Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

Wait... wait... I am confused, Thomas. You believe that we are doing the damage?

If it is our fault that the world is growing warmer, then shouldn't we be doing more to correct that? ...at least stopping the engines that cause the problem? I am, I admit, old-fashioned enough that I am a firm believer in cleaning up my own messes.

Can we just decide it isn't a real problem? <she asks hopefully>

Really, my head is in a spin. Should we be trying as individuals to follow the protocol without making it a requirement for businesses? Should we learn better coping skills? Just ignore this and move to higher ground? That is what they are doing in New Orleans, I think.

What do the economists think the scientists and the rest of us should do... because I admit, I am now at a loss. (It was so much easier when I allowed myself to believe in the inevitability of things happening for a reason.)

0 Replies

Hi Pifka, I think as an individual consmer, what little we can do to limit environment damage is too little while car and other factories continue to produce products that does the opposite. Fossil fuels for our vehicles and utilities will continue for many decades to come, with more pressure on supplies as countries such as China and India begin to purchase more products that use these fuels.

A reversal is not in the books - yet. Unless all government agree to limit and restrict the use of fossil fuels, nothing we do will matter.

0 Replies

Hi C.I.
Certainly it seems like many I know who have been trying to simplify and use less since the 1970's can hardly stretch themselves any further without just agreeing to eliminate themselves permanently (yet still the pollutants continue to rise).

All the governments but this one and Australia (and a few others that I can't remember in central Africa & the Mid-East) have agreed to do something. But with the protocol depending on each country having their own test... well... it does seem to unfairly target the USA. Do we deserve it? We have wallowed in energy and exuded pollution beyond what many would say is our fair share but we've also created the status level which everyone else seems to want.

It is confusing and, frankly, the older I get, the less I care how the world will be in 100 years. Also, the temperate PNW has been having snow showers for the past week... it is snowing right now just outside my window. Maybe global warming is not something that needs to concern me considering where I have chosen to live. (We've managed with the droughts of the summer so far and my waterfront cabin is about 100 feet above the mean high tide mark.)

I think I'm still going with Thomas being right -- Kyoto Protocol stinks. (Of course, he gets the best of both worlds... since he can argue against it while the country where he lives is fastidiously following the agreement.)

If I buy and drive a diesel vehicle, is that the right thing to do? Should I get rid of all our vehicles and count on the horse to get us to the grocery?

0 Replies

Piffka wrote:

Wait... wait... I am confused, Thomas. You believe that we are doing the damage?

Oh, absolutely -- I oppose Kyoto and most anti-global-warming policies because they cause more damage than they remove, not because there is no damage in the first place. There is a real problem here, but most solutions are so expenses we're better off living with the mess than with the cleanup.

0 Replies

I never thought the Kyoto Protocals were good for the US, because it would have penalized the US more than more poluting countries like China. Until they can clean up their act, Kyoto is dead with the US.

0 Replies

I think Kyoto is dead in Europe too. Our continent will miss its target by a long shot. But that won't keep us from expressing rightful indignation about those Americans not signing. And why not? After all, we are holier than you. We might as well congratulate ourselves for it.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

I think Kyoto is dead in Europe too. Our continent will miss its target by a long shot. But that won't keep us from expressing rightful indignation about those Americans not signing. And why not? After all, we are holier than you. We might as well congratulate ourselves for it.

I think your irony captures the essence of this issue. The tough part for our critics is accepting the fact that, despite his offensive beligerence and lack of rhetorical polish, George Bush was exactly right on this issue from the start.

0 Replies

That one mark for Bush against thousands of mistakes doesn't make Bush look any better in the US or throughout the world.

0 Replies

However it does provide an important basis on which to seriously question the quality of popular judgements here and throughout the world.

0 Replies

george, Isn't that true of everything?

0 Replies

Well, Clinton didn't bring the Kyoto Protocol to a vote either... does that mean you think he's a great guy, George?

0 Replies

Presidents can't bring a damn thing to a vote

All they can do is send a text down the street to the US Senate

/Clinton never bothered to do that

His signature is worth less than his word --- hovering about zero th both of them Smile

0 Replies

Clinton did the right thing by not approving Kyoto.

0 Replies

I understand that the Guardian Newspaper in England has featured a story which tells that "global waming" will now be blamed for a new "ice age" which will cool Europe precipitously. The mechanism seems to be "global warming" interfering with the all important Gulf Stream.

If this is so, it will be the second time we have received warnings about an "ice age". Many may remember the dire prophecies of the late sixties and seventies.

I wish they would get it straight. Are we going to die in fire or ice?

Or is this just another scientific "gotcha"?

0 Replies

Quote:

Lobbyists funded by the US oil industry have launched a campaign in Europe aimed at derailing efforts to tackle greenhouse gas pollution and climate change.
Documents obtained by Greenpeace and seen by the Guardian reveal a systematic plan to persuade European business, politicians and the media that the EU should abandon its commitments under the Kyoto protocol, the international agreement that aims to reduce emissions that lead to global warming. The disclosure comes as United Nations climate change talks in Montreal on the future of Kyoto, the first phase of which expires in 2012, enter a critical phase.

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,9061,1661745,00.html

Shall we simply acknowledge that regardless of whether Kyoto represents the best means of reducing greenhouse gasses, the oil industry will fight against regulations of any sort under any plan. In other words, why do we not just assume what they say to be false or unhelpful?

0 Replies

Mortkat wrote:

I understand that the Guardian Newspaper in England has featured a story which tells that "global waming" will now be blamed for a new "ice age" which will cool Europe precipitously. The mechanism seems to be "global warming" interfering with the all important Gulf Stream.

If this is so, it will be the second time we have received warnings about an "ice age". Many may remember the dire prophecies of the late sixties and seventies.

I wish they would get it straight. Are we going to die in fire or ice?

Or is this just another scientific "gotcha"?

Duh, how do you think the Gulf Stream is going to be interfered with in the first place? Global Warming melts the ice caps which sends fresh water into salty water and disrupts the Gulf Stream. That causes the "Ice Age" in Europe.

The entire Global Warming issue isn't about dying in fire. It's about our environment being disrupted in such a way that our crops won't be able to grow properly.

For example, what if the Yellowstone Supervolcano were to super-erupt? Well, it is very possible that were it to do so, vast swathes of the US will be destroyed but the cooling will prevent rain from getting to the tropical zones. Without water, those areas will dry up and there's no food.

Weather-wise Gulf Stream only affects Europe and North America directly. The rest of the world will suffer from the knock-on effects.

But then again, I'm no meteorologist.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Shall we simply acknowledge that regardless of whether Kyoto represents the best means of reducing greenhouse gasses, the oil industry will fight against regulations of any sort under any plan.

Yes, we shall.

blatham wrote:

In other words, why do we not just assume what they say to be false or unhelpful?

Because the possibility remains that no actually existing regulation under any actually existing plan, as enforced by any actually existing agency, will increase humanity's welfare under global warming. If that possibility were to prove true, the oil industry lobbyists would have done humanity a true and helpful service -- even though that wouldn't have been the reason they were doing it.

PS: I wonder why they waste their money -- Europe will fall short of its obligations by a long shot. And in one of the reports about the Montreal conference, I read that CO2 emissions in Canada, which has signed Kyoto, have actually increased by a higher percentage than in the USA, which hasven't.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:
In other words, why do we not just assume what they (petro industry spokesdaemons) say to be false or unhelpful?

thomas replied:
Because the possibility remains that no actually existing regulation under any actually existing plan, as enforced by any actually existing agency, will increase humanity's welfare under global warming. If that possibility were to prove true, the oil industry lobbyists would have done humanity a true and helpful service -- even though that wouldn't have been the reason they were doing it.

Well, I can't argue that you don't have your finger on a possibility there because it surely is one. Of course, you may not have an actual finger at all because the possibility remains that your nervous system is warmly encased in a vat sitting on a shelf of vats in a warehouse in Pittsburg where alien intelligences etc etc

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Of course, you may not have an actual finger at all because the possibility remains that your nervous system is warmly encased in a vat sitting on a shelf of vats in a warehouse in Pittsburg where alien intelligences etc etc

Pittsburg eh? Wink

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

How do you know it's not a normal cycle? There is not exactly a preponderous amount of evidence that actually supports global warming as a man made problem.

Scientific consensus is that it is more likely that humans are causing the warming than it is that humans are not causing it.

That has been the scientific consensus for quite some time, too.

0 Replies

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know