Burning fossil fuels may harm us or even kill us in the long term, but because those negative consequences will not effect us immediately, I doubt there will be little in the way of real reform until the energy companies can drain every last penny they can from their coal mines and oil fields.

This is a beautiful study. I have argued on these blogs with those who call global warming a figment of liberal imagination and an agenda for greedy opportunists like Al Gore. Environmental degradation is synonymous with poor health for living creatures. New species are disappearing faster than they are being found. Our air and water are being poisoned with particulate matter and heavy metals, even as we politicize the science that says climate cataclysms loom, if we won't remedy our addiction to fossil fuels. We are dolts if we don't realize that we ourselves pay the price for our environmental apathy, with debilitating ailments like emphysema, asthma, coronary artery disease and cancers. Take note of what the environment is doing to the toads, the salamanders, the birds and the fish in the sea, because pretty soon the environment will do the same to thee.
Caravan

Thank goodness you only used Carbon as an eye catcher. and didnt go down that farsicle road. I would like to see the study. Much of these are are so severely flawed to push this green agenda, I doubt its validity from the ooutset. That said, at least you didnt go down the global warming road. I am assuming that finally understand this is simply untrue. As for Carbon, since its in the headline--that is a big Falsehood that ihas been consistently wrong over the last 12 months or so. So now, we are down to a last ditch efforet to do away with fossil fuels and some "study" that links 120B in escalated health care costs to this( not named) is cited? I think its time we stop the fear tactics and effort by the green agenda propagandiststo get their way by any means neceassary.

Additionally, we are not just talking about pennies at the pump. That be big sucking sound you hear, is freedom being sucked out of the American peopl. Everything from lightbulbs, to toilet paper has been used thus far and now we have the gobernment controlling property by inserting a whole new beauracracy in place to decide if your home is up to snuff before you sell it. On top of that, we have Cap and TAX coming around the corner. It is insanity and government control run amuck. Show the source of the study if your gonna use it. Otherwise, its similar to the closed door sneeky politics going on in Congress.

[My apologies. Here's the link. I'll add it above as well. http://www.nationalacademies.org/morenews/20091019.html //AAG]

"New species are disappearing faster than they are being found."

Care to link anything to that?

This is not inattention. This is deliberate obliviousness to the long term consequences of a cash cow that was created to keep on giving. But it is the number of terms that increases the remuneration. Vote out the smug rascals who won't legislate against their own pocket books; reduce their terms and their pensions that way until they get the message that county citizens have the ultimate power to tip the pension gravy even with this law in the books.
Cynic

Thank you for powsting the link. Unfortunately, the print on the page is so small its hard to read. That, said, I went to part 5 " Ovewrview of quantifying and valuing Climate change impacts"

The first paragragh states clearly it begins by "summarizing trends", with "estimate models" and wraps up by stating " Given its resource constraints, it was not feasible for the commitee to conduct a detailed critical review of the IAM's"

In plain English--they used 3 assumptive models with then speculate on the future effects - or - more succinitly--they speculated on speculation. Wonderful. The problem is, as I stated in the last email, the green agenda does this consistently. When confronted, we hear the same ole same ole--fiction and scare tactics.

But since your article focused on the dollars and the "pennies at the pump" comment--despite the President warning you in November that energy costs "would necessarily skyrocket" as a result of cap and trade--please refer to this study for cost impacts

http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm2585.cfm

There is much more than this study but in every study--the methods must be scrutinized to determine if results are artificial.

In this study and analysis of the Waxman Markey bill ( CAP and TAX) the folowing predictions are made:
Implementing the Waxman-Markey legislation will be very costly, even given the rather optimistic assumptions about how effective it will be in reducing CO2 emissions and how accommodating the economy will be to the added energy costs. The Heritage Foundation's dynamic analysis of these economic costs are summarized as follows (adjusted for inflation to 2009 dollars):

•Cumulative gross domestic product (GDP) losses are $9.4 trillion between 2012 and 2035;
•Single-year GDP losses reach $400 billion by 2025 and will ultimately exceed $700 billion;
•Net job losses approach 1.9 million in 2012 and could approach 2.5 million by 2035. Manufacturing loses 1.4 million jobs in 2035;
•The annual cost of emissions permits to energy users will be at least $100 billion by 2012 and could exceed $390 billion by 2035;
•A typical family of four will pay, on average, an additional $829 each year for energy-based utility costs; and
•Gasoline prices will rise by 58 percent ($1.38 more per gallon) and average household electric rates will increase by 90 percent.

See the appendix 1 and others for reliable details on each process used. No phony baloney. it also provides enough data for any critic to chew on. So, in summary--Waxman Markey is based on enough economic pain that hopefully behavior changes through the pain of economic strife. It will cost much more than pennies, and many more jobs will be lost than saved and defintiley more lost than created.

Please put quotes around my Heritage quotes--I cut and pasted it--

Starting with " in this study"
ending with "90 Percent"

My apologies