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 > A Stern review > Comments

A Stern review : Comments

By Andrew Hewett, published 6/11/2006

The debate about whether climate change is occurring is over. The question now is how do we respond?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. Page 8
  10. All
Fester,

NOAA still has a total blackout on its SHA data.

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/trinanes/tmp/sha1163235773.gif

This may be a knee jerk to the Democrat wins in the US.

Stand by!
Posted by KAEP, Saturday, 11 November 2006 7:34:09 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
Owen, Cathy, Froggie, Col, Ludwig,

Have you read “Chanticleer” in the Australian Financial Review, back page (84), Friday 10 November?
First para of the second article:

“Global warming flagship bearer [how do you bear a flagship? Is it made easier by rising sea levels? - But seriously,] Al Gore will be in Australia sharing his views with backers of his US-based Generation Investment Management Fund.”

The last two paras note “Fund managers are getting excited about risks flowing from climate change”, and “big accounting firms” are influencing customers toward reporting climate-change detail for market value assessment.

Plainly Gore has vested interests. So do Bush, Cheney, and the rest of us. You can view him as a slick, self-interested promoter, adding to his fortune, or as a player in the game of influencing corporate policy toward more environmentally sustainable outcomes.

Those more deeply interested in global warming may already know about “environmental accounting”, a discipline influenced, by H. T. Odum, an American systems ecologist. Any realistic model of a corporate or national pattern of energy, resource, materials and information flow must be based on a sound and proven methodology which has testable links, both within itself and also to the wider world. Odum’s method is described in his textbook “Environmental Accounting” John Wiley and Sons, 1996.

For a more immediate and accessible introduction, see:

Environmental Accounting Using Emergy: Evaluation of the State of West Virginia
which is at:
www.epa.gov/nheerl/publications/files/wvevaluationposted.pdf

The abstract says:
“Historically, questions related to environmental policy have been difficult to solve, because solutions depend on accurately balancing the needs of both human and natural systems. In addition, there has been no good way to express the socioeconomic and environmental effects of policies in common terms.”

West Virginia is an interesting case to us because it is a coal mining state and those with more detailed knowledge can appreciate or dispute its systemic resemblance to Australia, as an economy strongly influenced by extractive industries.

Emergy is “embodied energy” - all the energy inputs leading up to a product or activity. See Wikipedia for more, as I’ve about reached 350 words.
Posted by Sir Vivor, Sunday, 12 November 2006 4:44:52 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
Absolutely 'Sir Vivor', HT Odum is the one guru we need to resurrect. Ditch fiat-money economics in its entirety and make Odum & ecological economics compulsory would be my first edict as emperor, at least we'd then have a better idea of how fast things are going backwards.

Big step forward coming, as usual, from the EU:

EU directive on energy-using products could force monumental changes
..EuP will require manufacturers to calculate the energy used to produce, transport, sell, use, and dispose of almost every one of its products. It will require that the manufacturer go all the way back to the energy used when extracting the raw materials to make its product, including all subassemblies and components. And in time, it will set limits on a product-by-product basis of how much energy can be used in a product’s entire lifecycle. ..
http://energybulletin.net/22156.html
(stand by for hysterical bleating about communist plots from the 'free market' fundamentalists & other corporate apologists)
Posted by Liam, Sunday, 12 November 2006 1:57:38 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
Froggie

You can guess what I’m going to say;

I very strongly recommend you see Al Gore’s film. It is essential for you to do so in order to confirm or counter your beliefs.

“I must say it is a pretty slick piece of work, full of dramatic music, voice-overs in suitably grave tones and spectacular scenes.”

Well of course it is. It has to be. As a former US vice president, Gore would get laughed out of town if the production quality wasn’t up to scratch.

“Quite a cunning trick, if he can achieve it.”

Well I say, good on him. He is just playing the same game that everyone on the other side of the argument is playing, and thus levelling up the playing field a bit.

Anyway, as I said before, he is putting his money where his mouth is. So the whole accusation of vested-interest behaviour is entirely dodgy. His financial situation should be seen as a positive thing in support for his arguments, because if he is not right, his investments aren’t going to work.
Posted by Ludwig, Sunday, 12 November 2006 10:13:33 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
Andrew hasn't understood Stern's report correctly. Stern said that the cost would be 20% of the world's economy in the year in question (2050, I think). Which is equal to 2% of the world's economy over a 10 year period or 0.2% over a 100 year period.
Sure, there's a lot of money involved if you had to spend it all in just one year but the cost is tiny when considered over a realistic time scale. Which means that there are even fewer reasons for not acting NOW to reverse GHG emissions.
Posted by Bernie Masters, Monday, 13 November 2006 10:19:07 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. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. Page 8
  10. All

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