Sunday, May 30, 2004


Even natural gas is no good. Only impractical alternatives get the Greenie seal of approval, of course:

"Hundreds of people rallied downtown Saturday against the construction of a $550-million natural-gas-powered electrical generation station near Montreal. The march was organized by a coalition of environmental and social groups who say the project will increase greenhouse gas emissions.

Andre Belisle, spokesman for the Quebec Green Coalition for Kyoto, said the province should look at cleaner forms of energy. "People want wind power energy, solar energy and we want to remind the government of that," Belisle said".


S. Fred Singer is Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia and president of the Science & Environmental Policy Project based in Arlington, Virginia. He has served as director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service. Excerpts from his latest article:

"The Kyoto Protocol, adopted in 1997, insists on lowering [carbon dioxide] emissions.... At best, Kyoto would merely slow down somewhat the rate of rise, which by the year 2020 will be largely determined by emissions from major developing countries like China, India, Brazil, and Mexico -- none of which are covered by the accord. The Kyoto Protocol's main emphasis is on carbon dioxide produced by burning fossil fuels. By contrast, the powerful greenhouse gas methane is barely mentioned-perhaps because its main sources, while human-related, are "natural": rice agriculture and cattle-raising. Furthermore, the Protocol does not mention other factors that affect the climate, such as sulfate aerosols from coal-fired power plants, soot from diesel engines, and smoke from the burning of biomass (mostly in developing countries).
The Kyoto Protocol, therefore, would have practically no impact on global temperatures....

An even more serious embarrassment to the IPCC claim is the fact that the global atmosphere has not warmed appreciably in the last quarter century. The IPCC climate models very specifically call for the atmosphere to warm faster than the surface as a result of the greenhouse effect. The warming rate is supposed to increase with the altitude up to about five miles. But data from weather satellites and weather balloons show no significant rise in the global mean temperature of the atmosphere, in stark contradiction to the climate models.....

The response of global-warming theorists to these contrary findings has been twofold: One strategy has been to attack and try to discredit both the satellite data and the re-analysis of the proxy data; the other has been simply to ignore any contrary evidence. They make repeated references to the "warming of the last 25 years" but never mention the total lack of warming evidenced in both satellite and balloon observations.....

Over the last twelve years, since Rio de Janeiro, an impressive set of stakeholders has been built up: international bureaucrats and national bureaucracies; industries that build, sell, and operate wind energy and solar energy technologies; and a multitude of non-governmental organizations that make their living from climate scares. In addition, there is the $4 billion a year spent by the U.S. federal government alone on climate studies and on research related to the mitigation of global warming. These stakeholders do not ultimately care about the details of the Kyoto Protocol; the important thing to them is the process, which must be kept alive.

Economists must offer convincing demonstrations of what is already apparent from the data: that modest warming correlates with increased GNP, higher average income, and enhanced living standards across the globe; and that carbon dioxide, rather than being a pollutant, benefits the growth of agricultural crops and forests. Economists must also demonstrate that control of carbon dioxide imposes huge economic penalties, particularly on lower-income groups. This is a matter of making the facts known".


Many people would like to be kind to others so Leftists exploit that with their nonsense about equality. Most people want a clean, green environment so Greenies exploit that by inventing all sorts of far-fetched threats to the environment. But for both, the real motive is to promote themselves as wiser and better than everyone else.

Comments? Email me or here. My Home Page is here or here. For times when is playing up, there is a mirror of this site (viewable even in China!) here


No comments: