Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Sat 06/18/2005 View Fri 06/17/2005 View Thu 06/16/2005 View Wed 06/15/2005 View Tue 06/14/2005 View Mon 06/13/2005 View Sun 06/12/2005
1
2005-06-18 Europe
Europe fails to cut greenhouse gas emissions
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by phil_b 2005-06-18 05:36|| || Front Page|| [11130 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Oops, please move to P3.
Posted by phil_b 2005-06-18 05:50||   2005-06-18 05:50|| Front Page Top

#2 Check this out:
--
Kyoto advocates mislead us all by focusing on emissions per head instead on net emissions per square kilometre of governed territory.

This has a remarkable effect on priorities and targets.

A focus on net emissions recognizes that any nation both generates anthropogenic green house gases and absorbs them. Generally, urban areas create greenhouse gas emissions while rural areas absorb them.

Hence net emissions relate to population density. While the US may be the greatest emitter there is now considerable evidence that the US is an overall greenhouse gas sink. On the other hand Europe with its high population densities far exceeds the United States in terms of net emissions per square kilometre.

This is the "US is the great polluter" fraud.
---

Great article, read it all, debunking Kyoto fraud at
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1034067/posts
Posted by anon1 2005-06-18 06:07||   2005-06-18 06:07|| Front Page Top

#3 According to a very Pro-Kyoto Canadian website, this is their estimate of the difference Kyoto will make - and it ain't much.

Actually I read elsewhere it is more like a delay of Global Warming (not necessarily a bad thing) by 3 months.

But here is their figure:

Without the Protocol, scientists estimate mean temperatures will rise by about 1°C by 2050, and 2.5°C by 2100.
With the Protocol, the expected rate of temperature rise is a little bit much lower. Between 0.04-0.10°C by 2050, and 0.08-0.28°C by 2100(but this is just a delay of the inevitable)

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/environment/kyoto/07.html

The worst thing about the Kyoto myth is it encourages people to see carbon dioxide as a pollutant when it is a benign gas necessary for all life on earth. Increasing C02 levels lead to lusher plant growth: they IMPROVE the biodiversity of plants.

But instead the alternative is nuclear power which releases deadly toxic pollutants that nobody wants to store anywhere near their backyard. But the nuclear industry is the big winner out of the Kyoto Fraud.

And what a great world it will be when every tinpot dictatorship has access to plutonium because they "need" a reactor for "energy". And dumps their N-waste in the nearest river or desert where it will be dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years long after the warning signs (if there are any) come down.

So much for limiting nukes to the developed world.
Posted by anon1 2005-06-18 06:29||   2005-06-18 06:29|| Front Page Top

#4 Whopping effect of Kyoto Protocol a load of hot air

Here is the conclusion of a long, boring scientific paper discussing the effect of Kyoto at its highest and best, assuming US and Australian ratification:
--------
We find that implementing the Kyoto Protocol until 2012 has only an effect of 2 ppmv on CO2 concentration and several hundredth of a degree Celsius in 2012, its implementation and reductions after 2012 enable reaching a maximum CO2 concentration level by 2050 that is by the order of 20 ppmv or two tenths of a degree Celsius lower than not implementing the Kyoto Protocol

for reference: http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:ZzPDuX9-lWIJ:www.stabilisation2005.com/posters/Hohne_Niklas.pdf+impact+effect+%22kyoto%22&hl=en
Posted by anon1 2005-06-18 06:48||   2005-06-18 06:48|| Front Page Top

#5 Saudi oil may be running out

kind of related if you're interested in energy:
http://www.simmonsco-intl.com/files/CSIS.pdf
Posted by anon1 2005-06-18 08:36||   2005-06-18 08:36|| Front Page Top

#6 Read an article years ago,that said Israli's were using co2 in greenhouse' and had cut productin of fruits a veggies from 1/3 to 1/2 the time.
Posted by raptor 2005-06-18 08:51||   2005-06-18 08:51|| Front Page Top

#7 "Next week the government's Sustainable Development Commission will propose radical new vehicle and aviation taxes, greater household energy efficiency and a carbon neutral public sector" (I have no idea what that means, but its a triumph of Burecratic gobbledegook)

It means fewer poorer people will be able to afford to own and use cars, and low cost air travel will become a thing of the past. The government intends to price the less priviliged off the road and out of the planes. A good bit of old style socialism from New Labour. Nice, eh?
Posted by Bulldog ">Bulldog  2005-06-18 09:48||   2005-06-18 09:48|| Front Page Top

#8 While the US may be the greatest emitter there is now considerable evidence that the US is an overall greenhouse gas sink. On the other hand Europe with its high population densities far exceeds the United States in terms of net emissions per square kilometre.

That can change if the people in charge here don't get a handle on illegal immigration...
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2005-06-18 12:00||   2005-06-18 12:00|| Front Page Top

#9 anon1, your Saudi link nails one thing, which is that we don't have visibility on supply (or reserves). This makes us vulnerable to oil price shocks, which we seem to be on the verge of. If oil goes higher Monday/Tuesday next week, we won't see $58/b oil again for quite a while.
Posted by phil_b 2005-06-18 17:50||   2005-06-18 17:50|| Front Page Top

#10 Don't be such a pessimist Phil, the comming Flu epidemic is going to cut oil use by 2 to 3 million barrels a day. :>
Posted by Shipman 2005-06-18 20:17||   2005-06-18 20:17|| Front Page Top

#11 A flu pandemic will cut supply by millions of barells. You better hope it doesn't come in the northern winter.
Posted by phil_b 2005-06-18 21:35||   2005-06-18 21:35|| Front Page Top

#12 Socialist govts in general demand their economic units work more regardless of the merits so that the State can take more - for me Kyoto is just a feel-good, PC alibi for Socialist Govts to raise tax burdens while making sure no one gets wealthy, since wealth = competition against Big Govt.
Posted by JosephMendiola 2005-06-18 21:57||   2005-06-18 21:57|| Front Page Top

#13 They may demand, Joseph, but what they get is "You pretend to pay us, and we'll pretend to work." So everybody loses, which is exactly what's happening in the most socialist European countries.
Posted by trailing wife 2005-06-18 22:39||   2005-06-18 22:39|| Front Page Top

00:10 Anonymoose
23:58 Zhang Fei
23:58 BigEd
23:57 CrazyFool
23:45 Zhang Fei
23:43 trailing wife
23:41 Zhang Fei
23:34 trailing wife
23:32 Zhang Fei
23:28 xbalanke
23:28 xbalanke
23:25 trailing wife
23:17 trailing wife
23:16 Frank G
23:16 Bill Nelson
22:58 ed
22:52 phil_b
22:51 JosephMendiola
22:49 Zhang Fei
22:44 Zhang Fei
22:43 JosephMendiola
22:39 trailing wife
22:38 Atomic Conspiracy
22:38 Zhang Fei









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com