|
On February 16, the European Commission published a press release (IP/05/187), in which it welcomed the Kyoto Protocol's entry into force that day, as it "gives the interna-tional community its most powerful instrument yet to combat global climate change. In-dustrialized countries that have ratified the Protocol are legally obliged to meet their tar-gets for limiting or reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2012." The Protocol would, "also mark the beginning of a global carbon market, with links to the EU emission trad-ing scheme that began on January first. This is expected to stimulate investment in emissions-saving projects around the world which industrialized countries can use to help meet their targets. These instruments provide cost-effective ways to meet targets by using flexible mechanisms provided under the Protocol."
Commission President José Manuel Barroso declared, "It is imperative that we do all we can to save our planet for future generations, and indeed make it safer for us all today. The Kyoto Protocol is a first but crucial step in doing so. The Protocol's entry into force today sends a strong signal to business that we need new climate-friendly technolo-gies." Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas even added, "Combating climate change is not an option, it is a necessity. If global temperatures continue to rise, this will present a threat to our well being and to our economies. This is why the EU is working hard to meet its Kyoto targets for cutting emissions. But overwhelming scientific evi-dence suggests that we need to work harder and aim for deep emissions reductions worldwide. Kyoto is only a first step - the EU is ready to discuss further-reaching meas-ures for the post-2012 period and we urge the rest of the international community to en-gage in this discussion at the earliest opportunity."
The Kyoto Protocol is a protocol to the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), whose ultimate objective is to stabilize global greenhouse gas emissions at a level that would prevent "dangerous human-induced interference with the climate system." Under Kyoto, the EU-15 has committed to reduce its overall emissions of the six greenhouse gases controlled by the Protocol to 8% below the 1990 level by 2012. Each EU-15 Member State has an individual target set under a "burden-sharing" agreement. The rest of the EU-25 have individual reduction targets of 6% or 8%, except Cyprus and Malta which have no targets.
Commissioner Dimas hosted a reception on February 16th to celebrate the Protocol's taking effect. Invitees included the ambassadors of the 140 ratifying countries, Envi-ronment Minister Lucien Lux of the Luxembourg Presidency, the President and mem-bers of the European Parliament Environment Committee and representatives of indus-try and non-government organizations active in the climate change debate. Represen-tatives of CFACT Europe were sadly, not invited.
The EU-Commission's worries over global warming are of course, legitimate. Everyone shares these worries. It is by no means clear, however, whether the Commission should have hailed this highly controversial Protocol so enthusiastically. From the first discussions of global warming, until the conference of the American Geophysical Soci-ety a few days ago in San Francisco, countless leading scientists have opposed placing the blame on carbon dioxide which they view as vital and useful. For these scientists, CO2 and other so-called greenhouse gases are not to blame for global warming. They rather attribute any warming to a shift in the earth's orbit around the sun.
When a majority of scientists at each global climate conference chose not to adopt the models favored by the Greens, these conferences ended in disaster for the opponents of CO2. According to participants, the Kyoto conference was a "gigantic bazaar with endless haggling over CO2 reduction quotas." Indeed, unwilling delegates were even offered increases of this "climatic poison" in order to enlist their support. It was also ap-parent that permanently carving the name of a Japanese city into the Protocol's stone pleased the Japanese.
"Kyoto" was considered dead just a few months ago. Only Putin's eventual surrender enabled it to take effect. The EU-Commission's press release did not mention it at the time, but Russia caved in exchange for massive concessions by that same EU Com-mission. Hence the Protocol was born of political deals rather than sound scientific findings. The process culminated in an expensive worldwide promotion tour designed to convince industry-free island nations that it was in their interest to ratify the Protocol.
Stavros Dimas, the new Environment Commissioner obviously tries to emulate his predecessor, former Greenpeace activist Margot Wallstrom, when he mentions "over-whelming scientific evidence" as the premise for the Kyoto Protocol. Yet what does he base this on? In 1996, at the World Energy Conference in Tokyo even Professor Bert Bolin, Chairman of the "Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change" (IPCC), under pressure from many scientists admitted on record, "We have no evidence." I've often joked with friends that they can consider the IPCC's reports to be the holy scriptures of the Kyoto.
In 1998, more than 18,000 U.S. scientists signed a petition saying they see "no con-vincing scientific evidence" that human emissions of CO2, methane or other green-house gases are disrupting the earth's climate at present or in the foreseeable future. On the other hand, there is substantial scientific evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide has a positive impact on flora and fauna.
In reality, the Kyoto Protocol is just another step down the slippery slope towards new "Ecotaxes" designed to burden the industries of the ratifying countries under the excuse of "Saving the World". The result of such policies is easily predictable - bankruptcies and unemployment.
The defenders of "Kyoto" have meanwhile grown so used to manipulating the truth, that they are no longer even aware of obvious nonsense in their own publications. The EU press release not only declares every sovereign atoll to be a "country" in order to achieve the magic "140" signatories, but also claims that these 140 signatories repre-sent 80 percent of the world's population. To facilitate demonizing the USA, such non-signatories as China and India were conveniently left out.
|
|
