Fred, over at Gay and Right, has picked up on a report that echoes something I’ve long argued – that if climate change is indeed real, then it’s the height of human arrogance to pretend we can reverse it, even if human activity is one of the contributors. Despite all the advances in science and technology, not much progress made in changing the weather.
One approach � mitigation � would limit carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere largely by reducing emissions due to human activities. The Kyoto Protocol is an example of this approach. The second approach � adaptation � would reduce society�s vulnerability to, or help cope with, the consequences of global climate change due to higher CO2 emissions.
The projections underlying this study are from researchers who are sympathetic to mitigation. However, their conclusions show that adaptation is preferable. Cost estimates are based on reports from various United Nations-affiliated organizations.
So, before you Kyoto-marxists come to “carbon tax” my personal resources (crippling my ability to adapt) , how about a little demonstration? Make it rain.
Then, make it stop.
Human (and animal) kind has survived massive climate shifts throughout our history, and barring cataclysmic change, will continue to do so. The resources that will be sucked down the wealth transfer hole under Kyoto would be better applied to adaptation.
The obvious advantage to the adaptation model is that there isn’t nearly as much guesswork involved. Furthermore, even if a magic device were invented tomorrow that neatly removed massive amounts of CO2 from the atomosphere for mere pennies a day, we cannot assume that the results would include a stabilization of weather. Because, meteorological��semantics aside, it’s local weather patterns that we must live with and adapt to, regardless of what direction the overall climate is going in.
Update – DO NOT MENTION THE WEATHER MACHINE UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES
Kyoto is nothing more than feel-good liberal pap predicated on junk science. 35 years ago I recall school teachers telling us we were headed for another ice age. Images of wolly mammoths and saber-tooth tigers flash frozen in tundra extending as far south as the Brazilian jungle dazzled our impressionable young minds. (And scared the $hit out of us)
As I see it, with the Cold War over, we needed a new boogy man, what with so many scientists out of work now that the war machine was “right-sized”. With the aid of activist college instructors, tennured leftie university professors, Greenpeace kooks and furry little gnomes like David Suzuki, we now have a new religion sweeping the globe. Forget Islam which is purported to be the fasted spreading faith, we’ve got “The Church of Environmental Consciousness”. Not surprising, the eco-freaks target young children in their quest to spread this tripe.
Well, they’ve pretty much nailed the ‘make it rain’ part here, now if they could just do something about the ‘make it stop’ portion, I’d would be impressed.
There is a “magic device ” already at work its called a tree.A tree takes in carbon dioxide and gives off oxygen.
There is an unbelievable amount of loony stuff on the internet about Bush being responsible for hurricane Katrina. Many think he has deployed a “weather machine” that can cause drought, heat, cold, rainstorms, flooding, hurricanes and the like. Some believe that Bush is even responsible for earthquakes. These are all tools in the neocon quest for world domination.
It goes without saying that hurricane Katrina was caused by Bush to 1) destroy the black community in New Orleans; 2) create job opportunities for Halliburton to rebuild the city, etc. etc. It is truly mind-boggling.
At a government level Koyoto isn’t about climate change…it’s about revenue streams and redistributing wealth and power with a new currency/commodity called CO2.
Since there’s no stopping the juggernaut of Climate, we should look to enabeluing and adapting the swampy tree-huggers with some Eucalyptus stem-cells and planting them in a big damn forest – I’m sure it would appeal to the Veganwits. As for me I’ll take some gills in the neck when Waterworld comes around and I can do the Prince Namor, the Sub-Mariner thing, go Neptune !
Adaptation is a first step toward what I always try to coax out of the Lefties when discussing Glow-ball Worming, namely, subsistence living.
In the end, they finally admit that living hand to mouth is an admirable goal. But only half-heatedly since it’s always the other guy who needs to give up his car, his computer, the roof over his head, education and all the other things modern civilization provides.
The more information that comes my way on the internet, the more I despair about the division in the world bewteen (Left) those that operate under a “belief system” and (Right) those that operate under the principles of the Enlightenment. Short of a world war to bring this clash to a conclusion, I’m siding with the idea that the only thing that will bring about a unified and peaceful vision of mankind will be a new invention. Now what that is, I really don’t know. But it must be something that changes human perception to the degree that electronic media does.
Suppose some magical device is created to take all the CO2 out of the air. What pray tell will plants survive on?
Ed,
You can’t leave it at just that. What would be the benefit of that magical device? Why would anyone use it? What exactly are you getting at?
At least if someone from the past was able to see the future and explain the benefit of, say, television, it would be quite simple: instantaeous communication with sound and images on a worldwide scale.
“At a government level Koyoto isn’t about climate change…it’s about revenue streams and redistributing wealth and power with a new currency/commodity called CO2.”
WL Mackenzie Redux is exactly right. My NDP family believes that the real problem with the country is the rich are too much richer than the poor. Income redistribution schemes that take money from the rich and dole it out to the poor are what they want, even knowing that money will get wasted in bureaucracy. Plans to improve the economy and increase the wealth of everyone, rich and poor, are not good enough for them because that would leave the gap. The rich would still be rich, and that is what keeps them up at night. Bringing the rich down is more important then bringing everyone up.
The Kyoto accord is just a world-wide income redistribution scheme. In this case the “rich” is the U.S. and what is making Kyoto supporters crazy is that Bush won’t sign on. Clinton wouldn’t either, and rightly so. Kyoto won’t reduce the emissions of the world’s largest CO2 producers, it was never meant to. The crafters of the Kyoto accord don’t want the U.S. to significantly reduce emissions, they want them to have to buy those CO2 credits from less industrialized nations, and thus to hamper U.S. growth by hampering their economy.
There are some true believers who think that my SUV is bringing about the imminent destruction of the planet and want to save us all, but the Kyoto accord is being pushed by more cynical politicians who want something completely different.
Must Control,
You got that right. Speaking of redistribution of wealth, this needs to be distributed as widely as possible:
Soak the Rich! (Professors)
No sooner had I finished reading this entry, then up pops on the Govt. of Canada web site a summary of an address by St�phane Dion at the Tremblant Forun entitled “Cutting Megatonnes Of GHGs; Making Megaprofits.” Apparently Dion dreams in technicolor as he believes that Canada will meet its Kyoto targets.
Anyway, it started me thinking. What is going to happen if and when some corporation actually starts making “megaprofits” off of GHG reduction? We all know the environmentalists hate the idea of corporate profit. How much will they hate the idea of some global corporation making “megaprofits” on one of their pet causes? Will we see demonstrations in the street against “Big Kyoto?”
“Big Kyoto”!!!
Thanks, Tim, I had a good chuckle over that one!
(wish the prospect were really that funny – being hobbled to Kyoto is one of the things making my husband consider moving to the States [I’m an American myself])
So whats the difference between climate and weather? Well climate is what you expect and weather is what you get. Thus what do you build your house to withstand?
Why not do both?
I think the post has some good points, namely that we should learn to live with global warming. Good idea, but why not try to slow it down too? It seems that too many of us think that there is only one answer, when often it takes a little of this, a little of that.
I am in favor of Kyoto, but not as a means of wealth distribution (I concede that many may support it for just that reason). We cannot out-pollute China, scraping soot from our kids’ cheeks is not high on the list. Since China is going to reach a breaking point on pollution, reducing pollution is a race and the nations that get there first will lead a vital industry.
This is not some faux lefty diatribe. “Saving the world” and saving the world are not very often opposites.
Kyoto basically penalizes developed countries by raising the price of carbon-based fuels in order to curb demand and hence reduce CO2 production.
Well, energy prices are pretty darn high right now, so doesn’t that accomplish the same thing? Evidently not, since the money’s going to the ‘wrong’ people. Go figure.
If Kyoto was trully about saving the planet, then we should be hearing loud cheers as energy prices climb. The silence is very telling.
Science estimates that life has existed on Earth for three and a half billion years. During that time, scientists estimate, the Sun has increased its energy outpu by 30%. According to the accepted climatic logic of Global Warming advocates the Earth should have been a frozen ball two billion years ago to account for today’s temperatures. Conversely, if Earth was habitable way back then, why, it should be far too hot today to support life. But it isn’t. Why? Because the Earth manages to self-adjust. Higher solar radiation causes the increase of water vapor in the air. More vapor means more clouds means sunlight reflected and lower temeratures. The increase in vegetation also reduces the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. And that naturally reduces the Greenhouse effect.
It ain’t life that causes greenhouse effects, it’s life that mitigates the effects. As for the United States, the estimates are that there are more trees now than there were during the American Revolution. True? I don’t know. But I accept it. I don’t accept the theory of Global Warming.
Just my thoughts on the matter. LOL
I’ll concede that Kyoto is wrongheaded. But it means well. The object of Kyoto, beyond wealth redistribution (which, as everyone points out, never seems to work) is to clue us in that we are a part OF our environment, not apart FROM it. Global warming is only one of the issues we have to either adapt to or perish from: widespread soil erosion; whatever Ebola-type virus finally comes out of Africa and decimates the population; air, water, and earth pollution are just a few of the others. Mitigation may indeed be impossible at this point. Adaptation, done properly, is almost certainly the only path to take–but people need to know there’s a reason (reasons) TO adapt; otherwise, we’ll just continue our reckless behaviours, only more so. And that way madness lies.
Given that life expectancy is up, violence is down, the environment is cleaner, and people everywhere are freer and economically better off than they have ever been, around the world, taken as a whole and on balance, I fail to see how our reckless behaviours lie in the direction of madness.
Perhaps it is simply the case that humans are forever fixing in the problems caused by their last improvement, while at the same time working on the next one.
Albert Camus wrote, “I leave Sisyphus at the foot of the mountain. One always finds one’s burden again. But Sisyphus teaches the higher fidelity that negates the gods and raises rocks. He too concludes that all is well. This universe henceforth without a master seems to him neither sterile nor futile. Each atom of that stone, each mineral flake of that night filled mountain, in itself forms a world. The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”
You might also want to check out the excellent plan reported by Radley Balko at http://tinyurl.com/bagfz
I have posted on the high prices of gas, and namely the lefty inspired NEP II idea. I think that the rising prices of fuel is a good thing in the big picture, in that it may be the impetus to move us to a less polluting and ultimately less expensive energy source.
That is not to say that the families struggling with this are not important, but it is to say that the neither the government nor the oil companies should subsidize anyone’s gas bill.
Pollution, and gas prices are rooted in a consumption problem, in short we consume an unsustainable amount. Not surprisingly, the market is now telling us that we are consuming too much and need to dial it back a bit. I think we should listen.
I agree that market pricing will naturally ameliorate excessive consumption, Dave, unfortunately I don’t think we have market competition, due to government malfeasance and people’s short-sighted NIMBY.
When I drive through the river valley in the deepest chill of winter, it always warms my heart to see the great billowing clouds of condensed steam rising off the Rossdale power plant. It looks like an old Kris Kringle post-card scaled up to the size of a modern city.
Then, in our so-called news papers, I read activists calling it smoke. Idiots. People who are unwilling to share their environment with modern infrastructure are doomed to having no modern insfrastructure.
And to them I have two words to say: Wool Underware.
Dave:
“I am in favor of Kyoto, but not as a means of wealth distribution (I concede that many may support it for just that reason). We cannot out-pollute China, scraping soot from our kids’ cheeks is not high on the list. Since China is going to reach a breaking point on pollution, reducing pollution is a race and the nations that get there first will lead a vital industry.”
Unfortunately Kyoto has nothing to do with pollution, despite the feds attempt to redefine ‘pollution’ as they have already done with ‘freedom’ and ‘marriage’, and I suspect they have also redefined ‘corruption’ and ‘fraud’, but have neglected to tell anyone except the Liberal Party of Canada. The climate has been changing since the beginning of the earth. Imagine how prehistoric man felt when the ice caps covering most of Europe and North America started to recede, it meant their lifestyle of thousands of years was changing(scary thought), they had to either adapt or die. From 900 to about 1200 the Vikings were able to establish colonies in Greenland and grow wheat, oats, etc., scientists estimate the global temperature was about 2 to 3 degrees warmer than it is now. If we are led to believe that “we” are responsible for global warming and “we” are guilty, how much easier are “we” to manipulate by the leaders. The best way to exert power over the masses is ‘fear’, we no longer have the Cold War and total nuclear war to ‘fear’, so the powers that would be invented ‘catastrophic global warming’ Who will benefit the most financially from Kyoto and the buying and selling of “hot air”, no names mentioned, try MS, PM, JC, P.Corp.
Very glad to see a study that starts asking the serious questions about how we will deal with global warming, instead of arguing about whether it is happening or not.
Considering that humans are much touted as the most adaptable species in existence, why do we keep insisting that it is too costly for us to adapt our society to lower fossil fuel use? We are in effect insisting that all the less-adaptable species of our world do most of the adapting.
I’ve heard it said that we are a virus the earth is trying to get rid of.
Running out of oil in 50 years may be a more pressing problem.
“Ultimately, the world will enter The Long Emergency, a horizonless era of conflict, withering global economic relations, and energy starvation — with plummeting standards of living.” ~ Jim Kunstler
Climate change isn’t the only reason to try to curb our CO2 emissions. Higher CO2 levels are also causing ocean acidification, reducing nutrient levels in food, and possibly even making ranching less profitable.
From an interview with Heidi Cullen, climatologist with The Weather Channel:
Q. I saw reports in German newspapers saying, “Take that, America! You should have signed Kyoto, now you’re paying for it.”
A. That’s just an egregious misuse of science. I don’t want the scientific method to be lost in all of this finger-pointing and apocalyptic talk.
Go Nuclear!
Mike
Republic of Alberta
Ah, Laura the Lying Lunatic is back.
For the first time this year, it’s possible to say for certain that there is indeed some slight warming trend going on in the world (as also on Mars). As a result, you aren’t seeing a lot of people denying the facts of global warming. Indeed, I don’t see any such people. Laura’s problem is that she has been insisting for about fifteen years, not just that the world was getting much, much warmer than we know it really is, but that she knew exactly why and how to change it, all without a scrap of evidence.
If there really were legitimate reasons to limit CO2 output, common sense would tell you that those reasons would be put out first and foremost. Instead, they’re always buried behind a lie, only for use as fallback once the lie is challenged. Now what does that tell us?
Oh, and I’ll concede that the Holocaust was wrongheaded. But Hitler meant well. And that makes all the difference, right?
Ebt, you’re the one who doesn’t present a shred of evidence, just name-calling, same as you’ve done before.
I thought you knew what you were talking about, Laura? Why do I have to educate you? The information isn’t hard to find. You could find lots of it right at SDA. Why haven’t you? Too lazy? Too stupid? And why is it up to me to make up for your laziness and stupidity?
Oh, and it’s too damn bad that you don’t like to be called names. The problem is, you don’t seem to mind if the names actually fit you. Don’t want to be called a liar? Stop lying. Don’t want to be called stupid? Smarten up.
A lazy, stupid, lying piece of shit doesn’t occupy any moral high ground, Laura, so you can stop whining and shut up. You’ve got nothing to say to me.
Ebt, I’ve been reading SDA regularly (couple times a day, usually) for a year or so. I’ve followed up every lead Kate’s given regarding climate change (unless I missed one when I was out camping), and several given by her readers as well. I watched the Friends of Science video a couple of times, and followed up ideas that were new to me from that. Lately I’ve been wading through Bob Mills’ address to the House about Kyoto (recommended to me by Jema54). I keep hoping I’ll find out that the skeptics are right – that would be good news! But so far, I haven’t. Below are some of my favourite sources of info about climate change. What are yours?
US Climate Change Science Program
U.S. Global Change Research Information Office
Real Climate
Science of Climate Change – Science of Climate Change – [Meteorological Service of Canada – The Green Lane]
Marice Strong was the primary architect of the Kyoto plan. It is not an idea or an environment clean up program, it is a plan for global Communism. Stalin was never as ambitious as the people who push this fanatical, human hating, diobotical retoric. POLLUTION IS NOT CO2.
You’re lying, Laura. If you followed the sources you found here, then you know the links you posted to are propaganda sites.
It’s ALL propaganda ebt – EVERYBODY has motives. Which would you rather do – pick one angle and trust it blindly, or learn as much as you can and decide for yourself?