Finally found a printed copy, as it didn’t appear in the online version. Many thanks to Sue Lynn for spotting it and noting it to me!
From NST Letters 4 Dec 2009:
Below I append my original letter in full (‘cos I’m too lazy to retype the NST version right now):
Copenhagen: Why the rich nations aren’t keen
Dr Chandra Muzaffar in his letter ‘ENVIRONMENT: A climate deal is a must’ laments that Many analysts are doubtful that “a deal will be sealed” during the Copenhagen Climate Summit.
Quite frankly, the industrialized nations don’t seem very enthusiastic about a new, overarching carbon emissions deal to follow up where the Kyoto Protocol leaves off. And who can blame them? The Kyoto Protocol itself, like all ‘carbon cap and trade’ schemes, has proven to cost far too much and achieve far too little.
Take Germany as a representative example. For Germany alone, in 2005 alone, adherence to the Kyoto Protocol cost 6.2 billion Euros in increased energy costs. Continued adherence is estimated to result in a loss of 18.5 billion Euros by 2010 – and that’s without applying the stricter parameters negotiated at Copenhagen.
How about more recent results? Australia’s Kyoto-styled Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme is due for 2010. Starting steps towards it have already caused electricity prices to shoot up 22%, with a predicted doubling of energy costs by 2015.
That’s just two countries. What’s the price tag for the whole world? Using the estimates of the Third Assessment Report released by the UN’s own International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a mind-boggling USD 150 billion a year needs to be spent globally in order to reduce temperatures by just a miniscule 0.001 degree Celsius.
To reduce temperatures by a meaningful amount – say half a degree – it would cost a staggering USD 75 thousand billion a year. For comparison, the actual global economy for 2008 was a mere USD 70 thousand billion.
Is it really any wonder then that the developed nations don’t seem too keen on cutting their own economic throats – and at the tail end of a major global recession, no less?
But what has all this spending actually accomplished? Unfortunately, nothing – since the Kyoto Protocol was enacted, the European Union’s carbon emissions only decreased by 1.5% instead of the Kyoto Protocol target of 8%. Even worse than nothing was achieved for signatories Japan (8% increase) and Canada (22% increase). Money well spent, eh?
You may be starting to see why the Kyoto signatories don’t seem too keen on throwing more money into the well-intentioned, but ineffective wishing well at Copenhagen.
But surely reducing our carbon footprint in order to safeguard our future is worth a few thousand billion here and there? After all, we’ve all seen the resultant natural disasters and worldwide flooding portrayed in all those films and documentaries. We have to stop the planet from getting a fever, right?
I’ll be blunt. Despite continually increasing CO2 levels, global warming has failed to manifest as hysterically predicted.
The BBC reports that ‘For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures… even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.’
In fact, temperatures have actually decreased by 0.41 degree Celsius since 2001. The lack of real warming is evident in the much fretted over poles – the Arctic, where ice is at the same levels as 1979 and sea ice is increasing at record rates; and the Antarctic, where ice is at the highest levels ever recorded and the continental ice sheet is expanding at record rates.
What about the increased natural disasters we were warned about? That ‘catastrophic climate change’? Well, the 2009 Atlantic hurricane season has just ended with the fewest named storms in 12 years. A total of zero reached the mainland USA – so much for climate change causing more Katrinas!
However, if the reader does not know about all this ‘cool’ news, I don’t blame them. Instead, I blame the dishonest ‘climate scientists’ who continue to churn out outright lies about the state of our planet.
Recently, hackers broke into the servers of the Climatic Research Unitof The University of East Anglia and exposed thousands of emails and documents. In them, the researchers bluntly note the cooling temperatures and blatantly discuss how to tamper with the results to show warming instead. This travesty of ‘science’ has been dubbed Climategate, now a very hot search term on the Internet.
What’s more, just last week the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric research in New Zealand was exposed as having artificially altered pre-1970 temperatures to appear much lower than present temperatures, thus implying massive warming without any basis in reality or justification.
What other ‘settled science of global warming’ is next to be exposed as complete fakery? If it turns out that carbon emissions don’t really cause global warming, then what are the billions and trillions being spent on Kyoto and Copenhagen for?
I am all for reducing pollution, protecting the environment and weaning off fossil fuels. But please – let the focus be about proven and urgent issues like fixing China’s choking smog problem. And let it be carried out in a sensible fashion like improving renewable energy technology instead of penalizing economic growth.
The two-decade long focus on global warming is a distraction from the real issues at best, and a massively wasteful blunder at worst. It’s high time we took a good, hard look at the facts behind the hype.
But that would probably cause everyone else to jump off the Copenhagen bandwagon too.