100% Proof

The other day I was invited to speak to an environmental organization about HR763, the “Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act*. At the end of my presentation a gentleman wanted to know what “proof” I had that the fee on pollution coupled with a dividend would work.

I was a bit taken aback by the request. I was a helicopter pilot. Helicopters are the product of extensive engineering but in 30 years of flying I never assumed 100% proof the next flight would bring me back.

At the presentation, I was limited to imaginary examples. One of the examples I gave was:  let’s say, we have a choice between coffee and tea. But, we know coffee is slowly killing us. Collectively, we decide to raise the price of coffee each year by a buck and send the money collected back to the drinkers of both tea and coffee.  It is my guess that even die-hard coffee drinkers would eventually find a tea they like and pocket the money.  (Thank God coffee is safe as I would be a true challenge to this experiment.)

This is HR 763 in a nutshell: A fee is placed on coal, oil, and gas at the point it is extracted. The money collected is then divided up and returned to us equally. We can stick with dirty primitive fuels if we wish. Or, we can switch to solar, wind, nuclear or any other clean modern source, and pocket the money we save.

What about proof in science? There is a public misunderstanding that science can give us 100% proof. 100% proof is rare and, basically, can only be attained in controlled laboratory conditions where variables are completely regulated.

Part of climate science does have 100% proof. In 1865 John Tyndall, in the laboratory he designed to analyze our air, discovered what retained and released heat. He added carbon dioxide to the air and tested its radiative qualities discovering it as the main greenhouse gas. This has been duplicated thousands of times and will be duplicated as long as there are intelligent beings capable of doing the experiment.

Climate change and the economic principles that govern our daily lives are complex. We cannot prove them in a laboratory. The scientists know chemistry and physics and, from these, they created predictions. When they first formulated the equations, they assigned degrees of confidence to their work. Each year the work has improved, and their confidence has gone way up. Unfortunately, their predictions of warming and extreme weather are happening faster than they predicted. The warnings we were given 50 years ago are happening. We need not doubt the basic predictions of the scientists.

And so too the economics of consumption. For years economists have advised us that if we wish to control consumption, such as the use of tobacco which costs lives and money, we should raise the price.  The last two winners of the Nobel Prize in economics advise us that the consumption of dangerous fossil fuels can be modified by price interventions.

To give us 100% proof, scientists and economists would have to create another earth, populate it with 7 billion fossil fuel addicted humans who burn coal, oil, and gas as if there was no tomorrow.  Then see, if by adding a pollution fee with a dividend return, we can stop the insanity.

But there is no Planet B to experiment on or to escape to.

I was also an army maintenance test pilot. When a helicopter came out of maintenance, I was the final check before the line pilots were given it. Did I have 100% assurance that it would work? I had the best designed helicopter in the world, maintained by the best mechanics. No, aviation and life do not work that way.  What gave me confidence was the mechanics were not only the best, they were morally committed to their work. I have the same trust in our scientists and economists who are committed to solving the specter of climate change. Moral commitment from professionals was enough for me to strap the machine to my rear end and give it a try. Sometimes the helicopter performed perfectly. Sometimes it took weeks to get all the bugs out.

We worked together and trusted each other. We better start listening to our scientists and economists and strap this earth to our rears and launch a few plans.  There are going to be adjustments and there will never be 100% proof. We won’t know what changes will required until we design a flight plan and take-off. The work of our best scientists and economists is a rational basis for immediate action.

·        For more information go to www.citizensclimatelobby.org.

·        For any presentation on climate, call me at 906-285-3702

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address - 335

Lincoln gave two great speeches: the Gettysburg Address and his second Inaugural Address. His second inaugural address must have come as a surprise to most Americans. He had just won a landslide election, and the Union Armies had defeated the Confederate Insurgency. You would think he would have taken a victory lap. But the President was wrestling with God's purpose. Why had the nation, both sides, suffered so grievously? In a country of only 32 million, 650 to 750,000 soldiers had died. Lincoln believed the nation was being punished for the institution of slavery. The South for creating its wealth on the backs of the blacks, but also the North for being too slow to challenge the appalling injustice of slavery. Seven times in his short speech, Lincoln referred to the book from which he had learned to read. The book he referenced was the King James version of the Bible. Here is his speech: "Fellow countrymen: at this second appearing to take the oath of the presidenti...
Read more

Right Wing Wokeism - 344

China Must Be Thrilled Donald Trump was elected to manage borders and curb left-wing wokeism, but his right-wing wokeism—attacking electric vehicles and renewable energy because they don't fit MAGA ideology—is equally senseless and against national interests. Ironically, his own base benefits from renewables. The five states with the largest share of wind power are red states, generating at least a third of their power from wind. This is about geography, not politics. Rural America has vast solar and wind potential and is already capitalizing on it, regardless of voting patterns. More critically, Trump's "drill, baby, drill" approach at a time when artificial intelligence, electric vehicles, and autonomous technology are advancing will not make America great again. Instead, it risks making China great again. Trump once boasted about sending Americans to Mars. The real question is whether a Chinese astronaut will greet them there, asking, "What took you so...
Read more

Power Corrupts - 342

A Link between Slavery & Big Oil   Noam Chomsky, one of the world's most quoted authors, expresses his opinion of the Big Oil misinformation campaign: "I don't know what word in the language—I can't find one—that applies to people of that kind, who are willing to sacrifice the existence of organized human life, not in the distant future, so they can put a few more dollars in highly overstuffed pockets. The word 'evil' doesn't begin to approach it." Was there another time in US history when evil ruled?  Let's look at the United States before the Civil War. In the South, there were 4 million enslaved people. The slaves, or their parents, or grandparents, or someone in their lineage had been kidnapped, shackled, and shipped to the Americas to spend their lives with no freedom whatsoever. This criminal operation started in 1619 and accelerated until the Union forces ended it. The black humans had no rights and were conveniently labeled as les...
Read more