View Full Version : Climate, Global Warming & World Taxation

Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 03:01 PM
A few days ago, Sir Nicholas Stern presented his report to Senior Government Ministers on the implications for this country - and for the rest of the world - of "Global Warming". A long list of terrible predictions arising from this " man made phenomenon" was presented, together with arguments for wide and increasing general taxation in order to deal with these consequences.

It is clear that , apart from specific technical and environmental works within the country, much of the money would be allocated to industrial works in the third world "to assist them" in upgrading their own industrial base in order to reduce their increasing CO2 emissions.

So what do we think about this general taxation of the north to assist the south - given that India and China are most obviously making significant industrial advances already? Is the justification for taxing the north convincing.....or are there perhaps other reasons for our current governments to be considering increasing general taxation?

Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 07:40 PM
The planet has went through warm and cold periods before. They weren't a result of human activity then and I'm not sure they are now.

But then, I think we should move beyond fossil fuels because we can.

Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 09:05 PM
Over 30 years ago in junior high school, I was taught in social studies (not science) that the Earth's climate was cooling off. During the 70s there were some colder than average winters. Because of the nonsense I was taught when I was 14, I am reluctant to believe in global warming. The weather has been warmer over the last 20 years than it was in the 60s & 70s but weather fluctuations over time are normal. The climate around 1000 AD when the Norse settled in Greenland & Iceland was probably similar to what the Earth has experienced over the last twenty years. What human activity cause that global warming? Then around 1300 the climate entered a "Little Ice Age" lasting until about 1850. Since then it has been on a warming trend. There are many forces of nature beyond the control of man & the weather is one of them. If the climate is truely warming we will just have to adjust. For some counties like the Maldives or Bangladesh it could be a disaster but for others such as Canada it could be a blessing. Personally I will not be surprised if the climate is cooler in 30 years than it is today.

Thursday, November 2nd, 2006, 10:25 PM
update today:

Analysts here have now argued that the situation as already outlined requires even more capital investment than was expected in order to meet the costs of the plans so far proposed.

It is very hard to made sense of all these claims and counterclaims. It is even more difficult to see how some smaller countries ( guess who!) can make any significant changes in world CO2 level when various other major countries (eg. the US, Australia ,China ) are , for their own reasons, not on board! In fact , it would be fair to say that the entire exercise would prove to be pointless. Even so, it still really does look as though we shall be subjected to yet higher environmental taxes to pay for more and more imaginative eco-schemes.

Friday, November 3rd, 2006, 08:25 PM
I cannot resist commenting on the interesting news this evening of a large Pan African - Chinese Conference in China. The Chinese are very willing to help Africa --asking no questions about Africa's "progress " toward Democracy or Human Rights. These questions are considered quite irrelevant in the context of their joint national advancements! In fact, various African spokesmen made the point that Europeans were being arrogant with their interference and continual demandings & expectations.

So, they therefore look forward to increasing trade , selling their oil for industrial development. Not one word did I hear about the Emission of CO2 or global warming - this subject presumably being absent from the agendas! And yet, to labour the point, we will still be taxed all the same to assist the third world with their eco-friendly development.Is this right? Is this justified in the circumstances? Is America about the leap forward with similar assistance??

Tuesday, November 7th, 2006, 05:11 PM
The planet has went through warm and cold periods before. They weren't a result of human activity then and I'm not sure they are now.

But then, I think we should move beyond fossil fuels because we can.

I agree.

I don't believe there is enough proof that the current warming is 1) as big as some claim, 2) unique for our time and 3) caused by humans. Even if these were true, we still need to have a debate about what price we're ready to pay to make the huge adaptations required to combat these presumed climate changes.

Also, if we're sure the climate is changing, we should prepare for measures of adaptation, people might for instance not be able to live on small islands or in lowlands, but instead we might be able to colonize the Siberian tundra, etc.

We shouldn't spew out waste just because of this though, it's obvious that for instance car pollution in cities is a proven health hazard for people, and our industries must of course be heavily regulated to control poison from reaching the nature.

Have being interested in these issues for quite a while, I've collected alot of interesting links, here are a few recent ones:

The dodgy numbers behind the latest warming scare. (http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009182)
Björn Lomborg, OpinionJournal - Stern Review

Climate chaos? Don't believe it (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/05/nosplit/nwarm05.xml)
By Christopher Monckton, Sunday Telegraph

Chaotic world of climate truth (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6115644.stm)
By Mike Hulme - Director, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research

Kyoto protocol: Adapt or fry (http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn10035)
New Scientist

Wednesday, November 8th, 2006, 02:24 PM
The Science is clearly still argued about!

But even if it is agreed that CO2 is rising "out of control" as a direct result of man's over burning of Carbon-based fossil fuels, for a few smaller countries to cripple themselves with absurd levels of taxation (in order to "save the planet and help out the third world") will achieve next to nothing in terms of global CO2 levels. If America , India, China and whoever are not on board ( for whatever reason - they may also conclude that it is all pointless in reality) , then whatever sacrifice is made by the smaller nations ( eg Britain) will have no meaningful impact whatsoever! It would therefore seem to be an unhelpful course of action for such nations.

However I do agree that all nations should work to improve their own energy sources - and that clearly includes a greater research effort towards energy diversification.

Thursday, November 9th, 2006, 05:31 PM
The planet has went through warm and cold periods before. They weren't a result of human activity then and I'm not sure they are now.

This is actually contained in Enlil's article-link "Climate Chaos? Don't believe it". There are many research papers which indicate a significant warm period in the middle ages ( hence its name) after around the year 1000. The temperature increased for about 200 years and then slowly fell to levels significantly below the average. This could not have been man made or industrial.But there is evidence of interest. During the earlier warm period, the Vikings established thriving farms in Greenland but, as we know, when the conditions deteriorated, these became impossible to maintain. Significant warming and then cooling again - seemingly a natural phenomenon.Where the farms once were, there is now permafrost! These temperature variations were surely not man made but entirely natural, probably cyclic events.

Pity us if tax money is squandered because of misguided science.