WPC-Climate Science 101

Dear New Hampshire State Legislators,

Thank you for your efforts and service to our state!

I began losing sleep six years ago because of what I had learned about human-caused climate change from reputable mainstream scientific organizations. I now channel that energy into positive volunteer activities to help enable our civilization to address the problem. If you are not yet concerned, or you think the current energy market will sort things out on its own, or you think New Hampshire shouldn't do anything special because our state is too insignificant to make a difference, this is for you...


Climate Science 101

  • It’s Warming (1)

  • It’s Us (2)

  • We’re Sure (3)

  • It’s Bad(4)

  • We Have to Change to Fix It (5)

  • Cash-back Carbon Pricing Will Help (6)


  1. IPCC AR5: “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia.”

  2. USGCRP NCA4: “It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause

  • For the USGCRP, "extremely likely" means a 95% - 100% probability.

  1. NASA: “Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree

  2. IPCC AR5: “High to very high risk of severe, widespread, and irreversible impacts globally.”

  3. IPCC AR5: “Limiting climate change will require substantial and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.”

  4. REMI: During the first 20 years the Carbon Fee and Dividend policy from Citizens Climate Lobby will lead to:

  • A 50% reduction of US carbon emissions below 1990 levels, and dropping rapidly in the US and globally

  • The addition of 2.8 million US jobs and $1.375 trillion in GDP from the economic stimulus of the dividend

  • The avoidance of 230,000 premature deaths in the US due to the reduction in air pollutants


The rest of the world accepts #1 - #5, and our President does as well. Already, 46 countries are pricing carbon emissions from fossil fuels. Canada has implemented #6, and their steadily rising carbon price will exceed $100 by 2030. The EU prices carbon and is working with Canada to charge the US for our carbon emissions if we don't price them ourselves by 2023. Why would we not keep that carbon cash in our own economy - and give it to households to protect them from temporarily higher energy prices - rather than paying our major trading partners for our pollution?


It is obvious that the US will price carbon emissions from fossil fuels this decade in a way that reaches $100 per ton of carbon dioxide equivalent warming by 2030 and rises for decades after.


New Hampshire should prepare. We can do that by increasing energy efficiency, favoring clean energy solutions, and choosing electric heating and transportation over fossil fuel options (coal, oil, and gas). You can help by educating the public and businesses about why doing these things is not just necessary to eliminate pollution, but makes sense for our bottom line. All these things will be cheaper to do gradually starting now rather than if we are forced to do them later after we've locked in future stranded costs and our workforce is not adequately prepared.


Complementary policies will also be necessary to ensure relative climate safety, but cash-back carbon pricing at the federal level is our best first step at addressing the problem. Preparing for that now, here in New Hampshire, is our best move for a prosperous and healthy decade ahead.


Sincerely,

John Gage

12 Fordway Extension

Windham, NH 03087

603-965-1586


This is the sixth in a series to help inform the NH state legislature about the best first step we can take to address the climate risks we face. There are many co-benefits to the carbon cash-back approach. See carboncashback.org/benefits for independent analyses. Previous "Why Price Carbon" letters are available.