BIG NOTHING
Tuesday, December 4, 2007 at 08:28PM 
So, Australia is under new management with a new left wing government and has signed up to the Kyoto protocol. This was greeted with applause on the first day of climate talks in Bali yesterday, leaving the US as the only developed nation not to ratify the pact. Australia's new Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, wasted no time in breaking with the policies of his conservative predecessor, John Howard. I bet.
But what's the point of signing up to something that has no value? Kyoto has been a pathetic failure in bringing about reductions of greenhouse gases. The likes of the European nations which lecture the US which such fervour have INCREASED their CO2 emissions - blowing away any prospect of honouring their own solemn obligations.
Bottom line - Kyoto is hot-air, a blunt eco-instrument aimed at bludgeoning the USA into embracing sustained industrial meltdown. The new Australian leader is playing to the international gallery, aimed at winning the plaudits of fellow hypocrites.
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (17)
The whole point of Bali is to prepare for a replacement to Kyoto which runs out in 2012.
The USA won't be bludgeoned. Bush is a unilateralist and no-one expects the USA to be anything other than obstructive to the process of international agreement on climate change until he departs the White House.
Rudd was elected on a pledge to ratify. He's merely sticking to his election promise.
Peter,
Has Kyoto delivered on its objectives? Yes or No. If No, why sign up to it? If yes, why replace it?
Peter -
Words and signatures on pieces of paper will not reduce CO2 emissions. Since Kyoto, the USA has done much more than any other industrial nation to halt the growth of emissions - much of which has to do with new technologies.
I know you believe that CO2 emissions have to be reduced, but this blind faith in 'Kyoto' actually damages your cause. It's such a duff that to invoke it invites ridicule.
You can believe that CO2 emissions ought to be reduced whilst also not falling for the ego-driven tripe churned out by ignorant politicians whose only cause is self-advancement.
Peter Garrett should be good value as Aussie Environment Minister though.
The Aborigines will be looking forward to some apologies and some compo, I'd imagine.
Kyoto was planned to last until 2012. Some countries have achieved their targets (including the UK) while others have failed. The US achieved a reduction of 1.5% in carbon emissions in 2006, which is nowhere near reducing its emissions to 1990 levels as per Kyoto.
You guys either believe that carbon emissions have nothing to do with global warming, or that if they have it's not worth trying to do anything about it, but instead trust the market to deliver a technological fix or fixes. Well there's no chance of the market doing that in anything like the timescale available. So we have got to make cuts. But as the Stern Report showed, that's a lot cheaper than doing nothing.
I read that former diplomat K. Rudd is fluent in Mandarin.
Well bully for him. Since he is the only leader of any country outside China that speaks Chinese, then they can expect him to pay frequent visits to Peking about their industrial emissions. Ha!
The Chinese will reciprocate by sending over millions of surfboards made from blotting paper.
Gosh, this really is a subject for hilarity. Meanwhile, back in the real world, the rate of warming increases:
Climate change is causing the tropics to widen, with possible impacts on the global food supply, research suggests. Scientists examined five different measures of the width of the tropical belt, and found it expanded by between 2 and 4.8 degrees latitude since 1979.
What larks!
See
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7126069.stm
Yeah, Peter. As if the BBC doesn't have an agenda. But the world won't turn to ruin:
http://icecap.us/
Allan from your link this little gem:
Our scientific understanding of global warming has gone through three stages:
1. 1985 – 2003. Old ice core data led us strongly suspect that CO2 causes global warming.
2. 2003 – 2007. New ice core data eliminated previous reason for suspecting CO2. No evidence to suspect or exonerate CO2.
3. From Aug 2007: Know for sure that greenhouse is not causing global warming. CO2 no longer a suspect.
Whew! So there's NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT! And there was me thinking that the IPCC people must have something going for them, but obviously not!
Thanks for that!
Peter fails to understand that the warmists case has to withstand scrutiny. It is failing to do so. BTW, by having Australia sign up to the Kyoto accord, how much does this reduce the forecast temperature increase - Peter can answer.
Allan
This is a bit like a Darwinist trying to argue with a Creationist. No matter how much evidence the Darwinist produces, the Creationist always responds that there is not enough evidence (and of course for them there never will be) and asks why there is no fossil of a frog-mammal, or something equally stupid. Your remark about Australia fits this mould pretty well.
In other words it's not really a debate at all, more a waste of time, or at best a dialogue of the deaf.
Well, Peter. One of the reasons why countries are 'encouraged' to sign the Kyoto accord is because some scientists and many more politicians insist that it will reduce global warming . i.e. it is supposed to work. If it doesn't work, then why sign it?
So, back to the question. Australia is apparently going to sign the Kyoto accord. By how much will this deed reduce global warming over the period in which the Kyoto accord has force? (in short, Peter, does it work?)
Allan
Please refer to my comment at 1.38. Are you a creationist, by any chance?
No Peter. I'm definitely an evolutionist but your refusal to answer a simple question relating to the efficacy of 'Kyoto' indicates that you are the creationist in this field.
What effect on global warming will the Australia's adherence to 'Kyoto' have?
Allan
Greenhouse gases trap the sun's heat and thus increase average global temperatures. As I assume you already know, the basic science for that has been around for over 100 years. So obviously if Australia reduces its greenhouse gas emissions that will help to reduce the warming trend. How much will obviously depend on what others do, but the Aussies have one of the highest outputs of CO2 per person in the world.
I know you work for the oil industry and this must be difficult for you, but as Dubya himself has said, the stone age didn't end because we ran out of stone.
Whether the science behind the man-made global warming sector bears scrutiny will be known quite soon. But it clear that for Kevin Rudd, the sign-up to 'Kyoto' is simply his feel-good moment to show the rest of the PC crowd in the Anglosphere that he is one of them. Bill Clinton, Tony Blair and Al Gore are other keystones in global PC. It will have no effect whatsoever on CO2 and global warming.
Allan
Your comment at 7.38 is self-contradictory.
First you say: Whether the science behind the man-made global warming sector bears scrutiny will be known quite soon.
Then you add: It will have no effect whatsoever on CO2 and global warming.
So you presume the outcome will be against AGW. Obviously if AGW is correct, Australia reducing carbon emissions will make a difference. This is a typical example of what I was saying earlier about a dialogue of the deaf.