The EPA’s latest comprehensive analysis on the effects of global climate change initiatives on the US is really a grand dukes mixture of assumptions and wishful thinking. On Monday, the EPA announced it’s new comprehensive analysis of climate change. The press release is here and the report is here. The EPA supposes global climate actions, keeping the temperature rise to the mythical 2°C will save 12,000 deaths annually by 2100 from heat and cold. This figure is in the range of about 0.003% of the population and would be in the statistical and measuring noise if there were any diagnoses of premature deaths from the disease known as climate. The do nothing scenario is 57,000 annual climate deaths in the US. Of course this is accompanied by billions in health savings per year. That’s trillions in economic savings. All from models and assumptions. The EPA includes equating CO2 to poor air quality and continues to ignore real improvements in air quality over the last 40 years.
The decisions we make today will have long-term effects, and future generations will either benefit from, or be burdened by, our current actions. Compared to a future with unchecked climate change, climate action is projected to avoid approximately 13,000 deaths in 2050 and 57,000 deaths annually in 2100 from poor air quality. Delaying action on emissions reductions will likely reduce these and other benefits.
In the report website, uncertainty is discussed in a link “Levels of Certainty.” The EPA buys projections from models that have little forecasting ability and concludes the only controllable uncertainty is future GHG emissions. All the estimated savings from climate change actions are here. Estimates are wonderful tools. They work best if the estimates weren’t made to support a predetermined end. And if you base the estimates on current climate models, then the estimates are worthless.
Remember, this is from global action, not just the US. So, the EPA proposes (in Paris?) to regulate China, India and developing countries? No wonder EPA wants to sell this on health effects that cannot be measured.
[added] Reading the EPA piece more, it seems the EPA is going to control the weather by controlling GHG’s, or at least extreme weather. Apparently there isn’t anything climate activists can’t control.