20 Years Ago: 4-29-93 — UN says even a $300/ton carbon tax won’t work; May have to limit emissions by force

No wonder this UN publication is out of print.

The news report is below.

###

Energy use seen increasing 50% by year 2010
April 29, 1993, The Daily Yomiuri

The world’s energy consumption is projected to rise about 50 percent by the year 2010 because developing countries’ energy consumption will double, according to an International Energy Agency report released Wednesday.

The IEA report also said that it will be impossible to maintain the world’s levels of carbon dioxide exhaust at those in 1990 even if a tax of $300 per ton were imposed on the exhaust of carbon in an effort to restrain carbon dioxide emissions, which are believed to cause global warming.

The IEA thus pointed out in its World Energy Outlook that its member nations will need to consider undertaking forcible measures to regulate the emission of carbon dioxide or extending financial assistance for implementation of energy saving measures.

4 thoughts on “20 Years Ago: 4-29-93 — UN says even a $300/ton carbon tax won’t work; May have to limit emissions by force”

  1. Clearly, although the publication may no longer be in print, the statist/totalitarian/authoritarian mindset has not changed and will continue to be pursued. The US Constitution is the ultimate defense against this mindset.

  2. Ack, I remember this one, too. It’s a good reminder that the UN’s dream of world governance — imposition of its edicts by force — has been around longer than Agenda 21.

  3. China needs more rice. Nature responds with more fretiliser, ( atmospheric CO2). UN suggests stopping this – by force. Who could expect China (and Russia in the same basket) to vote it up? In the confrontation of political science vs. nature, PO2 (political polution) never stands a chance against the proven benefits of CO2.

  4. The UN tried to authorise force to enforce climate policy again a few weeks ago. Surprisingly enough (or not), China and Russia voted it down.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Discover more from JunkScience.com

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading