATTN: Roxie or Butter Bracco

Tags

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Sign up for our Weekly Newsletter



Categories

Archives

At the Movies



Pin It