Posted by: rotenochsen | July 10, 2009


 Friday, July 10, 2009 12:00:00 AM

We have seen news reports that Al Gore stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars in CO2 credits trading via his new trading organisation. And I suspect most of the politicians who have jumped on to the band wagon of Cap and Trade have visions of dollars floating in their empty heads!

Despite the fact that more than half the real climatologists who were surveyed, said the world is actually cooling not getting warmer. The politicians all over the world are pushing this new Ponzi scheme.

Well, the fly in the ointment just may have spoiled there vision of control and riches for themselves. A report by a respected organisation was introduced to the members of the G8 meeting in Italy that may start people thinking about flushing CAP and Trade!

The Kyoto Protocol requires leading economies, by 2012, to cut by specified amounts carbon dioxide (CO2) and other “greenhouse gases” blamed for climate change. It allows for trading in carbon “credits” among lighter and heavier emitters.

A conference in Copenhagen late this year aims to deliver a global agreement for action after 2012, the end of the Kyoto-applicable period. Activists are pushing for much bigger emission-reduction targets and more stringent timetables than those set by Kyoto.

But the new report says Kyoto and its underlying approach have had no meaningful impact at all. To the contrary, cap-and-trade schemes – which set a limit on emissions and allow trading in emissions permits or carbon offsets – had seen emissions continue rising.

The report comes from a consortium of research institutes in Europe, North America and Asia, led by the London School of Economics’ (LSE) Mackinder Program and the Institute for Science, Innovation and Society at the University of Oxford.

It says the only policies that will work are those focusing directly on improving energy efficiency (reducing the amount of energy needed to provide the same service) and decarbonizing the energy supply (finding ways to reduce the amount of carbon released per unit of energy consumed), through developing and deploying technology.

“Policy should focus directly on decarbonization rather than on emissions; on causes instead of consequences,” the authors say.

“Worthwhile policy builds upon what we know works and upon what is feasible rather than trying to deploy never-before implemented policies through complex institutions requiring a hitherto unprecedented and never achieved degree of global political alignment,” lead author Gwyn Prins of the LSE Mackinder Program said in a statement.

Prins and his co-authors find fault with initiatives like the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade legislation – passed by the House of Representatives late last month – as well as the European Union’s emission trading scheme and Britain’s Climate Change Act.

Instead, they point to Japan’s climate strategy – setting a realistic, concrete target, “to be met by real-world efficiency gains and decarbonization through deployment of efficient and low-carbon technologies.”

“The Japanese target does not depend on the froth of purchased offsets,” they add.

The report notes that Japan, ironically, was slammed by environmentalists and the U.N. climate panel for what were seen as unambitious targets, even though its policy is actually working.

“Evidence from the best studied and most efficient example, namely the Japanese iron and steel industry, shows a 19 percent reduction in CO2 1991-2008 as a result of direct efficiency gains.”

‘Don’t put dogmatism ahead of pragmatism’

Despite the experts’ appeals, carbon trading looks set to stay ,there is too much money invested in the trading of CO2 credits to allow it to fail. And it will expand! To the average citizens detriment and to fill the pockets of the political aristocracy!

Obama met with Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt at the G8 gathering Wednesday and, according to Reinfeldt, expressed interest in linking a U.S. carbon trading market with one run by the E.U. and, possibly, Australia. Sweden holds the rotating E.U. presidency.

Writing on a Nature magazine Web site, Jeff Tollefson voiced doubt that the idea of reversing course put forward by Prins and his co-authors would garner much enthusiasm.
How much money will Obama and his henchman make off this canard we will never know. But one thing we all know is that it will cost US a lot more in the cost of living because of the incumbent increase costs of energy


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: