Dedicated to the balanced discussion of global warming
carbon offset / trading greenhouse kyoto climate model Inconvenient Truth bio fuel ipcc Glacier

Administration pushes market-based plan for global warming

San Jose Mercury News – June 1, 2007

This is a difficult situation. I really don’t want to condemn having a carbon trading program but the reality is that what we have today is not well done. If we are going to trade emissions, it needs to be extremely verifiable, under penalty of law with huge financial loss, and that the trades actually reduce the pollution of the atmosphere.

I suggest that these programs be held to the same standard that the SEC runs. In fact, I see nothing wrong with the charter of the SEC being expanded to govern this type of effort. The trading of emissions should be held on the books of public companies and it would need to be proven that the trading partner really had something to trade. If, after audit by a 3rd party, it was found that the value of the trade was less than the company accounted for then they would have to pay a penalty.

Britain pulls plug on Als big climate change show

Times Online – June 3, 2007

This article concerns the concert to increase awareness of global warming called Live Earth.  The concert series is being planned by former Vice President Al Gore with as many as 12 concerts. The shows have been receiving a fair bit of criticism for their use of energy, which in itself is indicative of the entire movement.

Industry caught in carbon smokescreen

Financial Times – April 25, 2007

I hope that no one is surprised at this article. It seems like a constant reminder of human greed that someone will take a fairly good idea and create a scam to make money. It seems that no government is immune from corruption as we all read about scams, schemes, and shenanigans in virtually every country with nearly every government. Why would carbon trading be any different?

Companies and individuals rushing to go green have been spending millions on carbon credit projects that yield few if any environmental benefits.

Global Warming: Fact, Fiction and Political Endgame

Townhall.com – February 26, 2007

This is a commentary article about Al Gore, his recent accolades for “An Inconvenient Truth”, and some of the background science of global climate change.  It is a very good read and I encourage my readers to click through to the source article (especially since the title is quite close to the URL of my blog). 

It is interesting that the author tries to draw a correlation between the Academy Awards that Mr. Gore received and the timing of the IPCC report.  I don’t think that this is anything but coincidence and all of my research indicates that the two are not tied together.  We know that the Academy Awards are always held the same time of the year and it appears that the IPCC was always trying to put their release out at that time of the year.  It does not appear that Mr. Gore’s very well made documentary had anything to do with it.

Gore And Global Warming: Bring Your Skepticism

The Bulletin – February 28, 2007

This is a great article. The article discusses other potential causes of global warming than human action. It also takes a fairly cynical look at the politics of the money involved. If you have an open mind on global warming issues, this article is well worth your time.

Beyond the natural carbon cycle and greenhouse warming, there are some other serious causal explanations for global warming. Among the suspects are, of all things, the sun and its fellow stars.

The Carbon Folly

Newsweek – March 12, 2007 issue

An interesting discussion on the concept of trading emissions between governments and companies so that the world can make its goals of reducing CO2 emissions.  This is a great read if you believe that humans can change the climate by reducing CO2 output.

Al Gore: A responsible approach to solving this crisis would be to authorize the trading
of emissions … globally.

the value of carbon credits in circulation, now about $28 billion, will climb to $40 billion by 2010

The notion that emissions trading is going to make a significant dent in global warming is deeply flawed

…allowing polluters in the developed world to shift the burden of making cuts onto factories in the developing world