Attendees at the recent G8 meetings in L'Aquila, Italy dined on polar bear tartare
This week, the global warming circus raised its tent at the G8 meetings in L’Aquila, Italy. According to the media, the world’s wisest leaders have saved the world by signing a new global warming pact.
Luckily, ABC News’ Jake Tapper cut through the crap and revealed a side of the story that’s absent from most reports and buried in others:
“The climate change provision sets a non-binding goal for a 50% reduction in greenhouse gases by 2050, using 1990 levels or later years as a base, with a goal for developed countries of 80%. The document pledges cooperation to limit the rise in global temperatures to no more than 2 degrees Celsius or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit.”
“But achieving this is far more difficult than writing it on a piece of paper as a pledge, particularly with developing nations balking at the goal and complaining that the industrialized world hasn’t followed through with aid and technology to help them reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”
Got that? It’s non-binding. So non-binding, in fact, that Russia, which actually signed the treaty, has already said it has no intention of abiding by it.
Arkady Dvorkovich, the top economic advisor to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said, “For us the 80 per cent figure is unacceptable and likely unattainable. We won’t sacrifice economic growth for the sake of emission reduction.”
He might as well have been speaking for India and China who aren’t G8 members and who have already said, “Thanks, but no thanks. We’re with Russia on this one.”
So on one hand, the solution to global warming was all smoke and mirrors. On the other hand, the leaders of the G8 did manage to have some very nice dinners and treated their bloated staffs to very nice Italian vacations.
Source: ABCNews.com, SBS.com.au
Learn to use the space bar. Seriously. Aside from that your mind, while warped, seems to at least process information. You should be able to find some work and then be able to buy a cell phone for your ‘emergencyR 17; needs. If you have enough time to type...
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Like or Dislike:
Yes there is no doubt that emission reduction could be much simpler!
Sufficient first phase 2020/2030 emission reduction is achieved by acting on ELECTRICITY generation (coal, gas) and TRANSPORT (mainly automobiles) alone, since these 2 sectors typically (as in the USA) account for 80% of greenhouse gas emissions.
The focus on electricity and transport gives several advantages – apart from lowering CO2 emissions:
1. Local environmental benefit from less pollution of sulphur and all else that’s in the emissions, regardless of the less certain or immediate global benefit from CO2 reduction.
2. Electricity supply alternatives which together with improved grid distribution gives better competition and keeps down electricity bills for consumers.
3. Transport alternatives (using electricity, hydrogen and other energy sources), which give variety of choice and competition advantages for consumers, additionally reducing the dependency on oil imports.
4. No trade problems: Unlike Cap and Trade, which involves cement, steel and other industries having to face imports from unregulated countries, the here suggested electricity and transport changes are not just more limited, but also largely local. Since there is little competition between say utility companies internationally, “best practice” results can be compared and shared.
Funding and Impact
Equity and long term loan finance can be used: Long term industrial loans from financial institutions, particularly if federal/state guaranteed, give low yearly interest repayments and lessen the effect on electricity bills or transport cost.
Compare with
today’s all-encompassing Cap and Trade (emission trading) suggestions, with unpredictability, expense, and needless disruption from normal business practice on one hand, or unnecessary profiteering from free allowance handouts with little actual emission reduction on the other hand – together with extensive -and unnecessary- regulation on what people can or can’t buy and use.
Understanding why proposed Cap and Trade is bad, in USA and elsewhere
http://www.ceolas.net/#cce5x
Basic Idea — Offsets — Tree Planting — Manufacture Shift — Fair Trade — Surreal Market — Real Market — Allowances: Auctions + Hand-Outs — Allowance Trading — Companies: Business Stability + Business Cost — In Conclusion
The Way Forward
http://www.ceolas.net/#cc10x
Introduction — Funding and Impact —No Energy Efficiency Regulation — A New Electric World
Electricity Generation — Distribution
Transport Power Generation — Regulation — Taxation
.
Like or Dislike:
Human being is destroying himself by his own hands: http://inspirationwriting.blogspot.com/2009/07/scientific-studies-showed-where-there.html
{ 1 trackback }