On May 15, 6:47 pm, James Annan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Tobis wrote:
> > Are you suggesting that the economy should not be constrained to avoid
> > a change larger than 85 C in the global mean if it should seem
> > inclined to head that way?
>
> Since it's not going to happen, I think it is reasonable to ask what is
> the purpose of such a "target" (or even "limit")? Is it just a
> rhetorical device to steer the debate in a particular direction? Would
> you support Govt action to set this "limit"?
No, because action at the mere govt level is futile. It will take a
treaty with the US, China, and India on board.
If China drafted a treaty, it would call for per capita limits and the
financial responsibilities would be allocated based on every molecule
of GHG pumped into the atmosphere since the beginning of the
Industrial Revolution.
>
> Having just read Stoat's new post, I should also raise again the
> question of whether any serious attempt to restrict carbon emissions
> could potentially result in "dangerous interference" with the global
> economy.
>
> Returning to the "bridge" analogy, if there was a trivial way of
> building a better bridge at negligible cost, then of course it would be
> sensible to do it. But in the real world, where resources are limited,
> people _do_ build dodgy bridges in poor countries. Even in Japan, let
> along Turkey, people fake earthquake resistance certification for their
> buildings.
>
> James
We don't seem to be able to justify much based on risk-benefit. So
what is driving the push for limits? Actually, all we really have
now is an attempt to appear to be doing something about global
warming, on the part of public officials and and some corporate
officials. The ROI is measured in PR, not safety. Comes down to
public horror I think, but I don't know if that will be enough to
sustain follow through.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
