Is a Recession the Best Way to Reduce Carbon Emissions?

Given the year-over-year economy-induced decline was saw last year in U.S. carbon emissions, maybe we should gun for a longer and deeper recession/depression. It would certainly outpace anything we’re likely to get from cap-and-trade and another such expensive and complex stuff. The following is based on data from a recent Netherlands report:

As an aside, by my calculations U.S. carbon emissions declined last year roughly on par with the entire annual emissions of Spain. Maybe we should make that the new unit of measure: We’re going for a Spain in emission reductions.

Comments

[Alex Filonov:]

Well, nuclear war might be even better. You can kill people or you can kill demand for products, and pollution will go down. I refuse to be happy about such pollution resuction.

Jul 01 05:24 PM

[Tony Petroski:]

I agree with Alex Filonov: Nuclear war will kill off carbon emissions (and the carbon units producing them) much more reliably than a recession/depression II. On the other hand, Carl Sagan used to warn about "nuclear winter" and the ice age that would follow. Is it possible we will kill off too many carbon units and then get a cooling trend so severe that we will have to go back to driving SUV's and living life again to get temperatures back up?

Jul 01 07:40 PM

[THofler:]

If a severe recession can create a big decline in carbon emissions, then can a tight cap on carbon emissions in turn create a sustained economic recession?

THIS is the vision of the anti-capitalist branch of the democratic party. They see it as a rare opportunity.

Jul 01 07:49 PM

[A Barrel Full:]

It certainly works in the short term.

Killing everyone when they reached 60 years old would massively reduce cancer and heart attacks. Not sure its a good idea though.

Jul 02 03:36 AM

[jerrydd:]

While it does work there are better ways like putting the true cost of oil, coal in them instead of in our income taxes. Then giving tax cuts and low cost loans to help people use less energy.

Then RE, eff would be by far the low cost energy sources. Even now with the huge subsidies for oil, coal, much RE now equals coal in costs installed and much less to run.

Jul 02 11:15 AM

[ObjectiveFu...:]

Nah, my money's on the pandemic... after a brief spike in carbon and methane release from billions of rotting corpses of humans and helpless domestic animals, Sacred Mother Gaia will at last be free of that awful parasitic infestation called humanity.

Jul 02 12:28 PM

[RECON605:]

NOPE.

WE ARE BEING MANIPULATED BY THIS ADMINSTRATION WHICH SEEMS TO HAVE ON ITS ADVISORY BOARD SOCIALISTS, FASCISTS, COMMIES AND IMPERIALISTS.

HE HAS SEPARATE TEAMS INVOLVED TO BREAK UP THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM PUTTING ANY REAL DIRECTION TO STOP HIS AGENDAS THAT ARE UN-AMERICAN AND UNDEMOCRATIC.

Jul 03 06:10 PM

[bartpr:]

how can you manipulate global warming. it is happening with the C02 emissions. talk to any welding expert. why it c02 used in welding gas.
because it absorbs the welding heats and affords a better melting.
you sound like a sour grape republican.

Jul 04 08:32 AM