The "Green New Deal" should be debated with Facts and a Truly Open, Logical Mind!

Please take your time when this subject arrives in casual or serious discussions. Engage with thought and some researched facts so you do not let the environmental debate get focused on a "religious type belief" or even “the financial costs” of whatever outlandish claims about the rise in temperature is being propagated.  The environmental debate should start with some careful checks on the underlying assumption made and used by those who are promoting solutions to problems that may not exist.  We all need to focus discussions (and policy actions) in a thoughtful manner and not let the debate center on the “costs” of solutions…which would imply agreement on a faulty premise.

This is not “settled science”!  There can be some degree of agreement on the warming trend…but there is no confirmation that this is driven primarily by human activity and that the carbon levels in the atmosphere must be dramatically lower.  (Do you now that: There is a carbon level…not that much lower than where we are today where plant life would cease to exist.) Many would argue that the earth is in the lower end of long cycles of carbon retention.  Do these well-meaning advocates understand these historic aspects within their areas of carbon concern?  Do they know that 80% of greenhouse gases are water moisture and that carbon is a very, very small percentage without a true proven cause and effect basis?  Do they know that the carbon effect on warming is thought to be logarithmic (doubling is only a 10% increasing impact on the measured variables)?  

The United States has accomplished a lot in the past three decades regarding the environment. It is hard to find many other countries that have acted as consistently to promote better actions by business and government. Until the countries with the largest populations adopt some of the US strategies and technology, there will be little world-wide improvement, even if the US stopped all use of most current fuels. The answer is to develop all possible energy sources based on market knowledge and forces and to innovate with environmental improvement in mind. Improvements in process and technology, that the rest of the world can adopt and use, to reduce the various areas of concern should be the focus of all possible efforts!

If our politicians get herded into a debate on the financial cost…they are indirectly accepting the underlying faulty basis for the entire discussion.  Our representatives must position the formal and informal interactions where they should be. All of us need to focus on the fact that the hysteria and the propaganda should not be accepted as a basis for either short-term or long-term policy actions! It is past time to learn, educate others, and think!  ("All of the above"... is often the best answer to a college quiz question...and it may be the right answer in this area of discussion to realize some balanced actions.)

Couple the noted concerns above with the clear knowledge that the rest of the world may be very slow to act in these areas.  We all want clean air and water.  Actions to move in that direction with an emphasis on improving technology and applications that the other nations can also use...that is what is needed.  Policies and actions should encourage research and development of new and better uses of all energy sources.  This is what will “help save the world” from the vocal minority who treat the “green new deal” like a religion. (Their set of solutions to what may not be even close to an emergency, as they suggest, could have a very detrimental impact on the world's economic future and on plant life…which is required for human existence.) We all need to think and to question everything regarding the environmental movement on the proper basis, out loud, with knowledge, so others hear that prudent, thoughtful actions are needed to get the best results for all involved.