THE NEXT ICE AGE - NOW!

Should we spend 50 trillion dollars to avoid one trillion dollars damage?
 __________________

1 Oct 09 – “The inconvenient truth is that there is no hope the UN climate change negotiations that start in Copenhagen on December 7 will deliver a new Kyoto treaty, with a global agreement on binding emissions targets,” says this article by Alan Wood in The Australian.

“Just as well, really, if we consider figures published in an article in The Washington Post, also on Monday, by Danish statistician and environmentalist Bjorn Lomborg.

“Well-known climate economist Richard Tol, a contributor to the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, estimates the global cost of emissions targets needed to keep the rise in global temperature to under the 2C limit suggested by the IPCC's work at $US40 trillion in 2100 to avoid expected climate damage costing $US1.1 trillion.

           As if that’s not folly enough, Lomborg thinks Tol's estimates are
           best-case outcomes.

“The last thing the world needs is a global trade war sparked by European attempts to bully the world into adopting its climate change policies, which are under attack in the EU itself, to shelter its industries from the economic damage its climate policies will impose.

“The looming failure at Copenhagen is a powerful argument against Australia rushing to pass the Rudd government's flawed emissions trading scheme…. For Australia, with an economic structure heavily dependent on cheap, carbon-based energy, to move ahead of the rest of the world is foolish.”

          Amen to that. Unless they purposely want to destroy their economy,
          I think it’s foolish for any country to establish an emissions trading scheme.
          Especially when CO2 is not causing global warming to begin with.

See entire article entitled “Climate Folly before failure”:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26147804-7583,00.html
Thanks to Linda Binutti for this link