Posted on 06/11/2011 11:56:55 AM PDT by UniqueViews
Heavy industry in Europe faces a crippling bill for global warming.
Lately, it seems, ever more people have been waking up to the almost unimaginable scale of this disaster now roaring down on us. As one power company last week raised its charges by an average £200 a year, it was claimed by the Global Warming Policy Foundation that a fifth of our soaring energy bills are now accounted for by the hidden subsidies and other costs imposed by the drive to "decarbonise" our electricity supplies.
The GWPF has also published a magisterial paper by Lord Turnbull, who was head of the Civil Service from 2002 to 2005. He castigates politicians and his former colleagues in the service, not simply for their blind acceptance of the questionable findings of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but for landing us with a Climate Change Act that commits us, uniquely in the world, to reducing our CO2 emissions by 80 per cent within 40 years. As I have observed here before, this target could only be attained by closing down virtually all the UK's economy.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
THAT is the real objective -- reduce all Western capitalist countries to third world status. I don't see how that is going to help the earth...
Well, the Muslim immigrants would feel at home.
LIberals are only virtuous when it's other peoples' money at stake.
In the mean time...
The world’s woodland is getting denser and change could help combat climate change
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2730446/posts
“In countries from Finland to Malaysia, the thickening has taken place so quickly that it has reversed the carbon losses caused by deforestation between 1990 and 2010. In Britain, forest density has increased by 10.8 per cent from 2000 to 2010 and by 6.6 per cent across the whole of Europe.
Dubbed the planet’s lungs, forests act as huge carbon sinks that absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as they grow.”
The Western economies will be crippled to comply with the fictional need to reduce carbon emissions, yet China and India will pour out even more CO2 and a single volcano will wipe out decades of carbon “savings” in an afternoon. The CO2 based theories of global warming are a pathetic farce.
Famine, disease & war that follow will rid the earth of the plague that is humanity, thereby returning it to the pristine state that existed before modern man arrived.
Gaia will be pleased!
/sarc
Do you have a source link?
I will guess that the algores of the UK do not bear any such costs of their carbon-enriched lifestyles.
More CO2, the better trees and other plants grow, absorbing more CO2.
God’s thermostat!
Neat, huh!
Nigel Lawson: The Coalition’s absurd energy policy is damaging industry and adding hundreds of pounds to every family’s fuel bills
“However, there is a threat to that recovery - and the bitter irony is that this is of the Government’s own making.
It is not the very necessary reduction and eventual elimination of the budget deficit. It is the Government’s so-called climate-change policy of ‘decarbonising’ the British economy - the replacement of carbon-based energy with substantially more expensive non-carbon energy, in particular wind power.
The ostensible purpose of this policy is to prevent what is customarily described as catastrophic global warming.
Now, there are at least two major problems with this.
The first, as more and more eminent scientists are finding the courage to point out (the most recent being the distinguished physicist Professor William Happer of Princeton University), is that it is far from clear that there is a serious problem - let alone a catastrophic one - of global warming at all.
The second major problem with the British Government’s policy is that even if it were thought to be desirable to cut back drastically on carbon emissions, this can have an effect only if it is done globally.
For the UK, responsible for 2 percent of global emissions, to go it alone is futile folly.
China, the biggest global emitter, has made it clear that it will not accept any restraint on its use of carbon-based energy, as has India. (The annual increase in China’s emissions, incidentally, is greater than the UK’s total emissions.)
Yes, I do — sorry, I somehow screwed up posting it:
Thanks!
The same idiots pushing this horse5h1t will be shocked when they find out that there are only a few options left:
- Horses for heavy loads (oh wait, nix that, horses are tremndous farters of greenhouse gas = methane. OK put them on the grill.)
- Stone Buildings (oh wait, you’ll need shovels and wheelbarrows to gather and move them, and a couple horses)
- Energy (derived only from the Sun, and we know how bright the Sun is everyday in Yurp. A fully covered roof of solar panels that cost FAR more than the savings quoted by the manufacturer. BTW, all the trees will have been burned long ago for their energy)
- Travel (get out your Birkenstocks and wool socks)
The right idea but numbers don't quite add up. A year's worth of "savings" (e.g. 40 Mt "saved" by cutting Germany's electricity use by 10%) was wiped out in an afternoon by Pinatubo. A more constant case is that the Iceland volcano wipes out all of Germany's cuts day-for-day as it erupts, but that's just one volcano of many. Your other point that these "savings" are not savings is good. That 10% "reduction" is based on fraudulent numbers like ignoring the giant subsidies for solar resulting in wasted energy elsewhere. Solar in Germany is just plain stupid.
The left wants to control rather than shut down economies. Of course, leftist control will lead to major reductions in economic activity. The left is imposing extreme environmental standards to gain control. Many large companies will agree to the left’s conditions as long as the left ensures its profits. The left has created a vicious cycle of legalized corruption among select businesses, rat politicians, and labor cartels. These three groups are engaged in massive theft of private property.
The biggest lie about the global warming movement has been the economic analysis. The IPCC has conducted some phony economic analysis indicating that reducing huge amounts of CO2 will be relatively painless (3 percent of GDP). I believe this loss of GDP is cumulative so it is relatively small. Long term economic forecasts are almost worthless much less a forecast involving the imposition of technologies that do not exist.
The second biggest lie is that the science is settled. Obviously if the science is settled, governments do not need to increase research spending on global warming. The alarmists do not mean that science is settled in this manner. They just want to stifle debate and ostacize anyone who disagres. Climate science is amazingly complex. It will never be settled.
The biggest lie from the science is that global temperatures can be regulated by coericive actions of governments. There is no empirical evidence that global temperatures can be controlled. The left has weaved the dual lies about costs (3 percent of GDP) plus temperature regulation to control the economies of entire countries.
...and give it all back to the atmosphere when the trees die, rot, or become food to termites.
forests act as huge carbon sinks that absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as they grow
...and give it all back to the atmosphere when the trees die, rot, or become food to termites.
but by that time, there are more living trees to absorb it and thrive, putting oxygen into the air, as a result.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.