Copenhagen Conference – no excuse for inaction.

The key messages from the Climate Change conference at the University of Copenhagen have now been issued. The statement says that the climate is changing “beyond the patterns of natural variability” and that the changes are a result of the “high rates of observed emissions”.

The most pertinent comment, IMHO, is this:

There is no excuse for inaction. We already have many tools and approaches ? economic, technological, behavioural, management ? to deal effectively with the climate change challenge. But they must be vigorously and widely implemented to achieve the societal transformation required to decarbonise economies. A wide range of benefits will flow from a concerted effort to alter our energy economy now, including sustainable energy job growth, reductions in the health and economic costs of climate change, and the restoration of ecosystems and revitalisation of ecosystem services.

If politicians will not act, then it is up to us, the public, to force them to act. How do we get them to act? Especially seeing that the ETS proposed by the Labor government looks like it will be rejected in the senate by the coalition and the independent senators.

Advertisements

60 Responses

  1. If I were a climate change believer, I would be royally pissed off. If I were a believer, and had voted Labor, I would feel doubly betrayed.

    Since I am a sceptic, however, I am pleased to note the governing classes have recognised that unilaterally instituting a draconian ETS would be political suicide.

    My prediction is the ETS will be delayed until after the next election, at least.

  2. Tony

    I accept that you are a sceptic, but what will need to happen for you to change your mind? And will it be too late by then?

    And if the government pushes ahead with the ETS legislation and it gets voted down in the senate (whether or not for the right or wrong reasons) I think it will not be the government that suffers, it will be the coalition.

    PS. I tidied the HTML for you 🙂

  3. “And will it be too late by then?”

    Joni,

    Even if it turns out global warming is a result of human CO2 emissions, it won’t be too late, and it definitely won’t mean the end of life as we know it.

    An increasing number of believers think that the constant alarmism and catastrophism is driving people away from the idea.

    As evidence of this, a survey released in the US this week shows more people than ever think the seriousness of global warming is exaggerated:

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/116590/Increased-Number-Think-Global-Warming-Exaggerated.aspx

    (Thanks for cleaning up the spill.)

  4. Just saw on the news that Turnbull has toughened his stance on the proposed ETS.

    Presumably this will sure up his flimsy internal support & play well with the rusted ons.

    A step in the right direction Tony? relatively speaking of course.

  5. By the way, I’ve been following a different climate change conference this week. 😉

  6. Good link Tony. And yes, but as the article says, is that because of the economic concerns or will that hold up in the next series of surveys.

  7. Hi Toiletboss,

    Sounds promising, but will have to wait and see the details. Turnbull couldn’t possibly carry on with this un-believable policy of trying to out-greenLabor. Who for one moment believed that? (Except of course the doctors wives from the North Shore and Brighton.)

  8. And note what the Gallup link says in regards to the conference you followed:

    That sets the U.S. public apart from the global-warming skeptics who assembled this week in New York City to try to debunk the science behind climate change.

  9. Lol. Yes Joni, I’d say 100% of the delegates at that conference would say global warming is exaggerated.

  10. An interesting cavalcade of co-sponsors for the Heartland Institute too; The Lavoisier Group among them. Still, given the encompassing nature of the issue & the polarity of opinion involved such contrarian gatherings are probably a healthy occurence.

    “Turnbull couldn’t possibly carry on with this un-believable policy of trying to out-green Labor.”

    Amen to that. Noone “green” believed him anyway & I imagine such a stance as “outgreening” Labor would serve only to haemorrhage those who would normally be certain Liberal voters in disgust.
    There is plenty of disdain for Turnbull throughout the blogosphere already, much of it coming from his own “side”.

  11. Oh yeah they do. But (and i am trying to be careful here) didn’t the Heartland Institute organise that conference?

    So one one side of the pond we have scientists presenting evidence that the climate is changing more rapidly than expected and on the other side scientists that deny that the climate is changing and/or that man is responsible.

    Do we act on the worse case scenario and try to reverse the effects of AGW which means doing some things that seem to be self-evident (less pollution, sustainable energy etc) or do we not act and hope that AGW is not responsible for climate change?

    (poo poo poo – my satellite signal has just gone in the middle of H&C)

  12. ‘There is plenty of disdain for Turnbull throughout the blogosphere already, much of it coming from his own “side”.’

    Amen to that as well. The Liberals need to get back to their conservative roots.

  13. “Conservationist” roots??

  14. “(poo poo poo – my satellite signal has just gone in the middle of H&C)”

    Mine died for a few minutes about an hour ago. Big storms here in Melbourne. (Can’t complain, we need the rain.)

    Great show though. Presets on now.

  15. Satellite back. Hunters are great.

  16. ‘“Conservationist” roots??’

    No, that’s what Malcolm is getting from the doctors’ wives.

  17. The gathering of this new cult at Copenhagen will be treated to a special surprise. Priestess Penny Wrong, employing that monotone style she has mastered, will present a keynote address.

  18. I’ve been alternating Melbourne and Sydney.

  19. Tony – LOL re Malcolm. And same here, but thanks very much, the boyf has now taken the remote to watch the Presets – for me I’d prefer the Hunters.

    And Stephan – I take it you disagree with the evidence from the Copenhagen conference that just took place (not referring to the upcoming one).

  20. “But (and i am trying to be careful here) didn’t the Heartland Institute organise that conference?”

    Yes they did, Joni. No need to be careful (too much of that going on these days). Why does that concern you?

  21. “The Liberals need to get back to their conservative roots.”

    Yes, the conservatives are rooted.

    It’s a beautiful thing given the last decade of mendacious overconfidence.

  22. I seem to remember that they have some vested interest in debunking climate change – that is, where they get their money from.

    And I understand that the scientists in Copenhagen also have vested interest, but why do the NY scientists not go to the IPCC conferences and bring up their opposing ideas?

    And I don’t know the answer here, but do the sceptic scientists also publish peer reviewed papers?

  23. You’d better switch over Joni: Holy Grail

  24. No satellite…. WAHHHHHHHH!

  25. Thunderstorm here in Sydney.

    I wish the climate would change!

  26. “why do the NY scientists not go to the IPCC conferences and bring up their opposing ideas?”

    Joni, the IPCC is now a huge bureaucracy. They do not want anything slowing down their gravy train.

  27. I understand Tony, but will the action to prevent AGW harm us in reality? Or will the inaction harm us more?

    And yes – any carbon tax or ETS will increase costs, but that money will have to go somewhere, and that will probably result in new industries.

  28. “They do not want anything slowing down their gravy train.”Tony

    Does that mean that they weren’t invited or prohibited from attending Tony?
    Seems like a mistake to exclude them to me; only invites accusations of imbalance that are surely best avoided.

  29. “Does that mean that they weren’t invited or prohibited from attending Tony?”

    Tboss. No way were they invited. In Bali, for example, you had delgations like ours: Kevin Rudd, Penny Wong and dozens of assorted hangers-on. Multiply that by many hundreds , and you get an idea why there was no room at the inn for any sceptics.

  30. Joni, you and i keep hearing the same mantra: The cost of inaction is far greater than the cost of action.

    Really? I’m not buying it.

  31. Why not? And when will we judge that?

    What if your are wrong?

  32. Satellite down here now.

  33. “Why not?”

    I can see how an ETS will cost us plenty of real dollars right now.

    If you take away all the exaggeration about the potential cost of climate change, a case can be made for it being more cost effective to prepare for adaptation, if and when required. (I mean, really, one degree per century. Maybe.)

  34. But don’t those dollars (ETS) go somewhere? The idea is that the money will go into new industries… money just does not disappear – oh wait, GFC…. oops.

    Satellite back? Just watching the reply of John “I now have my own gravity” Farnham.

  35. Oh no – now Icehouse vs Split Enz… what to do, what to do?

  36. What more can a poor boy do?

  37. Great Southern Land with Jet was great fantastic.

  38. Did u see Red Symonds walk behind the band?

  39. No, missed it. Did you just see Split Enz sing I See Red?

  40. Oh wait…

  41. Tony – it was in “I see Red” that Red walked by. LOL.

  42. Damn. I just didn’t get that one.

    (I blame the alcohol.)

  43. LOL… I am dry here. Nothing in the house 😦

  44. Hey Joni. Molly’s a legend.

  45. Indeed.

  46. Barry Gibb is awesome. And you just know those back-up girls are loving every minute of it.

  47. Melb now… Midnight Oil can still rock.

  48. Wow. Torn between the two. You’re right about The Oils though.

    Funny how I see Garrett as a different person in his rocker persona. There’s no connection with me to the dork sitting on the parliamentary benches. Strange. (I didn’t think that would be the case).

  49. I agree, parliamentary restraint is not good for him. He needs to rock!

  50. I’ve got to hand it to Peter Garrrett. He’s pulled this one off.

    He is now both a suited parliamentarian, moving in the stuffiest of circles; and a rock singer of the highest order. (He’s not a great technical singer, mind you, but he’s never needed to be one of those.)

    I dare say nobody’s achieved this dubious duet before. Good work Pete.

  51. And Rob Hirst is an amazing drummer.

    I think both concerts were great.

    Advance Australia Fair. I am on proud Aussie at the moment.

  52. Encore!

  53. Or would that be a song without notice?

  54. Very droll Joni. Anyway, over and out from me. Later.

  55. Same here everyone. Until tomorrow.

  56. According to “more than 2000 researchers from 80 countries”:

    “… climate change is real, it is happening faster than thought even a couple of years ago, and the effects are likely to be severe if political leaders do not act decisively and soon.”

    http://www.smh.com.au/environment/global-warming/alarm-at-weak-greenhouse-targets-20090313-8xup.html

    But standing firm against them in New York were professional delusionists “the James Cook university paleoclimate scientist Dr Bob Carter, the former head of the Australian Greenhouse Office, David Evans, and Bill Kininmonth, the former head of the Australian National Climate Centre.” (http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/climate-sceptics-fight-tide-of-alarmism-20090313-8xsh.html). Thank god there are a few courageous souls ready to speak truth to power.

    And Miranda Devine has finally provided the answer to the question that has puzzled me for years, viz: why are all these scientists conspiring to spread alarm and despondency? According to the US source she quotes, the ‘alarmists’ “are committed to warming alarm as either a vehicle for a post-modern coup d’etat or for illicit profits”.

    WTF is a ‘post-modern coup d’etat’?

    The only people on a gravy train are the same handful of professional denialists who bob up as celebrity speakers whenever there’s a loonie love-in like the one in New York. If they actually have a case, wouldn’t a few other scientists have joined them by now? Oh that’s right, the others are all either wallowing in illicit profits or plotting to take over the state … in a strictly post-modern way, of course.

    Honestly, these fruitcakes make one world government conspiracy nutters and September 11 truthers look sane and rational.

  57. BTW as an indication of Devine’s dedication to impeccable journalistic standards, I should note that David Evans is not ‘the former head of the Australian Greenhouse Office’. According to Sourcewatch, he “attended the University of Sydney for five years from 1979 where he did science and engineering, and then spent a further five years at Stanford University at Palo Alto in California, doing a PhD in electrical engineering … After taking out his doctorate he worked for a year in Silicon Valley and then returned to Australia to write a book on the research he had done for his PhD. He had planned to spend a year or two writing, but during his writing he discovered “lots more interesting stuff and mainly did my own research until 1999″. In the meantime, to support himself, he traded on the stock market and did some programming odd jobs.” (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=David_Evans)

    The closest he ever got to the Australian Greenhouse Office was to do some IT consulting for it. No doubt Fairfax will print a ‘clarification’ in small print on p17 in about six months’ time.

  58. Good posts Ken! No doubt the resident ‘sceptics’ will soon respond via a reference to a superficial understanding of Popper and ‘falsification’ theory or perhaps a reference to the insights provided by a favoured relative.

    Faith rules! Professional denialists prosper! LOL.

  59. PhD in electrical engineering eh? Probably re-wired a few refrigerators. That’d make him a real expert in climatology.

    Oh, I forgot. He swims regrlarly at Bondi and reckons the water there is as cold as it’s always been.

    Nothing like a bit of empirical evidence, what?

  60. A Modest Proposal to Prevent the Pernicious Warming of our Fair Globe Whilst Enriching the Treasury of the Realm and Avoiding All Inconvenience to Ladies and Gentlemen of Refinement Who Otherwise Might Suffer Severe Annoyance From Such Climatory Consequences Were the Situation Left Unremedied

    – by Jonathan Swift

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: