Comments on: On Good Authority http://www.terrarossa.com/on-good-authority/ Where Conservatives Consider a New Energy Future Thu, 20 Nov 2008 18:40:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Daniel http://www.terrarossa.com/on-good-authority/#comment-4754 Daniel Tue, 19 Jun 2007 12:28:21 +0000 http://www.terrarossa.com/?p=181#comment-4754 Why is it better to take ineffectual steps to "reduce climate change" now? I'd like to see some steps that do something, but the problem is that anything that will reduce climate change is very, very expensive. Energy prices are already up 25 percent in Germany and 15 percent in the UK and it isn't helping them comply with their Kyoto commitments. These higher prices are helping jobs leave Europe and yet they are doing nothing environmentally. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/08/AR2007040800758.html Worst of all, Kyoto does nothing to reduce climate change because all of the real emission growth will come from the Developing world. Data out in the last week shows that China's CO2 emissions will surpass the CO2 emissions from the United States. Currently cap and trade is Europe is not achieving results and even if it were, and the US had agreed to commitments under Kyoto, Kyoto doesn't affect climate in any measurable way (it will reduce the rate of increase by 0.07 C by 2050). Furthermore, how will we convince the developing world to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions? Dafur is sad, but it isn't a result of climate change. Climate change may exacerbated the problem, but the real problem is poor legal/politician institutions. Ban Ki Moon puts the horse before the cart. You can't have real economic development in Dafur before you have the good legal/political institutions. If there are quality institutions, climate change does not matter because people can adapt to a changing climate. The generals would have been better served to work on institutional climate than argue for expensive and ineffectual climate change programs. Why is it better to take ineffectual steps to “reduce climate change” now? I’d like to see some steps that do something, but the problem is that anything that will reduce climate change is very, very expensive. Energy prices are already up 25 percent in Germany and 15 percent in the UK and it isn’t helping them comply with their Kyoto commitments. These higher prices are helping jobs leave Europe and yet they are doing nothing environmentally. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/08/AR2007040800758.html

Worst of all, Kyoto does nothing to reduce climate change because all of the real emission growth will come from the Developing world. Data out in the last week shows that China’s CO2 emissions will surpass the CO2 emissions from the United States.

Currently cap and trade is Europe is not achieving results and even if it were, and the US had agreed to commitments under Kyoto, Kyoto doesn’t affect climate in any measurable way (it will reduce the rate of increase by 0.07 C by 2050).

Furthermore, how will we convince the developing world to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions?

Dafur is sad, but it isn’t a result of climate change. Climate change may exacerbated the problem, but the real problem is poor legal/politician institutions. Ban Ki Moon puts the horse before the cart. You can’t have real economic development in Dafur before you have the good legal/political institutions. If there are quality institutions, climate change does not matter because people can adapt to a changing climate. The generals would have been better served to work on institutional climate than argue for expensive and ineffectual climate change programs.

]]>