Global Warming Hysteria – Every attempt so far to get emissions under control turns out to be about money

En som vanligt intressant  artikel från dagens Toronto Sun av Lorrie Goldstein.

Artikeln finns här:

Global warming fixes not cool

Every attempt so far to get emissions under control turns out to be about money

By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN,  June 29, 2008

Let’s examine an important question.

Are the major schemes created by global politicians to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, ostensibly to combat global warming, effective?

The answer is no, because they aren’t about addressing global warming.

They’re about making more money for governments and large corporations.

Let’s start with the Kyoto accord.

Will it be effective in lowering global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions? No. It wasn’t meant to be.

Kyoto, a United Nations treaty, exempts the developing world — 143 of 180 nations which ratified it — from lowering emissions.

Since the developing world will account for most future emissions as it undergoes the industrial revolution we began a century ago, emissions will keep rising.

China, exempt from Kyoto, has already surpassed the U.S. (which hasn’t ratified Kyoto dating back to when GHG guru Al Gore was vice-president) as the world’s largest carbon emitter.

Last year, China alone accounted for two-thirds of the global rise in emissions.

Kyoto’s defenders argue it was right to have the developed world, responsible for most emissions up to now, act first, before requiring sacrifices of the developing world.

But that’s a political argument, not an environmental one.

So is the argument Kyoto’s greatest flaw is the U.S. refusal to ratify it.

Incorrect. The much greater flaw was exempting the developing world.

Given that, even if all 37 developed nations required to cut emissions under Kyoto hit their targets (many, including us, won’t), that would be about one-thirteenth of what the UN says needs to be done.

Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>

Finally, Kyoto defenders argue we had to start ”somewhere.”

But the ”somewhere” they started from had nothing to do with the environment.

Their focus was transferring wealth from the developed world to the developing one in return for the right to emit GHG.


One Kyoto scheme is the ”clean development mechanism,” where developed countries sponsor emission-reducing projects in developing ones. But since the latter aren’t required to cut emissions, the ”clean” mechanism is already dirty. It faces widespread allegations of profiteering, corruption and of increasing emissions.

The biggest scheme Kyoto’s drafters envisioned was emissions trading.

Europe’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), created three years ago, is the centre of a global carbon market valued at $60 billion annually, predicted to grow to $1 trillion in 10 years and to eventually become the world’s largest trading market.

The ETS is a ”cap-and-trade” system. Governments set annual caps on emissions, then issue permits to big industrial emitters, who buy and sell them.

That’s led to windfall profits for energy companies and speculators, but has been a bust for the environment and public.

Energy corporations, initially given their permits for free by governments, charged customers as if they had paid for them, resulting in skyrocketing electricity bills.

Emitters convinced governments to hand out more permits than current emissions, destroying the purpose of cap-and-trade, which is to emit less. That caused prices to crash, making it cheaper to buy permits than reduce emissions.

In Canada, Prime Minister Stephen Harper proposes tougher regulations on big GHG emitters, Liberal Leader Stephen Dion a carbon tax and NDP Leader Jack Layton, cap-and-trade.

All have the same goal — putting a direct or indirect price on burning carbon so people can’t afford to consume as much because they will have to pay higher taxes and/or prices for virtually everything.

Don’t be deceived by claims a carbon tax can be ”revenue neutral,” which is simply a bookkeeping entry in government ledgers.


In the real world, there will be winners and losers, chosen by government, and many of the losers will find they won’t be able to ”choose” to lower their emissions, as many victimized folks in the U.K. and Europe are now discovering.

None of these political schemes addresses the underlying issue.

Since we don’t know how to remove carbon from the atmosphere when burning fossil fuels, and renewable energy sources aren’t ready for widespread use, population growth alone will cause emissions to rise until we solve both these problems.

Meanwhile, politicians and CEOs will happily take away more and more of our money, lecturing us they must do so to — insert laughter here — ”Save The Planet.”

Etiketter: , , ,

Ett svar to “Global Warming Hysteria – Every attempt so far to get emissions under control turns out to be about money”

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

    […] not be blamed for Global Warming!,  There is no evidence man-made CO2 causes climate change,   Global Warming Hysteria – Every attempt so far to get emissions under control turns out to be …, IPCC Expert Reviewer – The present warm phase is no more than one of those naturally […]


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

Du kommenterar med ditt Logga ut /  Ändra )


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


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


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

Ansluter till %s

%d bloggare gillar detta: