STUDY: Green New Deal Would Have 'No Effect' On Climate Change

Green New Deal proponents, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), have long claimed that the GND, an expansive, costly, and dramatic change in the American economy (and in American infrastructure), would be worth it if it such extreme measures would in the long run lessen our impact on climate.

Now, though, a new study from the American Enterprise Institute questions whether the Green New Deal would have any real impact on climate change at all — leaving it little more than an effort to dismantle industry.

From The Released Study by America Enterprise Institute on The GND:
The GND’s central premise is that such policies — either despite or by reducing sharply the economic value of some substantial part of the US resource base and the energy- producing and energy-consuming capital stock— would increase the size of the economy in real terms, increase employment, improve environmental quality, and improve distributional equity. That is a “broken windows” argument: The destruction of resources increases aggregate wealth. It is not to be taken seriously.

Moreover, notwithstanding the assertions from GND proponents that it is an essential policy to confront purportedly adverse climate phenomena, the future temperature impacts of the zero-emissions objective would be barely distinguishable from zero: 0.173°C by 2100, under the maximum Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change parameter (equilibrium climate sensitivity) about the effects of reduced GHG emissions. Under an assumption consistent with the findings reported in the recent peer-reviewed literature, the effect would be 0.083°C by 2100, a policy impact not measurable against normal variation in temperatures. This conclusion is not controversial and suggests strongly that the GND’s real goal is wealth redistribution to favored political interests under the GND social-policy agenda and a dramatic increase in government control of resource allocation more generally.

A GND policy would yield no benefits in its central energy, environment, and climate context, but it would impose very large economic costs. Simple correlations among variables do not demonstrate causation, but the historical data on energy consumption and production, growth in gross domestic product, employment, rising incomes and energy consumption, and poverty make it clear that the GND would yield large adverse effects in each of those dimensions. In particular, because rising incomes result in greater energy demands and because the GND intellectual framework views conventional energy as a social “bad,” parameters that increase individual and national incomes — such as education and health investment, technological advances, and investments in productive plant and equipment — also must be viewed in a negative light. Accordingly, one logical corollary to the GND policy agenda is a reduction in such direct or indirect investments in human capital. Thus does the GND reveal the essential antihuman core of the modern opposition to conventional energy.
Read more here:


  • edited April 2019
    The GND main goal is Wealth redistribution NOT CLIMATE CHANGE! ITS SOCIALISM covered behind the mask of Climate justice.

    No wonder no Democrat voted for it. It would have exposed them and their GND and from what I've read the Democrats knew it would get nothing done and have zero effect in reducing climate change and have 100% effect in redistribution of wealth.
  • I am really glad to see this. Really glad. I always thought the proposal by Ocasio-Cortez was way too expensive, and that regardless of what we do the global climate will reach a point within a hundred years where humans will no longer be able to inhabit the earth.

    Now that solutions to the effects of warming are impossible, we can anticipate that sea levels will rise a good thirty or more feet within the next 50 years. Won't bother me, because I live 100 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean. And at my age I'll be dead by the time things get REALLY bad.

    What is good about this news is that the islands of Micronesia (including Guam and the CNMI, of course) will be among the first land masses to sink beneath the sea. And of course, by that time Emperor Trump will have discarded the Compact of Free Association as too costly, and will have deported all the Micronesians back to their islands, to wait for the sea to swallow them.

    Make more plastic! Burn more coal and oil! Deport all people of color back to their homelands! Give us the White Nationalist nation we all long for! Force the globe to warm, the seas to rise, and Weepy CReaper and Panzie the Gun Smuggler, and their friends can all be the first heroes in the dehabitation of the globe! YEA!!!
  • KABOOM!!! lol
  • @SaremChuuk said: "Trump will have discarded the Compact of Free Association as too costly, and will have deported all the Micronesians back to their islands, to wait for the sea to swallow them."

    That's your personal opinion based on factless information and as we can see is heavily laced with Trump Derangement Syndrome. The fact are thus, Trump is preparing the US for its future showdown with China and has taken steps and policies to ensure the US will come out on top if that ever happens. Trump and like Obama before him has made thr shift of US policies to refocus its attention on the pacific. The COFA is a assets the US see as VITAL to its national defense.

    Trump policies regarding immigration is focused on illegal immigrants not legal migrants which the COFA is and the COFA is US law that was ratified by the US Congress decades ago. Micronesians from the COFA states are legal and allowed to travel freely within the US and its territories and can go and come and leave as they please as stated by the COFA agreement. And the provision that makes the US fund the COFA states will end in a few years so it won't effect Trumps thinking since they will be no longer giving money to the COFA states. SaremChuuk is doing what we call fear mongering which is based on no facts but TRUMP derangement syndrome.

    @FactsMatters, yes i know the GND is as useless as stopping cow farts.
  • Did we forget that the champion on climate change aka Obama allowed drilling in thr arctic and US shores for oil? If memory serves me right obama allowed in back in his first term and under his administration oil and crude oil production increased under 7 years of his 2 year term. How ironic isn't it.

    And look these fake progressives can't stick to the topic. When this study shows that thei liberal socialist GND will have no effect to stop climate change they blame Trump and change the subject to the fake he will deport micros.

    They know they got nothing and they know their GND is a big socialists communist blue print for taking wealth and distribute it like Hitler and Stalin did. They take the attention away from their failure plan to make up things about deporting micros.

    Race card and race baiting mixed with fake nonsense.

    White nationalist this. White supremacist that. Deport people of color there. The Democrat tactic that always get used when they have nothing. No wonder they created the KKK these democrats.
  • Sarem, you are an American so why do you sound like you're always and just keep blaming American and American people and American companies and the current president for all the climate change problems that you predict for the future.

    Why don't you find ways to ask China, India, Russia and other big polluters to help with the reduction of CO2 to the atmosphere; with reduced production and use of plastics; etc. These 3 big, industrialized and rich countries some with several billions of people also have coastal communities and states with billions of users and polluters; so they should be asked to help out since these climate-related problems are for the whole world, not just America. America cannot do everything for everybody. But what do I know?
  • The short answer is that regardless of what China and India and other polluters do, we must do as much as we can. To do less is an abandonment of our obligations as citizens of this globe.

    What do we do? Say “the hell with it, let’s pollute as much as we can because everybody does. Easy way out, as I see it.
  • There is a longer story as well, but it might bore. This problem (the alteration of climate to the point of destruction of species) has been going on for decades (since the 1960s), No president is exempt, from Nixon to Ford to Carter to Reagan to Bush I to Clinton to Bush II to Obama to Trump. We, as humans, when presented with growing (and now conclusive) evidence that the burning of hydrocarbons was having significant effects on our climate, chose convenience over fact, and a need for speed, and an addiction to plastics, and chanted the mantra "drill baby drill!"

    And it the pursuit of profit, we allowed international corporate and state actor interests to convince us that the science was wrong. Global warming was not a problem. Nothing to see here, carry on, move on.

    I do not know where you were born or raised, but I do know that if you are Micronesian your people are about to experience cataclysm more severe than any known before, and to a great extent it is due to the hubris of American politics.

    And I can. I as an American can complain if I wish, and cajole, and nudge, just like Reaper and other nationalists in here, trying to convince anyone that might happen by that Trump is great, or on the other side ask Reaper what he has to say about the 19 year old white nationalist from San Diego who shot up a synagogue on the last day of Passover because he thought Jews and Muslims were going to take over the world, and he was doing the white nationalists a favor.

    The world is getting hot, and it is not going to get cooler for the foreseeable future, if ever.

    Reaper, what do you think about white nationalist terrorism?
  • @SaremChuuk, You care as much for climate change as much as you cared when Obama put illegals immigrants and their kids in cages and separated them and deportem them by the millions. Faux compassion and faux care about the climate.

    You are a race baiter stick to race baiting. Science and climate change is over your league.

    There is no such thing a white nationalist terrorism. Its something liberals made up. But there is something called islamic terrorism and anti Semitism. Democrats fear to call Islamic terrorism for what it is yet call a single act by a lone lunatic white nationalist terrorism. 100 people were killed and injured in Sri Lanka by islamic terrorism yet democrats didn't feared to call it for what it was. Anti Semitism is overflowing within the Democrat party and yet democrats refused to condemn it.

    Faux compassion and faux concern from a race baiting faux jew.
  • Here is a cartoon from the Liberal new York time that is making headlines this very moment. See how its similar to how the Nazis depicted the Jews as dogs and none humans.And its from the New York Times the same liberal paper that calls Trump a Nazi. The Star of David on a Dog with the Head of the Prime minister of Israel.

    @SaremChuuk, any thoughts on Islamic terrorism or the rampant anti Semitism within the Democrat party?
  • Sarem is not a Jew. I like how Sarem defend the GND with diversion from the issue at hand to deportation of micros that is grounded on no facts and a single shooter. Can defend tje GND so divert to baseless rants. Can't defend his partys blatant socialism agenda so divert.
  • Nazis, Muslims and Democrats all hate Israel, e.g. Democrat "Hamas Caucus" appointed to House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Sign In or Register to comment.