Global Climate Change - A Complicated Question
Just to demonstrate that I am not some radical Greenpeace environmentalist, I thought I would post a link to one of the best articles I have come across that highlights some of the problems with the conclusions of many scientists regarding global climate change. There is a lot of ammunition here for you ostriches.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6622
As I have said before, I cannot personally be sure that global climate change is occurring. However, imo, the cost of ignoring the problem far outweighs the cost of beginning to acknowledge it and develop a mitigation plan.
What I struggle with is what exactly are we supposed to do? On the one hand, I am generally not in favor of much (any) government regulation. On the other hand, I feel that this is one of those areas that is difficult for individuals or companies to control on their own. As libertarian as I may be, I find it difficult to imagine a world where there were no laws against pollution, for example.
posted by Carl Spackler @ 9:30 AM
4 Comments
4 Comments:
Thanks for the article….. curiously enough I was trying to post something in this matter when it came across.
I think our positions are merging on this issue, scarily enough. I’d be scared in your case, as it may be a sign of senility, Mr. Spackler. I’d like to summarize once more my position in global warming and get your reaction to see how close we’ve gotten (hopefully not too close, as this would be much more boring)…..
1. The planet’s climate IS changing.
2. The general tendency IS towards a warmer climate at the present time.
3. Not all effects of warming are counterproductive for the planet. Many, if not most of them are beneficial.
4. I have not been able to find a study that determines the optimal AVERAGE temperature for the planet. I have not been able to find a study that determines how the interests of my species correlate with that of any others, for example the penguins or the polar bears, as they are affected by the free variable of climate change. I have not been able to find a study that determines this process among species other than mine. I would appreciate someone pointing one out to me.
5. The planet has been much warmer and much colder than it is now and humans have thrived through all of these periods, as have other species.
6. Human activity MAY play a new role in this climate change process.
7. Human activity’s role is minor.
8. Human activity’s role is unavoidable because there is no cost/benefit reward to changing it
9. The technologies required to change the generation of energy from fossil fuels to renewable ones exist today. These technologies are advancing faster than any other form of energy generation since the Geico cavemen burned wood in their caves. Simultaneously, the traditional, fossil-based materials are becoming more scarce. The intersection of these two trends is unavoidable. Accelerating the trends through government fiat rather than allowing the marketplace to do it will (a) hurt the poor first and foremost; (b) have unforeseen detrimental consequences; (c) not affect climate change in any meaningful way (a small percentage of a small percentage).
10. The current proposals on the table, from carbon-trading to ethanol production and electrical automobiles are all good examples of what NOT to do. Sometimes, it is better to follow the advice “Not just do something. Stand there.” Especially when we’re not clear as to the cause, effect, or methods.
11. There are a significant number of activities that would, for the same or less cost, (a) save more lives; (b) improve the quality of life and (c) have more certain outcomes.
12. There is a LOT OF MONEY to be made exploiting the fears, apprehensions and sense of guilt of those who do not apply critical thinking to the process. I am all for making money in this process and celebrate the abilities, if not the intent, of the main beneficiaries of the debate, namely the National Resources Defense Council, the Sierra Club, Greenpeace and others like them.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/7345310a-32fb-11dc-a9e8-0000779fd2ac.html
This is an example of who gets hurt by the unintended consequences of by-passing the marketplace through government fiat - and who gets helped.
Archer Daniels Midland company, a $45 Billion company, (http://money.cnn.com/quote/financials/financials.html?symb=ADM), is doing much better. Meanwhile, little Tubutu, in Ethiopia, has to work 50% more at the Nike factory to buy his corn. Although, admittedly, he may feel a little cooler now.
perhaps more impactful to Spackler...the price of Ethanol and consequently corn has risen steadily. This has effectively priced tortillas out of the reach of many Mexicans.
It is simple equation for the corn farmer...but one day even the Spackler household could be forced to abandon their average of 4lbs of daily tortillas (is that really a statistic that somebody researched or does the WPost make it up? its not like there is a good fact checker for Mexican tortilla thru-put?)
Anyway interesting article (older) below
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/26/AR2007012601896_pf.html
I finally have some time to respond to some of these postings. I will take Centerline's manifesto first. Here is my opinion on your list:
1 - Agreed
2 - Agreed
3 - Agreed, with caveat to be explained later.
4 - Do not think there is an ideal, but imo, this is related to 3 which I will deal with at the end.
5 - Agreed
6 - Agreed
7 - Do not believe we have enough data to know for sure. I tend to believe that humans role is NOT minor.
8 - Do not agree. Pollution is waste. Economically, eliminating waste will ultimately be a good thing.
9 - Do not completely agree. I struggle with this one as noted in my original post. I do not like government intervention, however, in certain cases (Manhattan Project, Interstate Highways, Space Exploration), I believe this was the only way to get the process started.
10 - I'm not sure I understand why carbon trading is bad, or incentives for electric automobiles. I'm not a fan of more ethanol production.
11 - Impossible to predict this.
12 - I'm a firm believer that this is an area destined to make a lot of money.
To answer some of the caveats I had earlier, in general, I believe that any climate change that humans affect is bad. I have no logical rationale for this other than my fear of the unknown, and my confidence in mother nature handling things properly. I'm also one of these people that never takes medicine unless I absolutely have to.
Looking over our list, we do agree on more than we disagree, however, our differences are still material.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home