Expert survey: Israel will continue to use oil and coal for most energy needs
By Zafrir Rinat
Israel will have to continue to use oil and coal for the vast majority of its energy needs, according to a recent survey of Israeli scientists and other experts commissioned by the Environmental Protection Ministry.
The survey also found that there is no way of predicting climate changes in as small a land mass as Israel, and cast doubt on whether there is evidence of such changes in the country.
Advertisement
Dr. Avraham Arbib, the Infrastructure Ministry's deputy chief scientist, said that while Israel needs to expand its use of renewable energy, such energy sources will still not meet most of the country's needs even in 30 years.
"Some of the technology exists, like solar collectors on roofs," said Arbib. "But building solar power stations requires land and financial resources."
Many local climate experts also accused some researchers of using the increasingly popular issue to increase their chances of getting their studies funded.
"There's no doubt that the slogan of climate change has been adopted by researchers from various disciplines to get research budgets because it is attractive to funding bodies in Israel and around the world," said Nurit Kliot, a member of the research team that conducted the survey and a professor in the University of Haifa's department of natural resources management.
Nonetheless, she said, "one cannot argue that the scientific findings themselves were twisted in order to prove that climate change exists."
"Nothing like that was said by the researchers we interviewed," added Kliot.
Indeed, most of the experts interviewed for the survey say they do not doubt that human activity can cause climate change, and call for saving energy and protecting water sources.
However, many are skeptical about the ability to predict climate change in Israel.
"Most scientists think that just like you need to take out insurance, you also need to take cautionary measures and get ready for climate changes likely to take place," said Kliot.
The research team compiled their findings after interviewing 97 scientists and experts in diverse fields including climate, medicine, agriculture, water and energy.
The researchers asked the experts to discuss scientific questions and speak out about necessary policies in light of possible future climate changes.
Prof. Uri Mingelgreen, a scientist at the government-run Agricultural Research Organization who used to serve as the Environmental Protection Ministry's chief scientist, called into question the ethics of some scientists. "Climate researchers are approaching the red line when it comes to the ethics of their work," he said.
"It's hard to see research budgets in front of you and not go in the direction that the funding bodies want you to go in, instead of the directions that you think you should go."
Most of the scientists said the research was tilted toward studies highlighting the role of climate change in an effort to win funding, though they did not provide examples.
The United Nations, the World Bank and the European Union are among the institutions that provide funding and organizational support for research on climate changes, in addition to private foundations around the world.
"The research funders sometimes redirect the funds they have to researchers who show data that supports climate change," the report found.
Many scientists and experts said there is evidence of global warming in the Middle East and a reduction of precipitation, especially in the Kinneret area, but some prominent experts in the field of water and agriculture say it isn't so.
Gerald Stanhill, a scientist at the Agricultural Research Center, said that as long as people don't examine the influence of phenomena such as particles in the air that are liable to reduce the intensity of solar radiation, it is difficult to predict changes in the climate.
haaretz.com
Why Do You Rob Banks, Willie? [Chris Horner]
Mr. Sutton: That's where the money is.
Now, a news story out of Israel cites a scientist having dared quantify what has seemed an increasingly obvious truth, that scientists use global warming to “increase chances of getting their studies funded” and to the point that they are “Approaching the red line when it comes to the ethics of their work.”
“Many local climate experts also accused some researchers of using the increasingly popular issue to increase their chances of getting their studies funded. ‘There’s no doubt that the slogan of climate change has been adopted by researchers from various disciplines to get research budgets because it is attractive to funding bodies in Israel and around the world,’ said Nurit Kliot, a member of the research team that conducted the survey and a professor in the University of Haifa’s department of natural resources management…
Prof. Uri Mingelgreen, a scientist at the government-run Agricultural Research Organization who used to serve as the Environmental Protection Ministry’s chief scientist, called into question the ethics of some scientists. ‘Climate researchers are approaching the red line when it comes to the ethics of their work,’ he said. ‘It’s hard to see research budgets in front of you and not go in the direction that the funding bodies want you to go in, instead of the directions that you think you should go.’"
Those who have viewed Martin Durkin’s “The Great Global Warming Swindle” caught Nigel Calder’s entertaining take on the same. He used the example of seeking a grant to study the nut-gathering habits of a particular squirrel and noting that one is far better positioned to receive the money (and/or get published) if one expresses interest in the effect of climate change on the nut-gathering habits of the particular squirrel.
09/17 11:30 AM
planetgore.nationalreview.com |
