The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Unlike Kyoto, this climate deal suits us fine > Comments

Unlike Kyoto, this climate deal suits us fine : Comments

By Alan Oxley, published 3/8/2005

Alan Oxley argues the Howard Government is to be congratulated for forging a global policy on climate change.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
I can paraphrase this article as follows
1) CO2 is not the real villain
2) it's all a plot by the Europeans
Re 1) if you want to find out how water vapour emissivity, cloud albedo and methane fit into the overall picture read the archives of realclimate.org. Scientists say it is the extra CO2 that has created more cloud (it didn't happen spontaneously) but the dimming effect has has peaked. CO2 is currently several times more problematical than methane and that is where the biggest cuts should be made.

Re 2) there might be a grain of truth in it but I think Europeans will have the last laugh when they have an easier time of it in years to come. My prediction is that the alternative climate deal will prove more ineffectual than Kyoto.
Posted by Taswegian, Wednesday, 3 August 2005 2:40:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As I understand it, this latest agreement contains no mandatory targets. Where will this leave the agreement in realistic terms when countries put their national interest first? A reliance on good will alone?

I agree that technology plays an important role in reducing global warming, but wouldn't the money be better spent developing truly clean alternatives instead of band aid solutions which simply lessen the impact of greenhouse gas producing industries? What's more, these industries are unsustainable as they rely on finite resources. We're going to have to develop alternatives, and it would be better to start now than to wait until traditional resources are used up. As many critics point out, developing alternatives into viable replacements will take a long time, which is all the more reason to substantially increase funding, instead of the seemingly token funding these areas receive at the moment. Unfortunately, these funds are being diverted into temporary solutions instead.

There's no avoiding the need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The article criticised Kyoto for setting targets that are too low to have any measurable impact. True enough, they should be much higher. Will this latest agreement have a greater impact in reducing the effects of climate change? It's doubtful, given the writer's scepticism surrounding CO2 emmissions.
Posted by mbd, Wednesday, 3 August 2005 6:23:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Alan,

Why did our Liberal Party have to come in on the grouter concerning global warming and gleefully knock out Kyoto. From a cockie who has learnt the hard way about the environment, finally giving credit to the honest hard-fighting greenies, it seems too much like dirty underhand wedge politics. Did Howard and Bush work this out while our honest little Johnny was over there in God's own Country?

George C, WA, (Bushbred)
Posted by bushbred, Thursday, 4 August 2005 1:40:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We seem agreed that an effective plan for reducing global warming will have to be more ambitious than Kyoto and more binding than the alternative climate deal, and it is clear to me that the primary difficulty with this is the serious innovation required to make involvement in such a plan attractive to many many countries. The suggestion that the main impediment to the effectiveness of global politics is the placement of “national self-interest ahead of the international good” by European countries is –in the context of this article- a serious oversimplification. The pollies are doing the best they can for the world’s environment (albeit in a manner which is motivated by a desire to be PC) while sacrificing as little as possible of their country’s “interests”. That is, they’re putting national interest ahead of a sort of equality in the pursuit of international good, rather than putting it ahead of international good itself. This begs the question, of course, of whether international good necessarily includes the sort of equality in question but, regardless, if your role were Prime Minister to people who are represented by this ‘national interest’, wouldn’t you do the same? This articles says that you would with respect to John Howard, but fails to acknowledge the same with respect toEuropean leaders.
Posted by alliah, Thursday, 4 August 2005 8:11:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Just read in the Aussie reprint of the "Guardian" two interesting pieces regarding the Kyoto Incident.

1. Who would believe it, but China, who has just joined the ratpac mob to unearth Kyoto, says she would like the new group which includes Australia, to attempt to liase or join with Kyoto.

2. The Green Party has suggested that the new anti-Kyoto jag is really to do with a coal pact to find cleaner ways of burning coal, which includes four of the world's largest coal producers, including Australia. The Greens also suggested that both the US and Australia being on the outside of Kyoto, could be concerned that they might miss out on making a profit later on pro-Kyoto clean air technology.

Finally, china could be on the right track by suggesting that tow warring sides get together, but let's hope they earnestly talk about the perils of global warming rather than greedy wheeler dealing and trying to do each other down.

George C, WA - (Bushbred)

Finally, China could be on the right track by suggesting that both sides get together,
Posted by bushbred, Saturday, 6 August 2005 6:05:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Kyoto would be a very different beast if China was inside the tent. However the original Kyoto deal allowed China to emmit CO2 without sanction. All Kyoto was going to do was to move industry from the west to the east at an even faster rate with little reduction in CO2 output.

If China now wants to be inside the tent then the USA and Australia deserve credit for holding out in favour of a realistic deal.

Any global deal on climate needs to include the developing world. Especially China and India
Posted by Terje, Sunday, 7 August 2005 6:28:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy