Clearing out the environmental fog

Här kommer en fortsättning på Goldsteins artiklar i gårdagens Toronto Sun.

Se mina tidigare inlägg::
The REAL inconvenient truth: Zealotry over global warming could damage our Earth far more than climate change,  Pour cold water on ‘global warming’,  Kyoto is essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth-producing nations!,  They are the worst sort of people to put in charge of anything – ignorant, arrogant, self-righteous, often hypocritical.  Kyoto supporters have no idea what they signed!,  A CO2 graph that says it all!,  Miljökonferensen på Balis stora miljökostnader

Några citat:

”In Bangkok, developing nations refused to accept greenhouse gas (GHG) emission cuts after Kyoto, which doesn’t require them to reduce emissions, unless the developed world gives them billions of dollars to adapt to global warming. China wants developed nations to contribute at least 0.5% of their Gross Domestic Product annually. For Canada, this would mean sending at least $7.5 billion per year to developing nations, in addition to foreign aid.

(2) Here’s a little-known fact. While Kyoto applies to 163 countries, Canada is one of only 37 required to cut emissions. Yes, you read that right.”

”….then PM Jean Chretien, ”with almost whimsical disregard” for what we could actually achieve, not only ignored Canada’s consensus position, but insisted our emission cut should be 6%, so he could upstage then U.S. vice-president Al Gore, who was lobbying for a 5% cut for the U.S.

However, unlike Canada, the Americans never ratified Kyoto, complaining it made no demands on the developing world. Chretien ratified Kyoto in 2002. By the time the Liberals lost power in early 2006, Canada‘s emissions were so far above our Kyoto target, there was no realistic way to achieve it.”

Late last year, the Paris-based International Energy Agency compiled a list, which it presented at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Bali, outlining what’s required in order to meet (global GHG) emission reductions of 50% by 2050. The list … included: 30 new nuclear power plants, 17,000 wind turbines, 400 biomass power plants, two hydroelectric dams the size of China‘s massive Three Gorges project, and 42 coal or natural gas plants using carbon-capture technology to store CO2 emissions underground. But that’s not all. It concluded that all of that would have to be built and up and running by 2013 — and the process repeated every year until 2030.. It is an almost comical proposition. A new nuclear power plant hasn’t been built in the U.S. in 30 years.”

Artikeln finns här:

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Goldstein_Lorrie/2008/04/06/5208166-sun.php

 Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>

 

Clearing out the enviro-fog

Here are six significant issues to consider as we try to fight global warming

By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN, TORONTO SUN, Sun, April 6, 2008

When it comes to global warming, minor items like last week’s Earth Hour get far more attention than they deserve at the expense of much more significant ones.

Here are some examples:

(1) Last week in Bangkok, 1,000 UN/Kyoto diplomats met to consider the next global warming treaty after Kyoto expires in 2012. This was a continuation of the process started in Bali last year, which will culminate in late 2009 in Copenhagen, with agreement on a post-Kyoto treaty. At least that’s the hope. In Bangkok, developing nations refused to accept greenhouse gas (GHG) emission cuts after Kyoto, which doesn’t require them to reduce emissions, unless the developed world gives them billions of dollars to adapt to global warming. China wants developed nations to contribute at least 0.5% of their Gross Domestic Product annually. For Canada, this would mean sending at least $7.5 billion per year to developing nations, in addition to foreign aid.

(2) Here’s a little-known fact. While Kyoto applies to 163 countries, Canada is one of only 37 required to cut emissions. Yes, you read that right.

(3) Among those 37, Canada’s Kyoto target is to cut emissions an average of 6% below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012, higher than the 5.2% average for all 37 nations. Plus, our 6% target is much tougher than Canada‘s federal and provincial environment ministers agreed was realistic when Kyoto was drafted in 1997. Going into those negotiations, Canada’s consensus position was to stabilize GHG emissions at 1990 levels. According to Paul Wells in Right Side Up, The Fall of Paul Martin and the Rise of Stephen Harper’s New Conservatism, then PM Jean Chretien, ”with almost whimsical disregard” for what we could actually achieve, not only ignored Canada’s consensus position, but insisted our emission cut should be 6%, so he could upstage then U.S. vice-president Al Gore, who was lobbying for a 5% cut for the U.S. However, unlike Canada, the Americans never ratified Kyoto, complaining it made no demands on the developing world. Chretien ratified Kyoto in 2002. By the time the Liberals lost power in early 2006, Canada‘s emissions were so far above our Kyoto target, there was no realistic way to achieve it.

(4) A recent telephone survey of 1,093 Americans conducted by Texas A&M University, published in the journal Risk Analysis, found the more people know about global warming, the less they feel personally responsible for it and the less concerned they are.

(5) One reason that shouldn’t be surprising is found in Colin Campbell’s cover story on global warming in last week’s Maclean’s.

To wit: ”Late last year, the Paris-based International Energy Agency compiled a list, which it presented at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Bali, outlining what’s required in order to meet (global GHG) emission reductions of 50% by 2050. The list … included: 30 new nuclear power plants, 17,000 wind turbines, 400 biomass power plants, two hydroelectric dams the size of China‘s massive Three Gorges project, and 42 coal or natural gas plants using carbon-capture technology to store CO2 emissions underground. But that’s not all. It concluded that all of that would have to be built and up and running by 2013 — and the process repeated every year until 2030. It is an almost comical proposition. A new nuclear power plant hasn’t been built in the U.S. in 30 years.”

Meanwhile, a recent article in the respected scientific journal, Nature, argues the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has badly underestimated the technological challenge of reducing emissions.

(6) Canada is a minor contributor to global warming. We account for about 2.1% of global emissions, compared to 20.6% for the U.S. While many environmentalists condemn us as one of the world’s largest ”per capita” emitters, that’s true, but irrelevant. As these environmentalists themselves preach when railing against simply reducing the intensity of our carbon emissions — the amount of CO2 emitted per dollar of GDP — you can’t fool the planet, because a tonne of carbon dioxide is a tonne of carbon dioxide, whatever the ”intensity” of emissions. Exactly. Of course, the same applies to ”per capita” emissions.

 

Annonser

Etiketter: , ,

3 svar to “Clearing out the environmental fog”

  1. Why greens don’t want to ‘solve’ climate change « UD/RK Samhälls Debatt Says:

    […] Clearing out the environmental fog,  World’s Scariest Words: ‘I’m an Environmentalist and I’m Here to Help’ […]

  2. The Origin and Life Cycle of Junk Science – OR Global Warming Hysteria « UD/RK Samhälls Debatt Says:

    […] Clearing out the environmental fog […]

  3. The IPCC must be called to account and cease its deceptive practices! « UD/RK Samhälls Debatt Says:

    […] truth: Zealotry over global warming could damage our Earth far more than climate change,  Clearing out the environmental fog,   The Flawed science behind the […]

Kommentera

Fyll i dina uppgifter nedan eller klicka på en ikon för att logga in:

WordPress.com Logo

Du kommenterar med ditt WordPress.com-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Google-foto

Du kommenterar med ditt Google-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Twitter-bild

Du kommenterar med ditt Twitter-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Facebook-foto

Du kommenterar med ditt Facebook-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Ansluter till %s


%d bloggare gillar detta: