Government report challenges reliance on voluntary action to cut global warming

While we're on the subject of global warming, when it comes to reducing the emission of greenhouse gases from industry -- meaning, for example, aluminum smelters, landfills, coal mines and large farms -- President Bush has put great stock in voluntary programs.

Not the way to go, according to the inspector general's office of Bush's own Environmental Protection Agency.

It is "unlikely" that voluntary programs would reduce more than 19% the greenhouse gas emissions that are projected for various industries in 2010, the inspector general said in a report on Bush's program.

"If EPA wishes to reduce GHG emissions beyond this point, it needs to consider additional policy options," the report said.

The study blamed the reluctance of industry to take part in a voluntary reduction program and unreliable data about claimed reductions for the failure of efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions from non-carbon sources such as motor vehicles and power plants.

-- James Gerstenzang

Photo: Sergei L. Loiko / Los Angeles Times

Comments

[Arthur E. Lemay]

It is astonishing that anyone can believe that the fear of global warming and the incredible propaganda foisted on us by the environmental lobby and by politicians who want more taxes for their favorite projects is actually working.

Somehow, people believe that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the source of all truth on this subject. This is hard to believe when you consider that the world has spent more than 40 billion dollars on researching man’s role in CO2 emissions -- and there not any evidence, none, that CO2 controls the climate. The IPCC has developed many climate models which have all predicted the same thing – that increasing CO2 concentrations makes the world warmer. None of their models, I repeat, none have ever made a correct prediction, and none predicted the stop of warming in 1998, and the subsequent cooling. Yet, the IPCC politicians say we should use the long range predictions of the models, even though the short range predictions are all wrong.

Now, evidently making incorrect predictions is overlooked by the press and does not register with the public. We have even more predictions like this, and now the Government is telling us that the US voluntary approach to CO2 reductions is inadequate and we should adopt controls like the rest of world has done. The Kyoto Protocols accepted by 170 countries, but only 37 countries are required to reduce the CO2 emissions by 7% to 8%. This has been very costly, has raised electricity and other energy prices, and, since 2005, the average Kyoto Protocol compliant country’s CO2 emissions have increased by double digits. America’s volunteer approach has kept the growth in single digits. So, now some Government bureaucrat has his numbers wrong, and he wants to replace a system which works with one which does not work. This is rank stupidity.

Most climate scientists believe that the climate is mostly controlled by the sun, and is predictable by counting sunspots which are highly correlated with the sun’s energy emissions. Galileo make drawings before 1610 of sunspots, and the classic climate prediction theory has worked since then, and it did predict the cooling trend since 1998.

So, we have a group using a theory which does not work, telling us to spend trillions of dollars on a solution which also does not work, to solve a problem which does not exist! Never have so many been duped by so few to get so much money for absolutely nothing.

We are listening to con men that can’t get their facts straight and tell such whopping lies that everyone believes it.