Archive for the ‘Ethical Issues’ Category

« Older Entries

A Tragedy in the Making

Wednesday, July 25th, 2012

By David L. Brown

As drought and heat continue to destroy a significant portion of the US crop, a large tranche of corn continues to be mandated for use in ethanol production. The purpose of this is to enrich farmers and channel money to corn producing states in order to secure votes. (It makes no kind of economic sense as a fuel source.) Now that the world faces more widespread famine (it’s already been a reality in many places for several years), it might make sense to shut down the ethanol plants for the time being, as this excerpt from an article today on WIRED (here) suggests (emphasis added):

“In the short run, USDA needs to figure out a way to remove the mandate on ethanol use from corn,” said Timmer [an agricultural economist]. “If we could free up 20 to 30 percent of the U.S. crop, reduced as it is, it would bring corn prices down very quickly.

New speculation limits are scheduled to be enacted by year’s end, but drought means that may be too late, said Bar-Yam [president of the New England Complex Systems Institute, a kind of scientific and technology think tank]. In the meantime, the USDA has rebuffed all requests to reduce corn biofuel allotments.

So it would make sense, but the USDA isn’t having any part of that. Well, duh because obviously farmers and ethanol barons are more important than 7 billion human beings and the reputation of the United States. Well, how is it going to fly when third world people are starving wholesale? They get to suffer and die horrible deaths while the U.S. in all the great wisdom of the USDA (headed by a rain-praying lawyer and professional politician) continues to turn huge amounts of corn into ethanol. Do we want to make America the Great Satan in fact as well as in name? If so, this will certainly do it. With hardly any effort at all we can make our country the most hated in the history of the world. When you open a future dictionary to the word “Evil” there will be a picture of Uncle Sam pointing at you. That’s what these idiots are doing.

Meanwhile, here’s a chart showing what happens when food prices rise. The numbers represent incidents of social unrest.

The Wired article suggests that “some think” food prices may have led to the so-called Arab Spring (it’s pretty plain that they did), and that therefore it was a “good thing.” Boy, if that’s good I’d hate to see what they consider bad. The idea that a bunch of raving lunatics taking over third world countries has something to do with “democracy” is totally nuts. It’s anarchy is what it is, followed by theocratic chaos, mayhem and murder. Somalia et al. are hardly models for Jeffersonian democracy. Incidentally, if you doubt the connection, note the number of incidents of food-related social unrest last year in the nations most affected by the Arab Spring: Tunisia 300+, Libya 10,000+, Egypt 800+, and now Syria 900+. Hmm, where there’s smoke and so forth.

One could assume that the 2008 and 2011 events (all centered on sharp rises in the UN’s FAO food index shown by the black dotted line) will be followed by similar events in spades when the presently developing food price spike gets its boots on (which is happening right now). Many of these represent small, insignificant countries (in Western eyes, at least although the indigenous peoples might beg to differ), but there are also some significant ones, including India with 1.5 billion mouths to feed. What happens if a major population subset such as India falls into out-and-out famine? India is presently suffering a reduced Monsoon so food shortages may be coming there soon, incidental to the crisis in world supplies which will severely limit or eliminate the possibility of filling production shortfalls with imports.

China doesn’t appear on the chart and I don’t understand why, because it also has been suffering something like 50,000 minor revolts and demonstrations each year, many of which must be food related. I guess it’s not on the list because the wise leaders of China say “nuh uh, it didn’t happen.” They must have legions of Winston Smiths busily rewriting history there in the Middle Kingdom. Northern China is also presently affected by drought. If India or China (or both) were to fall into widespread famine and anarchy It would be like Somalia X1000.

(more…)

Posted in Agriculture Issues, Climate Change, Economics, Ethical Issues, Famine, Global Security, Politics, Population Issues | Comments Off

The Thin Gruel of Anti-Climate Change Logic

Monday, December 15th, 2008

By David L. Brown

The anti-climate change morons are hitting hard on the idea that the average global temperature hasn’t gone through the roof. They manage to ignore melting sea ice in the Arctic, thawing tundra, and many other signs of climate change.

Here’s the problem with their position: They are looking at “average” worldwide temperatures and concluding that since the averages haven’t changed much, that means that global warming and climate change do not exist.

The problem is that climate scientists have never even once suggested that the Earth’s temperature would rise by equal increments in every place. To the contrary, in fact. But nay-sayers have long made the leap of illogic by saying things such as: “It’s really cold in (fill in name of place) on (date) so there cannot be any global warming.” This goes beyond ignorance to full-bore stupidity, and yet you hear this kind of thing all the time.

Sometimes they even try to convince themselves that global warming would be a good thing, for example, by stating they would have less snow to shovel, or that they could grow coconut palms and bananas in their Minnesota yard.

Okay, let’s play their game. Here we go: I am going to create a plausible climate model that will prove, absolutely prove once and for all (on the basis of the illogic used by global warming nay-sayers) that there absolutely is no global warming. Here are the parameters of this model (keep in mind that this is being presented as an example of reductio ad absurdum, Latin for reducing an argument to the absurd in order to reveal its internal contradictions):

  • The mean temperature of the Equatorial region rises to 527 degrees F.
  • The mean temperature of the Arctic falls to Absolute Zero, −459.67 F.
  • The average global temperature remains exactly what it was in 1953, and therefore no global warming or climate change have taken place.

I told you I was going to take it to the limits of the absurd. But, well, this kind of makes the point that simple-minded conclusions based only on averages don’t quite seem to hold up under scrutiny, do they? But according to the arguments put forth by the anti-climate change nay-sayers, as long as the average temperature has not changed, there is no global warming. Never mind that in this absurd model there might be rivers of molten lead flowing across Brazil, or that the entire oceans have frozen into vast ten-mile-high glaciers in the polar regions. The (illogical) argument states that there is no climate change, period.

Well, perhaps not because any argument based on false logic leads inevitably to a false conclusion. False logic is a favorite tool of pseudoscience and propaganda. It can be boiled down to something like this:

  • 2 = A number
  • 1 = A number
  • Therefore, 2 = 1

Other examples of false and misleading logic include such as: “Einstein did poorly in school; I did poorly in school; therefore I am as smart as Einstein.” Another: “Science cannot explain this; I can explain this; therefore my explanation must be correct.”

So, the fact that it is cold and snowing here in New Mexico today doesn’t mean that there is no global warming. The chain of illogic that nay-sayers might use to claim otherwise goes something like this:

  • Some scientists predict that global warming is taking place
  • It is cold and snowing here in New Mexico today
  • Therefore, there is no global warming

This is pretty thin gruel on which to base an argument against global warming and climate change. The melting tundra, dying coral reefs, receding glaciers, spreading desertification and a host of other signals clearly demonstrate that climate change definitely is taking place. Those who do not wish us to recognize and act against this threat have pretty pathetic arguments to present, and yet it is an inconvenient truth that all too many people are ill-informed and cannot see through the false arguments.

Here is one more example of logic, this time sound and crafted to illustrate the problem at hand:

  • Climate change deniers claim there is no global warming and climate change
  • A vast and growing body of evidence says that global warming and climate change are real
  • Therefore, the climate change deniers are wrong.

There, that should fix it.

Posted in Climate Change, Essays and Opinion, Ethical Issues, Melting Planet | Comments Off

Zimbabwe: A Harbinger of Things to Come

Thursday, April 3rd, 2008

By David L. Brown

Thugocrat Robert Mugabe is not going to go quietly it seems. According to the BBC News, as reported here, members of Mugabe’s police today raided the offices of the opposition party that is claiming victory in this week’s elections. Two reporters, including one from the New York Times, have been arrested and Mugabe has said he will “fight to the last.” He has ruthlessly suppressed the opposition in the past and rigged elections in a style reminiscent of Josef Stalin.

The mess in the former Rhodesia, once the economic star of Africa, is the result of several decades of kleptocratic mismanagement. As The Economist pointed out with this cartoon in a recent issue, Mugabe has brought much “change” to the hapless central African nation.

d1208ww0.jpg

Yes, change. As I have pointed out before, just because things are changed doesn’t mean they are better.

Do you have any idea what 100,000 percent inflation would be like? Well, here is a clue:

zimbabwe-zim-currency-slide.jpg

What you are seeing there is a ten million dollar bank note issued by the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe. It was recently worth about four American dollars on the black market — not even enough to buy a Bush Meat Meal Deal with a side of Pygmy Fries.

Think about it: Our Federal Reserve Board gets the creepy crawlies every time inflation inches above four percent or so. It’s like the sky is about to fall and take us all to a better place. I guess if inflation here in the U.S. got anywhere near 100,000 percent as it has in Zimbabwe, the central bankers would all suffer massive coronaries or commit ritual suicide and we would have to wait for Jesus to straighten out the mess.

Americans are on edge about high gasoline prices and the rising cost of groceries, but hey! we ain’t seen nothin’. What if our four dollar gas got hit with a 100,000 percent inflation rate? Of course it won’t happen here, but it is interesting to consider what it might mean if it did.

I can’t even do the math on that one, because my calculator doesn’t have enough places for the numbers. But if that Zimbabwan bill pictured above is a fair example (value equal to a gallon of gasoline), it would cost about 150,000,000 to 200,000,000 dollars to fill up your gas tank. And wouldn’t that be a fine kettle of fish? I think a lot of us would discover that walking is a long-ignored human ability that has many merits. Yes, we can walk to the grocery store and spend five million dollars or so for a loaf of bread. What? You don’t have even five million dollars, the price of a loaf of bread should 100K percent inflation come to America? Well, you better start working harder, and it’s time to ask for a raise. A very big raise. Like an Apollo Mission to the Moon and One Giant Step for Mankind sort of raise. Don’t worry, I’m sure your boss will understand.

Why am I talking about this here? Well, because what has happened to the former Rhodesia is a prime example of what is wrong with the world, particularly that part of it that is in the bottom third economically. Many places, like Zimbabwe, are sinking slowly into a new Dark Age. Increasing poverty with accompanying famine, disease and crime are becoming endemic in more and more places, especially in Africa. Most of these problems are the direct result of over-population with resulting scarcity of resources, and a declining environment. Climate change due to global warming is part of the story, but population is the giant elephant in the room. And it doesn’t help that humanity is capable of producing monsters such as Mugabe, who has looted his own nation like a one-man modern day Golden Horde.

Well, I just wanted to let you know what you can expect to see more of as the Earth spins and spins into the coming Great Overshoot-and-Collapse, the Mother of All Tragedies. Meanwhile, we’ll all keep trucking off to the store in our merry Hummers or whatever. And, be sure to have a nice day y’all!

Posted in Economics, Ethical Issues, Politics | 1 Comment »

Specter of Famine Looms Over the Earth

Thursday, March 6th, 2008

By David L. Brown

Well, here we go again with more news from the gathering storm of famine that is looming over the world. Most media seem to prefer reporting on the latest antics of such hilarious characters as Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, and Michael Jackson, all of whom are apparently far more important than what is happening to our planet. Unlike most news sources, the BBC occasionally tells it like it is, as in this story about rapidly rising food prices. From the BBC News web site :

UN warns on food price inflation

The head of the UN World Food Programme has warned that the rise in basic food costs could continue until 2010.

Josette Sheeran blamed soaring energy and grain prices, the effects of climate change and demand for biofuels.

Some food prices rose 40% last year, and the WFP fears the world’s poorest will buy less food, less nutritious food or be forced to rely on aid.

Speaking after briefing the European Parliament, Miss Sheeran said the agency needed an extra $375m (244m euros; £187m) for food projects this year and $125m (81m euros; £93m) to transport it.

She said she saw no quick solution to high food and fuel costs.

“The assessment is that we are facing high food prices at least for the next couple of years,” she said.

Miss Sheeran said global food reserves were at their lowest level in 30 years – with enough to cover the need for emergency deliveries for 53 days, compared with 169 days in 2007.

Miss Sheeran said governments needed “to look more carefully at the link between the acceleration in biofuels and food supply and give more thought to it”.

We have been warning about this for some time now, and we are particularly concerned about the impact of diverting food to production of ethanol and biodiesel. This is analogous to throwing gasoline on an already out-of-control blaze. The world is already teetering on the brink of disastrous famine, and the social disruption and human tragedy that is likely to result is almost unthinkable. To be taking grain out of the food system to supplement the energy system is mindless insanity.

The BBC piece listed some examples of places where the rising price of food is already causing economic and social disruption:

  • Afghanistan: 2.5 million people in Afghanistan cannot afford the price of wheat, which rose more than 60% in 2007
  • Bangladesh: The price of rice has risen 25% to 30% over the last three months. In 2007, the price rose about 70%.
  • El Salvador: Rural communities are buying 50% less food than they did 18 months ago with the same amount of money. This means their nutritional intake, on an already poor diet, is cut by half.
  • Anger over rising food prices have already led to riots in Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Senegal and Morocco.

We might add that for people in places like these the cost of food is a major item in family budgets, possibly representing half or more of total expenses. What can it mean in Bangladesh, for example, to see the price of rice up 70% last year and another 25-30% already this year with Winter not yet over? Remember, too, that these people depend on the raw commodities, not highly processed foods such as we in the West “enjoy,” and in which the total cost is affected to a relatively less degree by rises in grain prices. When rice doubles, the cost of food for people in Bangladesh also doubles because they are living close to the bone.

(more…)

Posted in Agriculture Issues, Ethical Issues | 1 Comment »

China Seeing the Light on Biofuels

Thursday, December 21st, 2006

by Val Germann

A recent report on THE ENERGY BULLETIN website shows that the Chinese have become fully aware of the threat that biofuels pose to their food supply.  The quote below, from a Chinese official, gets things just about right:

“In China, the first thing is to provide food for its 1.3 billion people, and after that, we will support biofuel production,” the People’s Daily quoted Wang Xiaobing, an official at the Agriculture Ministry’s crops cultivation department, as saying. 

It was bit of a shock to this writer to read that the Chinese government now has the same attitude toward biofuels that we here at Star Phoenix Base have been promoting these last few months.   While it’s not likely (to say the least) that we had much to do with their position, it was still refreshing to see it in print. 

The article goes on to point out that China currently grows enough grain to supply the basic needs of its people.  However, the country does not grow enough feed grains to completely support its dairy and poultry production.  Much of that grain has to be imported, from the United States, which is rapidly building ethanol plants that will turn that grain into a low grade of gasoline. 

We here at Star Phoenix Base see a problem on the horizon here, a big problem.  Corn futures prices have broken the $3.75 barrier and are continuing upward.  Current projections indicate that by 2010, all U.S. surplus corn will have gone for ethanol, leaving none to export as world population and demand continue to increase. 

The Chinese have more than $1 Trillion in potential foreign exchange, much of which could be used to buy corn on the world market, if they choose to do so. 

We will let our readers do some math on that.

**

Posted in Agriculture Issues, Economics, Ethical Issues | Comments Off

The “Cui Bono?” of Climate Change

Wednesday, September 27th, 2006

by Val Germann

As regular readers of Star Phoenix Base know, the evidence for rapid climate change is pouring in from all directions and the idea is “gaining traction” rapidly, along with calls for action from many elements of the world community. But what action might be effective, and at what cost, to whom? These are the questions, the Roman “Cui Bono?” (Who benefits?), that will make or break humanity’s response to this crisis, if indeed there actually is a crisis.

That is, one big problem is that no one, no expert nor group of experts, actually “knows,” for sure and exactly, what is happening with the climate. No matter how convincing, a vote for climate change is an estimate, based on evidence and probabilities. In addition, the effects of any climactic variation will undoubtedly be felt unevenly across our planet and may actually improve conditions in some locales. However, anything done in mitigation will have real costs, in the near future, to real people and their vital material interests, sometimes in places not hurting at all! It’s simply human nature to view “climate change” in the light of any prospective effects on one’s human material interests, and to take the appropriate steps.

It’s for this reason that we’ve seen the energy companies lining up in opposition to the very idea of human-induced “global warming” or “climate change.” They resent being cast as the heavies in this drama and have been fighting back. Whole nations have resisted the idea as well, in some cases viewing the concept as just another plot by the First World to force an economic strait jacket onto the Third.

You won’t get much of a hearing for climate change in China, for instance, where fossil fuel consumption is galloping ahead, driving double-digit annual economic growth. The same situation obtains for India and many other “developing” nations who believe that they are finally reaching that brass ring and have no intention of cutting back on their economic growth.

With this as background let’s turn to a recent article on the cost-benefit analysis of climate change from the International Business Times website. The quote below will get our discussion moving:

Will the spending needed to prevent global warming cost the world more than just sitting back, or even enjoying the possible financial benefits of a hotter planet?

Here is where the rubber and the road are coming together: Exactly who will be bearing the real cost of any prospective climate change, and who might actually benefit from it? Also, just exactly who is “the world” in this context? It seems to this writer that our planet features a polyglot assemblage of nations, all with varying and conflicting material interests, and not any kind of “world” at all. But let’s continue with another quote from the article:

Robert Mendelsohn, professor at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, argues that such negative costs may still be less than the benefits. He sees a net global warming bonus in the near-term, as higher farming yields in northern countries offsets damage elsewhere, especially in Africa. “In that sense it doesn’t make sense to spend money right now,” Mendelsohn said, adding that beyond 2050 and a 2 degrees Celsius rise the damage and need for action grows.

This writer does not think Dr. Mebdeksohn has consulted with the unfortunate denizens of Africa about the lack of “sense” in trying to head off potential disaster there. The same is true about those poor unfortunates living on some of the smaller islands scattered around the world:

Richard Tol, Senior Research Officer at Ireland’s Economic and Social Research Institute, has a similar stance. “(My damage estimate) does hide some things that some people will get very upset about,” Tol said. “From an economic perspective small island states are so tiny and people are moving out of there anyway.” As an example Tol estimates the welfare loss of the Maldives submerging at three times the inhabitants’ annual salaries, in addition to the 100 percent loss of the country’s GDP.

Luckily, the residents of the Maldives do not possess nuclear weapons and so cannot truly express their particular views on the loss of “100 percent of the country’s GDP.” But are Americans or Europeans going to cut back on their prosperity for the possibility of saving the Maldives? This writer does not think so.

What American politician could possibly advocate trading major recession or even depression in the U.S. for the possibility of saving some distant island group? None, especially when most estimates show those islands as doomed already.

It’s an unfortunate fact that getting some kind of “world agreement” on the reality of “climate change” is only the first step, and likely the easiest one, in the long and potentially impossible process of getting something positive done planet wide. Note the last sentence of our feature article which demonstrates some of the difficulty:

Britain’s Stern will present his findings to ministers in Mexico next week, a month before countries start talks – expected to last years – on a successor to take the Kyoto protocol beyond 2012.

That’s right, the “world” will be taking years and years simply to get a follow-on to the dead letter Kyoto treaty. What chance does meaningful world wide action on climate change have, given this? Not much, it would seem.

**

Posted in Climate Change, Economics, Ethical Issues, Politics | 3 Comments »

Get While the Gettin’s Good

Saturday, July 22nd, 2006

By David Ponton

I was delighted to read in the first sentence of an article in the Wall Street Journal today that “Top executives at many utilities have reluctantly accepted that coal fired power plants contribute to global warming, and they have begun planning for a more restrictive future.”

“Accepted!” “Global Warming!” “Planning!” Those are words I never expected to hear attributed to utility executives.

My delight quickly turned to dismay as I read further in Rebecca Smith’s article.

She notes that TXU Corporation, a big Texas power conglomerate, is responding by speeding up development of polluting coal-fired plants. According to critics, TXU is rushing to build 11 new, large power plants in Texas that will burn pulverized coal. The goal is to build them before carbon regulation comes, in the expectation that existing plants will get an exception to carbon emissions. Citing company letters, the article states that TXU, led by chief executive C. John Wilder, oppose regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

If getting ahead of regulation is truly TXU’s motivation to rush to build these plants, they are acting immorally. The have placed the profit of the company and shareholders above the well-being of all humanity. I am reminded of the logging companies in California that reacted to proposed bans on the cutting of redwoods by cutting redwoods as fast as they could. The logs don’t rot, so they stockpiled masses of the ancient trees ahead of the ban. Egregious greed! TXU also seems to be “gettin while the gettin’s good.”

Ms. Smith points out that other, more responsible big utility companies including American Electric Power Co., Xcel Energy Inc. and Duke Energy Corp. have proposed newer style plants designed to release fewer pollutants and make it easier to control carbon dioxide emissions.

The article goes on to cite estimates of TXU’s jump in carbon emissions when the new plants go on line in 2011, rising to 133 million tons per year from 55 million tons in 2004. The article also contains background on carbon emissions and global warming for the illumination of readers that have been on another planet until today. (A subscription is required to read the Wall Street Journal piece.)

The article cites J. Wayne Leonard, CEO of Entergy Corporation, who said of heedlessly building coal plants: “You stop doing what you’re doing because you’re putting all mankind at risk.” Entergy makes most of its electricity from nuclear and natural gas.

The article discusses the emerging technology of coal gasification, which makes possible the capture of most of the carbon dioxide produced in the process, and recent advances in gasification that might make coal gasification plants competitively priced. Such plants are feasible in states that are progressive in regulating carbon emissions. Texas, where TXU is based, is not one of them. The Governor issued an executive order last year instructing state agencies to expedite applications for new plants, especially those that burn coal mined in Texas.

That seems to be another case of a vicious circle between business and government, this one leveraging immorality to all humanity.

Posted in Energy Technology, Ethical Issues, Fossil Fuels | 2 Comments »

CNN Hints at Problems with U.S. Population

Thursday, July 6th, 2006

by Val Germann

The article went up this morning just before 6:00 a.m. CDT with a headline reflecting the lead paragraph, something like: “U.S. population growth causing headaches.” But within the hour it was changed to what you will see when you navigate now to the CNN site, something like: “U.S. Population increasing; Japan & Europe’s falling.” Why the change? Well, that first headline was likely too negative, too problematic, concerning our glorious increasing population, which almost everyone knows is an unalloyed good. Here’s the offending sentence:

As the U.S. population speeds toward 300 million, the growth is producing headaches for Americans fed up with traffic congestion, sprawl and dwindling natural resources.

This definitely goes against the current conventional wisdom where population is concerned. That is, it’s an unchallenged axiom that an increasing population IS “all good” in today’s world. Here in the West, where people are getting too old, on average, more young people are needed to do the work, in spite of all these machines which were supposed to by now be doing the work.

No matter, our rising affluence (the very goal of our civilization) has cut birth rates, automatically, a fact itself considered an unalloyed good until quite recently. Who wanted the teeming slums of Calcutta here in the United States, eh? Well, no one, or so it seemed.

But the teeming slums of Mexico City, transplanted into Los Angeles or New York, that seems to be different. Yup, it’s A-OK with almost everyone to have millions of illegals from Mexico and other points south living “off the books” in our fair nation. But is this really a good thing?

Of course it is! You see, unending growth is not just good but vital, and if we Americans won’t continue a high birth rate, why, we’ll just have to get some people in here who will. No problem, even if they don’t speak English or share our culture. People are people, right? Absolutely.

So, get ready for a great future, chock-a-block with fellow non-citizens sharing your air, water and lane of traffic. I can think of nothing better, can you?

Read the entire CNN article here.

**

Posted in Economics, Ethical Issues, Law and Regulatory Issues, Population Issues | Comments Off

Experts Weigh In On Biomass Insanity

Wednesday, June 28th, 2006

By David L. Brown

My associate Val Germann and I have discussed the issues of ethanol and biofuels fairly often here on Star Phoenix Base. It is not necessarily that this subject is of unusual interest to us, but more because there is a mad rush of “irrational exhuberance” concerning this subject. It all seemed to start with President Bush’s State of the Union address when he spoke of “switchgrass” as the future replacement for imported petroleum … an unlikely idea that has apparently encouraged vast numbers to jump on board this perceived profit bandwagon.

Of course, the production of ethanol from corn has been going on for some time. This is a fairly well established, if none too efficient process. It has its start during the 1970s, when overproduction of agricultural products, and in particular field corn, was a problem and OPEC was squeezing the West by creating artificial oil shortages. Surplus corn could be used to make alcohol, which could replace oil. Brilliant!

But massive grain surpluses are no longer a problem; quite the contrary as agricultural production is bumping up against steadily rising demand (in case you weren’t watching the world population has approximately doubled since the 1970s). That fact makes it rather troubling that there is now surging interest in converting food grains and devoting agricultural lands to the production of a rather second-best alternative to gasoline.

Several recent articles and an editorial in Science Magazine discussed the “bright future” for ethanol and biofuel programs. We felt these articles were a bit too optimistic to say the least, and apparently there are others who agree with us. Those articles have generated quite a few letters to the editor of Science that point out some of the false assumptions and misguided reasoning behind the biofuel mania. A number of those letters appeared in the current issue.

Many of the points raised by correspondents have already been made here, but for the enjoyment and edification of our readers we are pleased to pass on excerpts from some of those letters. First here is a passage from a letter signed by five Danish agricultural scientists:
(more…)

Posted in Age of Oil, Agriculture Issues, Economics, Energy Technology, Ethical Issues | Comments Off

The Kyoto Treaty: Scandal in the Making?

Saturday, June 24th, 2006

By David L. Brown

The Kyoto treaty on greenhouse gas (GHG) emission has been touted as a brave step toward a reduction in global warming. But, according to an article in the 22 June 2006 issue of New Scientist magazine, many of the nations that have signed on to the Kyoto program are cheating by claiming they emit less GHG than they actually do.

According to the article, entitled “Kyoto Promises Are Nothing But Hot Air” (read it all here):

… two teams that have monitored concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere say they have convincing evidence that the figures reported by many countries are wrong, especially for methane. Among the worst offenders are the UK, which may be emitting 92 percent more methane than it declares under the Kyoto protocol, and France, which may be emitting 47 percent more.

One of the climate scientists, Peter Bergamaschi of the European Commission Joint Research Centre at Ispra, Italy, used a “top-down” technique to study actual emissions across Europe, allowing his group to monitor GHG emissions independently of official government reports. Bergamaschi’s calculations are supported by a similar study led by Euan Nisbet of Royal Holloway University of London.

(more…)

Posted in Climate Change, Essays and Opinion, Ethical Issues, Politics | Comments Off

« Older Entries