Thursday, April 21, 2005

Kyoto and the farce of global warming, part one

I was listening to the radio the other day and there was a professor on it discussing Kyoto and how its implementation would do little good in regards to solving the perceived problem of climate change. His arguments were that since Kyoto is based on reductions rather then restrictions, it does nothing towards solving the long term problem, and furthermore, countries that are exempt from it are not encouraged to begin to reduce or manage their own rates of emissions as they will look at Kyoto and operate under the assumption that it will be the frame that future treaties will use and thus they may as well pollute as much as they can before they are in a position of entering into any of these treaties.

As well, since countries such as China and India are exempt, and their industries are growing faster then the proposed targets of the countries under Kyoto, even in the unlikely event of all the countries managing to comply with the treaty it still won't actually bring about a real change in the actual emissions. So even if climate change is a great danger (which I doubt) Kyoto isn't going to have any real affect on solving the problem, and is furthermore going to hinder the finding of any solution in the future do to its poor core design.

The whole climate change thing has deeper problems then simply useless treaties that will do nothing to solve the problem. There is no actually defiinitive (or really even all that strong) evidence that A. global warming (or climate change as they have amended it to now, after the impending ice age and then expected global desert didn't exactly pan out) is actually occuring, and B. (and more importantly) that it is a man-made event and that there is anything that we can do about it.

And even if there truly is climate change, and the globe is slowly warming, is this truly a disaster as the media likes to portray it? The poles will have to warm something like 50 degrees before they are in danger of melting and flooding the earth, and it would take a very long time for such a dramatic change to take place, thus all people living on coastal areas will likely have time to get to higher ground. As it is, the result of the poles warming is actually to cause them to expand, not decrease, as with warmer temperatures they have more snow.

I'm not going to argue that it is perfectly fine to pollute up the atmosphere, or that we shouldn't be taking steps towards reducing reductions of the so-called greenhouse gases, but I don't see it to be the pandemic that it is being made out to be.