-Caveat Lector-
conservativeinfo - Subscribe to the Conservative Information email list at
http://conservativeinfo.listbot.com
A Stronger Case Against Kyoto
by S. Fred Singer
President George Bush finds himself under siege after rejecting the Kyoto
Protocol, a treaty that would impose punitive energy sanctions on the United
States’ economy in response to unjustified global warming fears. Foreign
politicians, American political opponents, and fundraisers for Green groups
are all ganging up on him. It could get worse once the sharks smell blood in
the water. But there are sensible ways to meet the challenge.
Of course, the critics are being disingenuous. Bush announced his opposition
to Kyoto during his campaign and has never wavered. His position also
reflects the U.S. Senate vote of 95 - 0 against any such treaty that would
cause severe economic damage to the U.S. but exempt most of the rest of the
world. And while the American public may express concern about global
warming, a recent Time/CNN poll indicates that less than half would be
willing to pay an additional 25 cents for a gallon of gasoline.
True enough, Bush’s PR has not been the greatest. For example, he should have
reiterated his position after the election using the bully pulpit instead of
waiting until March. He could have stressed the higher energy costs flowing
from Kyoto and the severe job losses as industry moved offshore, pointing to
the calamitous consequences on lower-income groups and attacking Green
elitists at the same time. He neglected to inform the public that Kyoto is
not supported by adequate science and is ineffective in reducing the rise in
greenhouse gases. In any case, even enviro groups, certainly the moderate
ones, agree that cutting energy use by some 35 percent in a decade is wildly
unrealistic.
Worst of all, he has been keeping on the White House staff and in key
government departments Gore acolytes who are actively opposed to his
policies. The White House has even recruited from environmental
organizations. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.
But it’s not too late; there are countermeasures that might work and would
let his critics take the onus for opposing Kyoto. But while they might
conceivably change the specific targets or timetables or modalities of Kyoto,
they would keep its structure in place. And this would almost certainly come
back to haunt us. Kyoto’s expanding bureaucracy and the 180 or so nations
that form the Conference of the Parties to the Protocol would get their hooks
into U.S. energy policy and thereby our economic policy. Unelected regulators
not responsible or even responsive to our citizens would determine our
economic future.
To avoid paying such a heavy price, it would be best to return to the
original 1992 climate treaty and its voluntary efforts to control emissions
through conservation and higher energy efficiency. Slowly rising fuel prices,
as oil and gas become depleted, and advances in technology will surely
accelerate the ongoing trend towards decarbonization – producing more GNP
output with less fossil fuels. Hybrid electric cars, electricity generation
with fuel cells and advanced nuclear reactors, more efficient appliances, and
cheaper wind and solar energy production are all in the offing.
In the meantime, advancing climate science could convince the public that
human-induced climate change is a minor contributor to the much larger
natural changes and that, in any case, a slightly warmer climate and higher
carbon dioxide levels would benefit agricultural crops and all of humanity.
The Kyoto Protocol is the opening wedge. Unless the Bush White House takes a
firm stance on climate policy, its energy policy is in peril; one cannot
separate the two. Beyond this, foreign policy and national sovereignty are at
stake.
*S. Fred Singer is Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the
University of Virginia and a former director of the U.S. Weather Satellite
Service. He is the author of "Hot Talk, Cold Science: Global Warming’s
Unfinished Debate," published by the Independent Institute (Oakland, CA,
1999).
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
