Economic policy of the heritage and foundation, Nicolas Loris, back behind the desk. Will you start by defining what thats job is . Guest tricky within itself. When the Obama Administration theyooking at green jobs included everything from trash collectors to people who work in goodwill. They were involved in reusing and recycling. Conventionally more people talk about the Energy Economy and what that looks like. Installing, the numbers are mixed. I would like to see green Energy Economies that drive Innovation Forward and doesnt rely on government subsidies. What is it comparable to in terms of numbers of workers or jobs related . Its difficult to say based on the numbers you use. Compared to other industries, they are certainly growing and thats great. Markets, people are demanding Renewable Power and is this is are demanding to use 100 renewables and the demand is driving production and thats ultimately what we want to see, Competition Among the Energy Sources when they are being subsidized through targeted tax credits. Thats just allocation with subsidization taking resources away from other sectors in the economy. Thats not actually creating growth, it is shifting it to politically preferred sectors of the economy that doesnt really do us any good, it only helps the people lobbying to get the handouts. Host in this election cycle several Democratic Candidates are calling for moving towards a net zero emission in the economy. Greench more with the economy have to achieve . Guest 80 of our energy needs are met through conventional oil and natural gas and if you have 80 of our needs in the world bus needs coming from these, you the tax andlicies regulate these out of existence. Even if renewable costs are coming down and becoming more cost competitive with conventional sources of energy. It is still going to take a lot to shift to a net zero economy. Host is anyone tried to estimate what the cost would be . Is it less than the cost of Climate Change . Estimate i every have seen from peerreviewed literature from m. I. T. , things that we have produced at the Heritage Action for him, the cost of the Green New Deal, it seems that the cost of these policies are going to outweigh both the benefits in terms of climate reduction, but also any type of cost from Climate Change itself. You are talking about multiple trillions of dollars across the economy. Energy is such a critical component of everything that we make and do that when you force Higher Energy prices on American Consumers and businesses, you are not just paying more for your electricity or at the pump, you are paying more for food, health care, and education. It has huge ripple effects throughout the economy. Host we are talking about the economics of environmental and Energy Policy. Republicans, 202 7488001, democrats, 202 7488000, independents, 202 7488002. Deal,ning the green New Alexandria a cause you cortez announced the Green New Deal. [video clip] its a big day for us of that forgation, a movement, frontline communities all over the country. Today is a big day for people who have been left behind. Today is a big day for workers and appalachia. A big day for children who have been dirt breathing dirty air in the south. Today is a really good day for families who have been enduring the injustices of thinking dirty or have seen their living rooms flooded with the waves of the rising sea level. Today is a think a really big day for our economy, the labor movement, the social justice movement, Indigenous Peoples and people all over the United States of america. Today is the day that we truly embark on a comprehensive agenda of economic, social, and racial justice. Climate change and environmental challenges are one of the biggest existential threats to our way of life. Not just as a nation, but as a world. Threat, we must be as ambitious and innovative in our innovation as possible. What have you done to talk about the Economic Cost of the Green New Deal. Guest part of the problem is the plan is a nebulous lee there are not good policy descriptions in the model and we attempted to use the federal governments own Energy Administration model to model what the cost would be to achieve. Theye timeframe that wanted to achieve, the model essentially broke. It couldnt handle such a rampup of reducing conventional fuel. Up the carbon tax and impose regulation on the conventional industry and we found millions of jobs lost per year. These are significant costs for negligible climate benefit. Down, we areg talking about mitigation of a few tenths of a degree celsius with a few centimeters on the Sea Level Rise within the same timeframe. Policies really have been all costs with no benefit. Done these have all been at heritage. Org . Guest thats right. Host joseph, democratic line, go ahead. Caller good morning. If you could allow me to make a quick personal testimony regarding the issues, last year i bought a plugin vehicle that has given me 50 miles of electric energy each day and turns out it gives about 120 miles per gallon, combining electric and gas. , put solar panels on my roof 47 of them. I follow a plan based diet. Im not bragging about anything, but its not really costing the anything but it has given me better health. Its kind of a nobrainer. I would kind of like to ask a question here teargas regarding the recent United Nations study that came out of a month ago, this is not the first one the u. N. Has done regarding the environment, but i would like to bring out bring up what i would refer to as a very Inconvenient Truth that came out in that report. Specifically talking about the cattle industry. Much it contributes damage to the environment, you know . Serious issue and people make fun of it, kind of, saying that they will take away our cows or whatever, but i would like to make reference to a documentary on netflix, anyone piece,ted in this lobbyists the cattle industry have. The documentary is entitled cowspiracy. Guest more props to you for having an electric vehicle and installing solar panels. Im all for those choices. My concern is when other people are paying for them. If you look at the tax credits for electric vehicles with federal and state subsidies they can be over 10,000 per vehicle oft largely accrue to some the wealthiest americans. You have Middle America paying for subsidized choices of rich folks. Not what we want to see out of competition and choice, those policies subsidizing the choices of the wealthy and resulting a lot of corporate welfare. Commentards to the beef , its certainly true that with methane emissions, the cattle industry is contributing to Climate Change and you see industries innovating with plant waste innovations, with lab grown meat. Things are happening at the market level. People are making choices. The market is driving decisions at the production and consumption level and that is ultimately policy. Confident the market will drive innovations fast enough to avert the cost of Climate Change in the future . Guest putting it in perspective is important. I am less worried about catastrophic costs as was mentioned the previous panel. We need to look at the international community. The future of Greenhouse Gas emissions will overwhelmingly come from the developing world. Innovationd is more to allow people to adapt to Climate Change in the near term by building more resilient and durable infrastructure, as well as looking at longterm solutions to make sure people have the energy needs they demand because we have nearly a billion people without access to reliable electricity. Also meeting environmental targets. Host temple, georgia. Judy, a republican. Caller hey. Can you hear me . Country isat, this headed downhill like a snowball heading to hell. All you socialists that want to control our lives and tell cortez we are not going to kill our cows. That is the way i feel about it. Host that is how judy feels in georgia. Brenda in chickamauga, georgia. Caller i dont believe what she just said. I cant believe anybody would say that, and i cant believe what he said about poor people and the average people is the burden of the cost of this. When is it we were never ever were not the burden on us Little People to make innovations . You cant append on big corporations. He talked about we dont want to subsidize like this man with the electric car. How many billions of dollars have a given tax cuts to these corporations that dont pay anything down . They could care less about how much we breathe. They can go by an island somewhere. Buy an island somewhere. Guest thats a great point. We should be talking about getting rid of all energy subsidies, not just the one for electric vehicles or Renewable Power. We should get rid of subsidies for coal and natural gas and nuclear. If you look at the market, this is a trillion dollar market. These guys dont need help from the federal taxpayer to meet these energy demands. It is either subsidizing economic losers like or providing corporate welfare to companies that dont need help from the taxpayer. I completely agree with you. We should eliminate the federal government picking winners and losers, not continuing down the path of government intervention. Host which sectors get the most when it comes to the government subsidies . Guest it depends on how you measure it and how yo what you consider a subsidy. If you look at immediate expensing, i dont consider that a subsidy. The tax cut bill applies it to everything now. That is not really a subsidy. On a per megawatt hour basis, the Renewable Power that generates the biggest benefits from the subsidies, for they stand to benefit the most. At the same time youve had a lot of historical treatment for the oil co. And gas and coal and gas and coal sector. Host if we got rid of them, how much would that say the government on the annual basis . Guest potentially 10 billion a year, if not more depending when you consider a subsidy. Not to mention the ethanol mandate which was once posed as a good idea. Now you have most environmentalist opposing the ethanol mandate because of the environment of destruction it has caused. There are 70 different ways the government intervenes into Energy Markets so many ways the government intervenes in the energy market. Dear allowing for more innovation. It will be the good ideas that move forward, not the ones with no support from lobbyists and politicians. Host jim a republican,. Caller thank you for taking my call. Back in the 1950s when i was a teenager, there was a lot of talk about an ice age coming. New york was going to be buried in 100 feet of ice. Age . Happened to this ice is it the same thing about Global Warming . Yeah, i think that is one peoplereasons a lot of have skepticism about Climate Science and climate policy. A lot of predictions about m a climate catastrophe, whether it is Global Warming or Global Cooling have not come true or any real political sessions for making these predictions and not coming true. Given net Intergovernmental Panel contribute half of it to manmade activity, but i dont think we are heading towards catastrophic warming. The real dire scenarios for you see several meters of Sea Level Rise and super extremes just are not born in reality. They make assumptions that dont see you becoming true based on both climate projections but also the use of Energy Resources around the world. Certainly notd to call it a hoax but we need to not fear mongering about the future of catastrophic Climate Change. Democrat. A caller i just wanted to mention subsidies. Coal power plants get five megawatt hour subsidies. What about the coal trains and the mines. What is it cost to build a new power plant today . You are talking about at least half 1 billion. Guest we should get rid of the subsidies. There was a reason the percentage of coal has dropped about 25 over the past decade. It cannot compete with cheap natural gas. Far fewer new coal power plants being built in the u. S. , although that is not the trend around the world. You are seeing more coal mines or exports for consumption in places like china and india who were building coalfired power plants at a rapid clip. Host milton, florida. Good morning. Caller thanks for taking my call. Its funny we are talking about Climate Change. I just got a book yesterday called the mythology of Global Warming. Im only on page eight or , but the caller talked about being a teenager in the 1950s. It talked about that. Says, and the media proclaiming the Oil Countries were destroying our planet because of Global Cooling. If we dont do something, the earth could drop 20 degrees. That the climate normally changes up and down throughout the years . Is there really Science Behind it . It talks about 30,000 scientists that disagree with Climate Change phenomena. Seeingyou saying the impacts of Climate Change were you live . Caller it is hot and its cold. When i was a kid, it was hot down here and then it got cold again and hot again. It is hot definitely. Is it hotter than normal . No. I was in alaska in the early 1990s. I worked in a hotel. It was the hottest on record in alaska during the summertime, 91 degrees or Something Like that in fairbanks. Then it was the coldest on record that year at 68. To me the climate goes up and down all the time. In florida. S ron guest the Climate Changes because of human activity and natural variation. It can be anything from the different trends in ocean oscillation. It can be volcanic eruptions. There are a number of factors that change the climate. It does not matter what is driving Climate Change. Risk toether it poses a certain communities, certain areas in the United States and around the world, and to the costs of the Climate Policies outweighing the benefits. What i see from a lot of the Energy Policies proposed by the left with the Green New Deal is significantly outweigh the benefits and would not do anything to really protect against the changing climate, no matter what the cause. Host explain how the urban tax works. Carbon tax works. Guest eventually it would impose a fee on each ton of Carbon Dioxide emitted, primarily targeting the Energy Industry as well as the agriculture industry if you account for methane emissions and the emissions coming from the Natural Gas Industry as well. Essentially the goal of a carbon tax is to price that allegedly externality of co2 and internalize those emissions. The problem with taxing co2 is that you are not internalizing a pollutant like he would smog you who would smog or have known risks. You are trying to mitigate warming. A carbon tax but really result in a huge tax on the Energy Industry, a huge tax on American Consumers and businesses, but not internalize. Host what other countries have imposed a carbon tax . Guest canada tried. It floundered a little bit mostly because they have been a number of giveaways to actually not changed very much behavior. Australia has tinkered with it a little bit. They have gone back from it to put implement and get because it was unpopular and they did not see much environmental benefit from the carbon tax. If you look at a number of places in europe that have either proposed a trade system or carbon fees, those policies have been wildly unpopular as well because they are not deriving the climate benefits they were promised. You saw the yellow vests protesters in paris for a reason. People are upset with paying more and more for energy and more and more for goods and services that they pay for and not seeing any change in the climate. That is why these policies in the United States and around the world are very unpopular. People care about Climate Change and are increasingly caring about Climate Change, but on the list of policy priorities it falls near the bottom and it has for decades. Oft we have Nicolas Loris the Heritage Foundation taking your phone calls. Republicans, democrats, independents. Bob is out of victoria, texas. Caller good morning, gentlemen.