OUR CLIMATE CHANGE FUNDING RESEMBLES THE SAME ISSUES OF THE COVID-19 CRISIS

Our Climate Change Funding resembles the same issues of the COVID-19 Crisis

The Biden Administration Plan to revitalize the industrial sector is ambitious when we consider the
fact that we are also trying to tackle Global Warming which is a byproduct of the Industrial
Revolution that had its humble beginnings three industrial waves ago and going on a fourth one
according to experts. The Energy sector is one of the priorities in the Administration’s plan.
Manufacturing is a critical component in the Supply Chains of this industry. Manufacturing since
late in the first half of the 20th Century has contributed between 11% to 14% of GDP to our economy
until recently. Our industrial sector only domestically invests .5% of GDP compared to 1.75% for
China. The infrastructure bill allocates $150 Billion to Climate Change and the Energy Sector. The
reduce inflation act invest $369 Billion in Energy Security and Climate Change for an estimated total
of $519 Billion over a period of years. The figure as a % of GDP is 2.3% if it was all invested in one
fiscal year of the U.S. government. It is not going to be invested in this fiscal year only, so really, it
does not change significantly what we have been spending in industry which is around .5% of GDP
annually or less because of the years that this money is going to be spread over.

The Crisis of not enough resources committed to Climate Change

The cost of curving Global Warming has been estimated to cost the World more than $50
Trillion dollars. Global Investment is woefully less than what it is required. Public
investment plays a vital role in mobilizing greater sums of private capital to achieve
climate goals. Worldwide investments in the low-carbon energy transition were US$755
billion in 2021, yet this remains far below what is required. Climate finance needs to
grow by a factor of almost six by 2030 to limit global warming to 1.5°

1
 OUR CLIMATE CHANGE FUNDING RESEMBLES THE SAME ISSUES OF THE COVID-19 CRISIS

United States Climate Funding (Our GDP in 2021 is close to $23 Trillion annually)

2
 OUR CLIMATE CHANGE FUNDING RESEMBLES THE SAME ISSUES OF THE COVID-19 CRISIS

According to Office of Management and Budget reports, federal climate change funding
was $13.2 billion across 19 agencies in 2017. In the 6 agencies we reviewed, we found
that 94% of their reported climate change funding went to programs that touch on, but
aren’t dedicated to climate change, such as nuclear energy research.

“We also found that OMB reports should include information on programs with climate
change-related financial risks, such as disaster relief. We recommended that OMB
provide information on these risks and further analysis in future funding reports.

Based on its review of the budget justifications of six agencies representing 89 percent
of OMB-reported funding, GAO identified few programs (18 of 533) whose primary
purpose is to address climate change. The remaining programs were multi-purpose—the
budget justifications included other program goals in addition to addressing climate
change. The 18 programs represented about 6 percent of these agencies' reported
climate change funding for fiscal year 2017.”

According to GAO's analysis, the 18 primary purpose climate change programs GAO
identified are fragmented across four federal agencies, but the programs serve different
purposes, target different audiences, or operate at different time periods and scales,
which minimizes potential overlap or duplication. Additionally, agency program managers
collaborate through the U.S. Global Change Research Program—a coordinating entity—to
avoid potential negative effects from fragmentation. However, climate change programs
outside GAO's review have not been analyzed for potential fragmentation, overlap, or
duplication.”

3
 OUR CLIMATE CHANGE FUNDING RESEMBLES THE SAME ISSUES OF THE COVID-19 CRISIS

4
 OUR CLIMATE CHANGE FUNDING RESEMBLES THE SAME ISSUES OF THE COVID-19 CRISIS

Analysis

Reviewing the above graphs, we can see that our efforts to combat Global Warming are inadequate.
Just like we did with the COVID-19 Global Health Crisis, we continue to fall short of planned required
funding to deal with Global Crises. At this funding rate for domestic and international Climate
Change projects; it is clear that we will not be able to stop the rise in temperature past the 1.5
degrees Centigrade as long as we rely on Capitalistic tools of managing scarcity, productivity and
efficiency. We know what we need to do, we have the people to get it done, however, unsustainable
Capitalism is working against Humanity’s survival on this planet by the generation of waste to create
our products and services we use, by the dumping of waste into our oceans, land and air and by the
financial rules of our Model of organized living.

What Academia is saying in the United States

The M.I.T. University Green Future Index ranks the United States as 40 out of 76 countries they have
in their index.

40th- Overall ranking

53rd- Carbon emissions
56th- Energy Transition
7th – Green Society
34th- Clean innovation
43rd- Climate policy

Like always, our country leadership and media, metaphorically speaking, talk and deliver messages
to the general public that are exaggerations of the facts. The amount of fiscal policy and funding
from public and private sources being invested to do our part in the World to fight Global Warming is
not what it should be for a country that claims to be a leader in the World for Human Rights. The
Infrastructure Bill, The CHIPS Act and the Reduce Inflation Act do not have the necessary funding or
purpose combined to be aligned with the ambition of the goals we have set for the United States.
The infrastructure bill is primarily a Maintenance Bill for the country, not for innovation. The CHIPS
Bill does not resolve the raw materials and low cost for the semiconductors we need and the
inflation reduction act is a traditional government action combined with the actions of monetary
policy of the Federal Reserve to deal with inflationary periods in our economy. It is not intended to
resolve the structural problems with Capitalism. We need more progressive reformers to enforce
our laws, lawmakers to change our laws that are disconnected with Human Rights and an executive
that is willing to experiment with executive orders for change the country into a Green Country.