Tag: cost-benefit Analyses

Cost-benefit analyses are done to determine if an action is worthwhile based on the difference between the costs involved in the action versus the value of the benefits involved.

 

Biofuel justifications are illusory

[This post was originally published on cfact.org on 29 July 2017 and authored by Paul Driessen.  Previous to this publication, Bob Endlich gave a presentation to the CASF at our 16 August 2014 meeting on a similar subject.  Mr. Driessen’s post complements Mr. Endlich’s  presentation, which was  entitled “21st Century Snake Oil.” ]

It’s time to really cut, cut, cut ethanol and other renewable fuel mandates – maybe to zero.

http://2hiwrx1aljcd3ryc7x1vkkah.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/biocorn-628x353.jpg

July 29, 2017 by Paul Driessen

http://2hiwrx1aljcd3ryc7x1vkkah.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/reagan-300x300.jpg The closest thing to earthly eternal life, President Ronald Reagan used to say, is a government program.

Those who benefit from a program actively and vocally defend it, often giving millions in campaign cash to politicians who help perpetuate it, while those who oppose the program or are harmed by it are usually disorganized and distracted by daily life. Legislative inertia and Continue reading “Biofuel justifications are illusory”

More rational policies in our future?

Trump’s Paris decision challenges bad science, economics and energy politics behind treaty

Paul Driessen

In the wake of President Trump’s exit from the Paris climate treaty, reactions from other quarters were predictably swift, nasty, sanctimonious and hypocritical.

Image from Pixabay.com

Al Gore paused near one of the private jets he takes to hector lesser mortals to say the action will bring “a global weather apocalypse.” Billionaire Tom Steyer got rich selling coal but called the President’s action “a traitorous act of war.” Actor-activist Mark Ruffalo railed that Trump has “the death of whole nations on his hands.” Michael Moore said the action was “a crime Continue reading “More rational policies in our future?”

Exiting the Mad Hatter’s climate tea party

President Trump was 100% correct (not just 97%) when he showed true leadership this week – and walked America away from the madness laid out before him and us on the Paris climate table.

 Trump was 100% right (not just 97%) to show real leadership and walk away from Paris. . .

Paul Driessen

I can guess why a raven is like a writing-desk, Alice said. “Do you mean you think you can find out the answer?” said the March Hare. “Exactly so,” said Alice. “Then you should say what you mean,” the March Hare went on. “I do,” Alice replied. “At least I mean what I say. That’s the same thing, you know.”

“Not the same thing a bit!” said the Hatter. “You might just as well say, ‘I see what I eat’ is the same thing as ‘I eat what I see’!” “You might just as well say,” added the Dormouse, ‘I breathe when I sleep’ is the same thing as ‘I sleep when I breathe’!” “It IS the same thing with you,” said the Hatter.

Can you imagine stumbling upon the Mad Hatter’s tea party, watching as the discussions become increasingly absurd – and yet wanting a permanent seat at the table? Could Lewis Carroll have been having nightmares about the Paris climate treaty when he wrote Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland? Continue reading “Exiting the Mad Hatter’s climate tea party”

Social Cost of Carbon Regulations by Paul Driessen and Roger Bezdek

Anti-fossil fuel SCC relies on garbage models, ignores carbon benefits and hurts the poor

“If you could pick just one thing to reduce poverty, by far you would pick energy,” Bill Gates has said. “Access to energy is absolutely fundamental in the struggle against poverty,” World Bank VP Rachel Kyte and Nobel Prize Laureate Dr. Amartya Sen agree.

Continue reading “Social Cost of Carbon Regulations by Paul Driessen and Roger Bezdek”