Stephen DeCanio published the following article on the Real Climate Economics blog, a Triple Crisis partner. In it, DeCanio explains that US actions on climate change will be ineffective unless there is global action, and that addressing climate change is in the US’ national interest.
Suppose you believe, as I do, in basic conservative principles (free enterprise and a market economy, limited government, and minimal change in established institutions that work well), but also acknowledge that anthropogenic climate change presents a sufficient danger that something needs to be done about it. The risk is that even as little as 2° Celsius (about 3.6° Fahrenheit) of warming might push one of a number of different earth systems past a tipping point that is both catastrophic and irreversible. In other words, the problem is one of risk management, in which prudence calls for taking action before it is too late to make a mid-course correction. What would be a conservative response to this threat?
It is unfortunate that the climate issue has been co-opted by liberals, because conservative policy prescriptions would not be the same as those that have been put forward by the Democrats and their allies among the environmental groups. The Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill that passed the House in 2010 (then died in the Senate) was a 1400-page monstrosity; it catered to special interests, placed undue burdens on people with low incomes, and had no connection to a coherent US international negotiating strategy on climate. Just as misguided is the EPA’s intention to regulate CO2 as a pollutant by executive fiat – a scheme that also is inefficient, non-transparent, and regressive. Virtually all economists would agree that either approach is inferior to a well-designed carbon tax or auctioned emissions permits, with revenues returned to citizens on a per capita basis or used to cut other taxes.
Conservatives have not yet accepted the fact that the frontier in the American West was declared closed by the Bureau of the Census in 1890. Their approach to environmental preservation remains one of fouling their nest, then moving on to somewhere more pristine. Now that there’s noplace left to go, they persist in their destructive behavior and simply deny their responsibility for the consequences. In a Biblical sense, they cannot distinguish between “dominion over the earth” and “destruction of the earth”.