This is making Warmists very excited, failing to realize that if the government forces this on the private sector it’ll mess with their own lives
Each year, the federal government purchases about 50,000 new vehicles. Until recently, almost all of them ran on diesel or gasoline, contributing to U.S. demand for fossil fuels and encouraging automakers to continue focusing on fossil-fueled vehicles.
That’s starting to change, and a new directive that the Biden Administration quietly issued in September 2023 will accelerate the shift.
The administration directed U.S. agencies to begin considering the social cost of greenhouse gases when making purchase decisions and implementing their budgets.
That one move has vast implications that go far beyond vehicles. It could affect decisions across the government on everything from agriculture grants to fossil fuel drilling on public lands to construction projects. Ultimately, it could shift demand enough to change what industries produce, not just for the government but for the entire country.
But, remember, this is not authoritarian at all. They’ll actually refer to it as a “free market” plan, rather than Socialist/Marxist interference in the economy, picking winners and losers which then forces this on you the citizens, who are supposed to be in charge, with elected officials doing your bidding, rather than dictating everything.
Of course, when it comes down to it, will government employees really want to give up their cushy vehicles and food and perks and stuff?
The federal vehicle fleet is a good example of how the social costs of greenhouse gases add up.
Let’s compare the costs of driving an electric Ford Focus and an equivalent conventional-fuel Ford Focus.
Assume each vehicle drives an average of 10,000 miles (about 16,000 kilometers) per year – that’s less than the U.S. average per driver, but it’s a simple number to work with. The damages from emissions in dollars from driving a conventional Ford Focus 10,000 miles are between $133 and $484, depending on whether you use a social cost of carbon of $51 per metric ton or $185 per metric ton.
Except, Ford no longer makes either Focus. They’re switching to expensive EVs, which cost quite a bit more than either Focus, meaning that the costs will pretty much never be recouped. Not the best example.
Much of the U.S. government’s spending goes toward carbon-intensive goods and services, such as transportation and infrastructure development. Directing agencies to consider and compare the social cost of purchases in each of these sectors will send similar signals to different segments of the market: The demand for less carbon-intensive goods is rising.
How about restricting all of the federal government’s travel, starting with Biden and the agency executives?
Read: Good News: Biden Regime To Force Social Cost Of Carbon On Government Purchases »