Lords support Bush on climate change control
Discussion
In today's Times: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22649-1682271,00.html
[quote=Times][b]Lords support Bush on climate change control[/b]
By Lewis Smith
AMERICAN opposition to the Kyoto Protocol and emission controls to reduce global warming is backed today by a House of Lords committee.
The Economic Affairs Committee calls for emissions targets and the protocol to be dropped in favour of investment in technology to enable the world to [b]adapt to climate changes rather than just try to reverse them[/b].
Lord Wakeham, the committee chairman, said that dropping the “penalties and controls” approach to carbon emissions in favour of investing in new technology would benefit the economy and help to win the support of Mr Bush.
“On the eve of Gleneagles we look to the UK to give a lead, especially within the G8, in overcoming what we think is an excessive preoccupation in setting emissions targets,” he said. “Technological development is much more likely to have an effect. It’s an area that is much more likely to get the US to co-operate.”
[b]Warnings by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on future temperature and greenhouse emissions were also said to be based on “some questionable assumptions”[/b].[/quote]
There'll be no immediate change, of course, because "penalties and controls" is what Blair does best, but perhaps we might be beginning to see a flicker of change?
In Melanie Phillips' online diary yesterday she mentioned that the "consensus" view of global warming was broken after the UK's Royal Society issued a statement stating that the world's scientists agreed that global warming was real, human activity had caused it and that governments should act. The US immediately disagreed (of course), but so did the Russian scientific community. The Russian statement referred to "the absence of scientific basis of the Kyoto Protocol" and "the ineffectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol".
So perhaps, eventually, we might see some sense on "sustainable transport" and a return to a balanced view of personal mobility.
[quote=Times][b]Lords support Bush on climate change control[/b]
By Lewis Smith
AMERICAN opposition to the Kyoto Protocol and emission controls to reduce global warming is backed today by a House of Lords committee.
The Economic Affairs Committee calls for emissions targets and the protocol to be dropped in favour of investment in technology to enable the world to [b]adapt to climate changes rather than just try to reverse them[/b].
Lord Wakeham, the committee chairman, said that dropping the “penalties and controls” approach to carbon emissions in favour of investing in new technology would benefit the economy and help to win the support of Mr Bush.
“On the eve of Gleneagles we look to the UK to give a lead, especially within the G8, in overcoming what we think is an excessive preoccupation in setting emissions targets,” he said. “Technological development is much more likely to have an effect. It’s an area that is much more likely to get the US to co-operate.”
[b]Warnings by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on future temperature and greenhouse emissions were also said to be based on “some questionable assumptions”[/b].[/quote]
There'll be no immediate change, of course, because "penalties and controls" is what Blair does best, but perhaps we might be beginning to see a flicker of change?
In Melanie Phillips' online diary yesterday she mentioned that the "consensus" view of global warming was broken after the UK's Royal Society issued a statement stating that the world's scientists agreed that global warming was real, human activity had caused it and that governments should act. The US immediately disagreed (of course), but so did the Russian scientific community. The Russian statement referred to "the absence of scientific basis of the Kyoto Protocol" and "the ineffectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol".
So perhaps, eventually, we might see some sense on "sustainable transport" and a return to a balanced view of personal mobility.
Something on C5 last night which, although it was still based on crap science in saying global warming was here to stay and its all our fault blah blah blah, also said that the $150 BILLION per YEAR that Kyoto pushes for will only delay the "inevitable" by 6 years. Yep, just 6 years. The oceans will still rise, waether will change, a measly 6 years at a cost of (grabs calculator) $150,000 BILLION.
Thats a shed load of cash!
Much better spent educating people and drilling wells and providing proper cooking facilities etc etc etc. Apparently, a huge number of people die in the third world every day because of illness brought on by cooking and heating with dung.. that $150 billion a year would go a long way to getting rid of that particular item, and do a lot more benefit.
Thats a shed load of cash!
Much better spent educating people and drilling wells and providing proper cooking facilities etc etc etc. Apparently, a huge number of people die in the third world every day because of illness brought on by cooking and heating with dung.. that $150 billion a year would go a long way to getting rid of that particular item, and do a lot more benefit.
telecat said:
And there's the reasoning behind the Lords. Unelected it may be but the people appointed to it generally are quite intelligent and have less axe's to grind politically. They can take a longer term view instead of worrying about the next election.
Precisely. Which is why Blair is getting rid of them. They show him up far too often.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff