Friday, January 12, 2007

Debunking Kyoto - Part 1

First of all, I want to make it clear that I am not disputing the concept of climate change. I believe that it has occurred at varying rates since the beginning of time.

However, I do not believe that the Kyoto accord is necessarily the ultimate answer to this problem. Throwing piles of money at something that will likely deliver questionable results at best, does not seem to be a reasonable approach in my humble opinion. Also, there are pollution problems other than greenhouse gas emissions plaguing our planet.

First I have to give thanks to SDA reader "Willy" for a reference to a very interesting article in Tuesday's Financial Post - Kyoto sinks Europe: Billions in costs make it more and more unlikely that the EU can continue to go it alone slashing carbon emissions by Benny Peiser who is a researcher at Liverpool John Moores University:


The crisis centres on a fundamental conflict between economic realism and environmental idealism, between national interest and green ideology. It has exposed the increasing tension between Europe's green enthusiasm and the realization that its unilateral framework comes at a hefty cost that is beginning to erode the economic stability of a waning continent.


Instead of reducing EU's carbon emissions significantly, the carbon-trading strategy for meeting its Kyoto target has actually had the opposite effect:


Instead, year after year, most EU countries continue to increase their greenhouse-gas emissions. Rather than proving its effectiveness, the trading system has pushed electricity prices even higher while energy-intensive companies are forced to close down, cut jobs, or pass on the costs to consumers.

Gunter Verheugen, the EU's industry commissioner, has warned that by "going it alone" Europe is burdening its industries and consumers with soaring costs that are undermining Europe's international competitiveness. Instead of improving environmental conditions, Europe's policy threatens to redirect energy-intensive production to parts of the world that reject mandatory carbon cuts.

Verheugen's warning reaffirms what U.S. administrations have been saying for many years. It is aimed at the rapidly evolving challenges posed by Asian competitors such as China and India that are set to overtake Europe's sluggish economy within the next couple of decades. Indeed, Europe's imprudent unilateralism is not only constraining its trade and industry; worse still, it has led to a significant slowdown in European R&D budgets, a sliding trend that is hampering the development of low-carbon technologies.



Did you catch that last bit? Kyoto has had the effect of slowing down low-carbon technology development.


In recent weeks, even U.S. Democrats have cautiously started to lower expectations. They now concede that even under a Democratic administration, the United States is unlikely to join any international climate regime that would exclude Asia's looming superpowers and burden its economy with unilateral obligations.


What's that? Even the Democrats are having second thoughts about Kyoto?


Meanwhile, the environmentalists are trying to wring as much political capital as they can from Stephen Harper's shaky minority government. Two noteworthy editorials from today's Toronto Sun chastise Harper and other politicians for jumping on the popular bandwagon.

A respected Canadian climatologist, Dr. Tim Bell, says "the Kyoto Protocol is a political solution to a non-existent problem without scientific justification."



More to follow.

34 comments:

kate's mangy small dead mutt said...

A respected Canadian climatologist, Dr. Tim Bell, says "the Kyoto Protocol is a political solution to a non-existent problem without scientific justification."

Maybe, maybe not. I do know that it's 34 below, the seat in the car I just started is as hard and cold as granite, and a little warming would be appreciated in this neck of the woods.

Ontario Lad said...

Sending millions of dollars to other countries so that we can buy the right to pollute through "credits" is not doing anything for the enviornment. China and India are just happily chugging away. And our enviromental record WITH Kyoto has been worse than the US's without it. Kyoto is a sham.

I laugh everytime I hear Dion talk about the Tory's enviromental record when HIS own record as Enviroment Minister is pathetic. And now he wants a second crack at it, after his Party showed 13 years of nothing? Oh, but now they have those neat little green scarves that show they are green. And oh yes, that little green bar on the Liberal website under the title. But THIS time they're serious. THIS time they are going to do SOMETHING.

Whatever.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

And now he wants a second crack at it, after his Party showed 13 years of nothing? Oh, but now they have those neat little green scarves that show they are green.

And don't forget that Dion named his dog "Kyoto". I'm sure that will have a profound effect.

Red Tory said...

I’m reluctant to make connections to the freaky weather and global warming, but for the record in the past month or so we’ve had: rain storm, wind storm, snow storm, rain storm, hurricane, rain storm, wind storm, rain storm, snow blizzard. Not exactly typical weather. We’ve also had about eight days of blackouts and power outages.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I’m reluctant to make connections to the freaky weather and global warming

The term "global warming" is very passé now. The new one is "climate change". This term can be used to apply to any weather at all, and therefore serves the environmentalist agenda much better. Hard to argue "global warming" in the prairies right now.

Red Tory said...

FYI, Peiser has recently conceded that he no longer doubts that "an overwhelming majority of climatologists is agreed that the current warming period is mostly due to human impact. However, this majority consensus is far from unanimous." He's also a social anthropologist and a bit of a nutter.

Red Tory said...

Whatever. Semantics...

KPK said...

"And don't forget that Dion named his dog "Kyoto". I'm sure that will have a profound effect."

Not if it craps on his lawn...

KPK said...

Yes I noticed that a lot of environmental groups are trying to get their causes out there in the media by using the "climate change" card - even if there was no evidence to support their claims.

OttawaCon said...

Gold star to Red Tory for pointing out the source of this ludicrous analysis. Tim Ball is hardly a respected climatologist.

Embracing people like this and Tim Ball does nothing for the credibility of Canadian conservatism.

Anonymous said...

The crazy weather we're getting right now is because it's an "El Nino" year and has nothing to do with "climate change" or "global warming".

Charley

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Embracing people like this and Tim Ball does nothing for the credibility of Canadian conservatism.

O.K. So we've discredited Tim Bell and Benny Peiser. Anyone have an issue with the Sun editorial board?

Anonymous said...

"I’m reluctant to make connections to the freaky weather and global warming, but for the record in the past month or so we’ve had: rain storm, wind storm, snow storm, rain storm, hurricane, rain storm, wind storm, rain storm, snow blizzard. Not exactly typical weather. We’ve also had about eight days of blackouts and power outages.
"

RT,

I know what you mean, but I read an article about an extra strong El Nino that effects the Jet Stream and weather in general.

Now whether it contributes to global warming or vice versa, I've read that there hasn't been much research yet to prove it. So it's a question mark.

Alberta Girl said...

"Tim Ball is hardly a respected climatologist"

Um - Ottawacon - is that because he disagrees with the likes of David Suzuki.

Who made DS a "respected climatologist".

I have heard Tim Ball speak - he presents facts from history unlike the DS types and other greenies who think that because it is windy on the west coast for a month that somehow this shows that "climate change" is a reality.

Respect is earned by presenting data and historical facts - not jumping on the latest - global cooling, global warming bandwagon.

Please enlighten me as to your thinking on why he is "hardly a respected climatologist"

bigcitylib said...

Tim Ball is not a respected climatologist because he has published zip on climat change in any of the standard scientific journals on the topic. In fact, he has published zip on any topic in climatology since his retirement ten years ago (putting stuff up on a website doesn't count, by the way)

He has also exaggerated his credentials with respect to what he taught, where and for how long, and is currently involved in lawsuits over the matter.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I googled Dr. Tim Ball and Bell and got results for both. Worthington talks about a Dr. Bell. Typo?

Red Tory said...

Joanne -- Bell, ball… who cares? I was referring to the author of the article in the National Post who is, I’m sorry to say, a bit of a crank. Do you even read the things you link to? Or perhaps are you too busy cutting and pasting to bother actually considering your sources and what they are expressing?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Do you even read the things you link to?

Perhaps instead of delivering your usual cranky personal attacks you could actually expand on the exact issues with which you disagree and why. Otherwise, I'll just chalk up your comments to more hot air.

bigcitylib said...

Its Ball, or the Friends of Science and the NRSP. I've been writing about these guys all week.

Red Tory said...

Ahh... I get it now.

Don’t fact check, don’t bother to consider the source, don’t bother to make a reasoned argument, don’t do anything other than cut and paste some thigh-rubbing piece of crap from the Sun and attach a snippy little remark to it. Then, tell your commenters they have to “expand on the exact issues” they have difficulty with. I have to say, this is a rather cunning approach to blogging.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Then, tell your commenters they have to “expand on the exact issues” they have difficulty with.

The problem is that mind-reading is not one of my talents. If that irks you so much, why do you bother to subject yourself to this "drivel" or do you just like to hear the roar of your own sound and fury?

Red Tory said...

Fine. I promise not to darken your door in future with my idiotic sound and fury. Enjoy your circle jerk. Ta-ta.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I promise not to darken your door in future

Ditto.

This all sounds oddly familiar. Oh yeah! Time to put me under the "Gormless Asshat" category again.

Cherniak_WTF said...

Joanne, I think some would be ready to debade if you did not base or quote from an article base on Tim Bell....
He is a "climate skeptic" who misreprsents real facts, is paid in large part by big oil, his own "research" has not been peer reviewed.
He the equivalent of a TV doctor selling aspirin...

Of course, some of the more dim ones in the Con cesspool love this guy....

Anonymous said...

Yes, you can always find a small handful of scientisits taking a position opposite the vast majority of scientists. That is the nature of the beast.

But if you actually want to learn about the science, and the massive consensus among the scientists who are LEADERS in the relevant fields as witnessed by their peer election to their own National Academy of Sciences, then read the vast amount of reserach done under the auspices of the National Academy of Sciences (US) and learn how strong the consensus actually is.

Fact is, at this point there is no longer a debate in th internaitonal scientific commuinity about human impact on climate change. The much more important and valid debate is on what we can and should do to help mitigate it.

Red Tory said...

Joanne -- No I just deleted you. Last post. I promise.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

I think some would be ready to debade if you did not base or quote from an article base on Tim Bell....
He is a "climate skeptic" who misreprsents real facts,


O.K. I can buy that. But what specifically in this particular article was so objectionable?

If most days I say "Humans don't drink water", and am therefore discredited, does it necessarily follow that if I make a statement "Humans eat food" that it therefore is invalid?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Well Alberta Girl, do you have a response for BigCityLib?

Anonymous said...

A respected Canadian climatologist, Dr. Tim Bell, says "the Kyoto Protocol is a political solution to a non-existent problem without scientific justification."..

That's it in a nutshell!

Anonymous said...

How unusual! RT stomping off (again) & cwtf moaning about lack of debate (again) but not presenting any logical argument(again).

I don't see what is so difficult about this:

Kyoto is nothing but a pretty but extemely expensive facade that confirms the old saying about the road to hell being paved with good intentions.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

PGP - The part of that quote that bothers me is "non-existent problem". I'm not sure I would agree with it. "Political solution without scientific justification", however seems to be a very apt description.

Kyoto is nothing but a pretty but extemely expensive facade that confirms the old saying about the road to hell being paved with good intentions.

Mac, very well said. As for Red, let's just say we have discovered that we have irreconcilable differences and have agreed not to darken each other's door ever again.

Works for me, although I'm still in the habit of second-guessing myself every time I write something - O.K. now, what's Red going to come back with on this? This is gonna get him going!

lol!

Joanne (True Blue) said...

BTW Red, thanks for the heads-up on the Waugh link not working. ;)

CHarles Barton said...

"A respected Canadian climatologist, Dr. Tim Bell, says "the Kyoto Protocol is a political solution to a non-existent problem without scientific justification."

Bell's cradentials are very much in dispute. Bell claims to be the first Canadian to hold a Ph.D. in climatology, is currently the subject of a law suit in Canada. All four of Bell's piblished peer reviewed papers were related about his PhD disertation which described regional climate change from 1714 to 1850 in the Hudson Bay area. His "data" came from Hudson Bay Company records, rather than scientific research. Bell research used the methods of geography, not climate science and delt with historical climatology of a specific small region. Bell has no published research in global climentology. Bell has never been a member of any major climate science society like The Canadian Meteorological or Oceanographic Society, or any similar equivalent outside of Canada. He has no publications in mainstream climate science journals. His appears to have inflated his cradientials, for example claiming to be a Professor Emeritus from the University of Winnipeg. He was never awarded that title. He is a former member of the geography faculty of the University of Winnipeg. The Calgary Herald states that Ball is “viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry rather than as a practicing scientist.”

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Yes, I've heard that about Bell as well. I can't speak to his authenticity personally. Perhaps you might want to take it up with the columnist in question. If you happen to get a reply, please let me know. Thanks.