To: Wharf Rat who wrote (765128 ) 1/22/2014 3:52:52 PM From: Bilow 1 RecommendationRecommended By TideGlider
Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1573433 Hi Wharf Rat; Re: "They already are [delivering on Kyoto promises], cuz they aren't in denial. βThe European Union as a whole will over-deliver on its Kyoto target β"; (1) Your article is from 2011. It's out of date. Here's the latest news: Reuters, January 22, 2014EU sets out leaner 2030 climate and energy vision (Reuters) - The European Union set out new climate and energy goals for 2030 on Wednesday, proposing less stringent targets than in the past in a reflection of tougher economic circumstances and a desire to limit rising energy costs . ... Current national targets designed to raise the share of renewable energy to 20 percent would not be renewed after 2020 . Instead, the Commission is recommending a modest EU-wide goal of 27 percent renewables without hard and fast national targets . ... Government subsidies designed to promote renewables have been blamed for pushing up energy costs . Current national targets had not proved the most cost effective option and ditching them would give governments more flexibility over how to meet main emission cutting goal, Barroso said. ...The one firm legislative proposal included in Wednesday's announcement was a scheme to prop up Europe's faltering carbon emissions trading market , with the aim of removing carbon permits from circulation to support prices. uk.reuters.com (2) Your article gives the reason why emissions fell in 2011 and it wasn't because of any political action:A warm winter in most countries was a key factor in cutting emissions in 2011, as the demand for fossil fuels for heating was lower than in previous years. The residential and commercial sector β largely outside the scope of the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS) β contributed most to lower emissions in the European Union. This is from your own article! Do you even read them? (3) Europe's CO2 emissions are not a significant part of the world's future rise in CO2 emissions. What you need are articles showing that China is stopping emissions. (4) Here, let's look at actual CO2 emissions. The program to reduce CO2 emissions began around the year 2000. Did it actually reduce CO2 emissions? No. Did it actually reduce the growth in CO2 emissions? Again no. Instead, CO2 emissions accelerated: In the above, I've added the black line showing the trend in CO2 emissions before 2000. The graph clearly shows that since y'all started getting countries to reduce their CO2 emissions exactly the opposite has happened. I took the above graph from an article that claimed that 2012 was a good year for CO2 emissions, because it's only a little higher than 2011! If you want to read the whole article, here it is:Could global carbon dioxide emissions be about to peak? That was the suggestion from some parts of the media yesterday after a new report revealed the increase in global carbon dioxide emissions had slowed in 2012. carbonbrief.org Now the above is a blog post. The actual study is published here:pbl.nl So no, you're not winning the war on CO2. CO2 is kicking your ass. Re: "A new RISJ study of climate change coverage in six countries suggests that newspapers in the UK and the US have given far more column space to the voices of climate sceptics than the press in Brazil, France, India and China. More than 80 per cent of the times that sceptical voices were included, they were in pieces in the UK and US press, according to the research. "; The article analyzes reporting as recent as 2010, LOL. Again, it's sadly out of date. It's not just US and UK now, skepticism has become very common in Germany and Australia. In general, alarmism continues to retreat. -- Carl