Thursday, March 9, 2000

Cap and Tax

Dear Paul Ryan,

I think you should be against the cap and trade bill. They say that cap and trade will limit or cap, carbon dioxide emissions for fossil fuel. Over time, such a cap will require greater cuts in emissions. They're doing cap and trade, because S 2191 which will target carbon emissions aggressively will be costlier than other improved versions that will give economy more time to adjust to energy constraints. Why can't you find a better cap and trade than S 2191. S 2191 raises the cost of $800 to $1300 per household by 2015. It would raise from $1,500 - $2,500 in 2050. There has been so many negative surprises in Europe's Kyoto Protocol., their reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I wouldn't wish a 1.6+ trillion dollar tax over a eight year period on all Americans and private sector. The government doesn't see it as a tax as long as it keeps spending it for some poor reason. Cap and Trade is not a dollar to dollar equivalent of direct cash flow. The reduction in GDP will allow real wages, because of the labor supply changes and reductions in productivity in capital and labor. The jobs lost for S 2191 is supposed to be 1.2 million to 2.3 million by 2015 according to Charles River Associates. S.2191 will really raise domestic manufacturing costs. Developing nations refuse to impose similar restrictions. American economy would experience a lot of outsourcing of manufacturing jobs. You don't want to go down this slippery slope. The cap and trade bill S 2191 is just a government re-engineering of the American economy! The congress has no intention of using this money for tax cuts on small business community. Why do you think businesses call it eco-socialism? Don't you think that the government will get more of the tax than small businesses. (littlegreenfootballs, 2009)(Justmeans, 2009)(Heritage Foundation, 2010) (Wall Street Journal, 2010)(wikipedia, 2010)
Why do you need to cut emissions by government control when the technology is available, companies will do it themselves. Businesses don't want energy rationing going on in a country as large as ours and resources as abundant as ours. There are some incredible hydrogen power plant technologies that don't pollute the Earth as much. Namely, laser reactors, ITER and HiPER reactors made in the United States and France don't pollute the earth at all, because the nuclear waste is completely saturated at the fusion temperatures. In the future, to close that 33% energy usage, hydrogen power plants could do that easily. United States manufactures its nuclear fuel in Iowa and North Carolina unlike most countries that dig Uranium up. Shockwave Power inside the revolutionary hydrosonic pumps designs can apply heat and evaporate liquids without scale buildup, it proves more efficient process for mixing dissimilar fluids. This can be used for heating and these are a lot cheaper than nuclear power plants. It has reduced energy requirements, improved process efficiencies, and elimination of process downtime. The Shockwave Power generator takes fluid and with the geometry of the holes in the cylinder, clearance between the cylinder, and rotational speed created differences where bubbles form and collapse. the collapsing bubbles create shockwaves for heat. It generates 33% more heat than electricity. The new inexpensive nuclear power plants burn up significantly more of the nuclear waste by firing streams of neutrons into the waste. Hybrid Fusion-fission reactors are about five years out until the technology is ready to mass produce. The laser reactor the DOE is building in North California is supposed to have tests into 2040! You should need to build nuclear power plants up until then to fill demand. The government could buy hydro-sonic pumps and would be very near the 33% savings in Kilowatts in my opinion. Then build those hybrid fusion-fission reactors. China likes to think this way too so it is the right thing to do. The S-2191 would reduce US economy GDP 1.5% to 2.5% annually, many net jobs would be lost, and would cost 100s of billions in a few decades. A new act making a government agency that protects the environment makes more sense than cap and trade's eco-socialism and it's way cheaper. If America have Cap and trade, where is America going to get enough GDP to pay for nationalized healthcare? The country would have double dip recessions and wouldn't be able to cover both. (Parsons, S, 2009)(University of Texas, 2009)( Schwartz, A, 2009)(RexResearch, 2010)(Fox News, 2010)

In a new little Ice Age, America would need more nuclear power plants, fusion power plants and hydrosonic pumps which are self-reliant and output more energy than inputted. We manufacture our own nuclear power fuel. There are always places to store the nuclear fuel. I think that China's idea of manufacturing nuclear power plants is a lot better idea. We should do all of these options, because we have when 2017 until China surpasses our GDP. I think how does Serbia in Russia survives with cold weather and low sunlight? Russians build a lot of nuclear power plants of course! I don't see why we can't start replacing the power plants that are ready to retire! This is why I don't believe the federal government should implement eco-socialist cap and trade. (nextbigfuture, 2010)(wikipedia, 2010)


Anonymous. (2010). Cap and Trade Pros and Cons
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from littlegreenfootballs website
Anonymous. (2010). What is Carbon cap and Trade in US and In Europe part 2
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from justmeans website
Anonymous. (2010). Climate Change - Letting Go of Perfect Solutions Necessary
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from justmeans website
Anonymous. (2010). Beware of Cap and Trade Climate Bills
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Heritage Foundation website
Anonymous. (2009, March 6). The Climate Change Lobby Has Regrets
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Wall Street Journal website
Anonymous. (2009, March 6). CBO Grossly Underestimates costs of Cap and Trade
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Heritage Foundation website
Anonymous. (2009, March 5). How to Hide a Trillion Dollars
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Heritage Foundation website
Schwartz, A. (2009, June 01). Worlds largest laser to Attempt Nuclear Fusion
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Inhabitant website
Anonymous (2009, June 01). HydroSonic Pumps
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from RexResearch website
Parsons, S. (2009, June 22). New Nuclear Reactors may almost Completely Destroy
Atomic Waste. Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Inhabitat website
Anonymous. (2009, January 27). Nuclear Fusion-Fission Hybrid Could Destroy Nuclear Waste
And Contribute to Carbon-Free Energy Future
Atomic Waste. Retrieved August 22, 2010, from University of Texas website
Anonymous. (2010, August 2). History and Future of US and China GDP
. Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Next Big Future website
Anonymous. (2010). Eco-socialism
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Wikipedia website
Anonymous. (2009, June 1). Giant Laser Reactor Unveiled in California
Retrieved August 22 2010, from Fox News website,2933,522857,00.html
Anonymous. (2010). International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Wikipedia website
Anonymous. (2010). High Power laser Energy Research facility
Retrieved August 22, 2010, from Wikipedia website

No comments:

Post a Comment