ZERO Carbon Emissions Produces Abject Poverty, Sabotages Hope

Cathie Adams reporting from Cancun, MX -- The industrialized world needs to realize that the radical environmentalists’ demand for a ZERO carbon economy by 2050 is a cruel hoax being perpetrated upon the poor. Succumbing to the unproven theory that burning fossil fuels is warming the climate robs the poor of the hope to improve their lives. Instead of feeling guilty for enjoying their energy-produced modern lifestyles, developed nations should encourage the undeveloped world with the knowledge to produce their own energy.

On Wednesday, I left Cancun’s paradise, where tourists enjoy running water and electricity, to visit a small village called La Libertad that has none of those amenities. It was like visiting an alternate universe, an extreme contrast to what is being taken for granted by delegates to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, Conference of the Parties 16 in Mexico.

About 20 delegates holding various U.N. credentials boarded vans and traveled about 30 minutes to La Libertad, a field trip organized by Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, CFACT.

Christopher Monckton, a British politician and journalist, joined our party. Since 2010, Monckton has been the deputy leader of the UK Independence Party and was formerly a member of the Conservative Party. During the 1980s, he served in Conservative Central Office and worked for Margaret Thatcher's Number 10 Policy Unit.

A well known critic of “global warming,” Monckton spent most of the prior night reading the conference’s working document. His critique of it during our drive provided a potent basis for what we were about to see.

Villagers in La Libertad have absolutely no modern conveniences: no running water, no indoor plumbing, no natural gas to cook with and no electricity to light their homes. The light of day shined through multiple gaps in the ceiling and walls of a home we visited that was built of leftover political signs, natural stones and various materials that had been obviously discarded by previous owners, including an old ironing board placed atop a 55-gallon barrel used for outdoor cooking.

We then visited a local school that likewise had no electricity or other conveniences. It was just as repulsive to witness energy poverty that robs individuals of the dignity to provide basic human necessities for themselves, as it was heartrending to witness children living without sanitation or access to simple hygiene.

My visit to La Libertad emboldened my belief that Americans need not apologize for our standard of living; rather, we must confront the hypocrisy of radical environmentalists who demand ZERO carbon emissions by 2050!

I agree with CFACT’s Executive Director Craig Rucker that, “For villages like La Libertad if there is energy, there is hope.”


Make sure to check out the comments on Facebook.

Cathy Adams writes:

Succumbing to the unproven theory that burning fossil fuels is warming the climate robs the poor of the hope to improve their lives.

Unproven theory?  Says who!  I'm under the clear impression that the connection between burning fossil fuels, rising concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide, and rising average global temperatures is pretty well established.  If it isn't, please enlighten me.  Rising concentrations of atmospheric CO2 has been confirmed by 60 years of scientific measurement, and the ability of CO2 to absorb infared radiation and thus trap heat radiating from the Earth was discovered by John Tyndall (1859) and Svante Arrhenius (1896).  The NASA climate website ( states that global average temperature has risen 1.5F since 1880.  There is considerable uncertainty how much the average global temperature will rise in the next 100 years.  However, prudence dictates that we at least consider the worst-case scenario.

Global poverty is a horrible problem, but if we are correct that high concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide is also a severe problem, there must be ways of addressing both problems without exacerbating either.  Having to choose between reducing poverty and reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations seems like a false choice to me.

© 2015 TexasGOPVote  | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy