With the Democrats winning control of both the Senate and House of Representatives in the recent US elections, Senator Barbara Boxer will take over as chairman of the US Senate Environmental Public Works Committee and has pledged to introduce legislation to curb greenhouse gases. The legislation is likely to be modeled after a new California law that seeks to cut California’s emissions by 25 percent, dropping them to 1990 levels by 2020. Read the article at MSNBC by clicking here.
So the Democrats aren’t talking about signing Kyoto? Why not?
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Doesn’t that require the President sending the treaty to them for ratification? I believe it was signed by Clinton but never sent to the Senate for ratification because he knew it would not be. So if this is the case, GWB can just keep sitting on it.
Thats easy Jennifer, Democrats are all talk no action.
The inconvenient truth is that Al Gore buried Kyoto before it was born;
“Signing the Protocol, while an important step forward, imposes no obligations on the United States. The Protocol becomes binding only with the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate. As we have said before, we will not submit the Protocol for ratification without the meaningful participation of key developing countries in efforts to address climate change.”
http://www.clintonfoundation.org/legacy/111298-statement-by-the-vp-on-us-signing-of-the-kyoto-protocol.htm
Read what the Guardian has discovered, the neo-dems.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/midterms2006/story/0,,1944311,00.html
I’m much more interested in what rog says, not the Guardian on our behalf. Hiding behind “key developing countries” in our case simply means key customers for our cheap resources. Easy hey.
Getting rid of Inhofe, Barton and Rumsfeld from important positions all in the one week. Oh, yeah!! Finally, instead of silly arguments based on ideology rather than science, some positive action toward adaption and alleviation may be taken. Such action is popular too. Witness Arnie – takes strong measures AND increases his vote. A certain Australian treasurer is taking notice of that particular result, me thinks.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20744170-2,00.html
Jen,
The interesting thing about the US elections is that the voters ditched the republican greens and replaced them with Democrat conservatives.
I suspect the Democrats might have had a pyhrric victory.
It is also fast becoming obvious that so-called climate science is actually junk science.
Henry Bauer writing in the editorial of the latest Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 20, No 3, pp 349, points out that incompetent mathematics and statistics are rife in many publications. Climate Audit for example has exposed that in relation to the multiproxy reeconstruction of the temperature for the last 1000 years.
So I suspect the fiscally conservative neo-Dems as the Guardian seems to have labelled them might carry on the work of Inhofe and others.
I think it is early days for the US and any radical change in policy.
Well of course Climate Audit would. We all predicted it. I predict they’ll find fault with all AGW science as soon as it’s released. They’re smart guys.
Interestingly locally Costello canvassing “the possibility” of future carbon trading, while the Prime Minister is saying “everyone would have to be in”.
Luke,
What?
All of your climatic alarmists predicted that Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick would show the Mann et al statistical procedure to be wrong?
Of course you are aware that CO2 is an excellent conductor of heat and the Japanese car manufacturers are considering it again as a refridgerant for car air-cons.
And CO2 is also used to transfer heat from nuclear reactor cores.
But you are sure right they are smart guys – recognise BS at 100 paces.
re the loss of Greens;
“…Although the environmental and energy agenda will now be set by Democrats in the House, the ideological makeup of the House and the Senate on these issues has not changed as much as the magnitude of Republican losses would suggest,” said Ebell.
“Green Republicans were replaced by green Democrats, while conservative Republicans were mostly replaced by moderate Democrats,” Ebell said. “This means, most notably, that the prospects for enacting global warming legislation in the next Congress have not been significantly increased.”
http://www.cei.org/gencon/003,05598.cfm
Did I say smart guys Louis – I meant smartarse. And yes CO2 is a most interesting substance with many uses. Louis I think we’ve learned a long time ago that your mind is closed to anything you don’t wish to understand. AGW is one of those topics. We’ll have a little debate and you’ll melt away before any substantive discussion is reached.
Luke,
with your latest ad hominem you have excused yourself from further comment on this thread, (fears Davy Gam Esq. will take him to task for grammatical, and other, sins).
As the more direct of us would advise – F___ OFF.
Now Louis that’s not very nice. It’s interesting to note of course that the Hockey Stick is a very small part of a big story, but if Mann had used the recommended stats procedure he would have the same answer, which is now well corroborated by other studies. Climate Audit is basically a den of nihlists and denialists. Not very productive place to hang out.
Incidentally good to see RC taking Monckton down and reminding us of viticultural pursuits.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/11/english-vineyards-again/
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/11/cuckoo-science/
Getting rid of loopies like Inhofe will be a major benefit of having the Dems in control. The end of the Dark Ages may be in sight at last.
Luke,
Mann et ak used Factor Analysis to produce the temperature reconstruction for the last 1000 years. One factor was an isolated proxy of Bristle-cone pine tree ring data which they weighted more than any other factor in their analysis.
You seem not to understand anything of the underlying science supporting climate science – physics, chemisttry and geology. (apologies to the biological sciences but but this omission is purely and administraive issue).
The Dark Ages have always been characterised by the dominance of intolerant religion.
Louis don’t try multi-variate stats if you still have trouble with running means. And after our little discussion on oil clearly you have no understanding of geology or chemistry.
Luke,
running means? What having CES chase me for my asumed dole payments.? Is it a 100 Yard dash to be mean?
Or do you MEAN it to be a stationary MEAN?
As for oil, oyl be well advised not to invest in your reccommendations.
Strange that someone who has no instruction in geology presumes so much?
Yep…instruction is where it’s at. Louis, you’ve been instructed in climate science, have you not?
Nexus_6
I don’t interlocute with cowards behind noms de plumes.
Climate science, what modelling things which cannot be modelled?
No, never received instruction in stupidity, though I do recognise your mastery at it. PHd?
Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters are claiming a green victory in the senate elections citing enthusiastic eco-warriors wind farmer McNerney and organic farmer Tester as examples.
McNerny replaces big oiler Pombo.
LCV claim that 8 out of 9 candidates on its list of “Environmental Champions” were reelected whilst beating 9 out of 13 on its “Dirty Dozen” list (someone’s got a bit of a counting problem).
However elsewhere it is generally agreed that green issues were not significant and that the election was more about changing the status quo. In Nancy Pelosis’ seat the Rep candidate polled better than the Green Party.
“They think we are tree-huggers and granola eaters,” Mary Graves, 47, a self-described mainstream Democrat, said with a laugh. “I explain that I’m just tolerant and love diversity and having everyone get along and respect each other.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,,-6205077,00.html
rog continues. Downsizing an avalanche in the US is cat. one denial with not a drop of political nous.
“interlocute” means what?
Re: the Kyoto question,
There are moves in several quarters (even our own Treasurer now, and even supported by Jen) to introduce GHG permit trading systems with areas of overlap. If these moves continue, Kyoto will become one of a number of interacting trading schemes. Over future years the barriers will gradually be torn down as they have with currency exchanges and other trade. When enough nations or regions adopt such schemes, even WTO rules will be amended to favour countries with GHG policies – that will encourage the stragglers (developing countries) to get their butts into gear.
For overlapping GHG permit trade, the devil is still in the detail of course, but in such cases experience leads to learning and generally, system improvements, unless railroaded by narrow interest groups. Kyoto will be acknowledged as the important 1st step towards a broader trading system.
As a denizen of the much-maligned USA, the best I can say is that the Democrats must now beware of achieving what they wished for. Said the other way around, now that they have the power, they have the responsibility, and will have to live with whatever reputation results.
The Dems have been given a chance. A wrong turn, and the USA will go Republican for decades. With the result that public morality will come to so closely resemble the aspirations of Islam that you won’t see daylight between the Taliban and Christian fundamentalists. (You might see brief flashes of ignition between them, though.)
If you closely examine the aspirations of the Republican party and the Christian Right, and the Christian Left, you will see there’s a lot in common with Islam. That’s got to generate some uncomfortability. Like, competition over whose religion is more “pure” or “righteous.”
The Dems embrace Islam as “the religion of peace,” and therefore may become bedfellows with those who wear lumpy vests. We will see.
This would be fun if it wasn’t such nasty business.
On the matter of responsibility, not much of an act to live up to.
You’ve long been bedfellows with the ragheads Schiller. The only difference may which group you lie with, and the degree of public scrutiny and transparency.
‘may be’..
‘Tis true, the USA alliance with the House of Saud is uneasy at best. Saudi Arabia could easily purchase Texas and sell it to Venezuela with pocket change left over. The Gulf War would be in Saudi Arabia except for the fact that the Saudis keep the oil going.
No wonder that the USA and other countries are looking hard at biofuels. But here’s the odd turnabout: the Saudis, with more money than they can possibly spend without merely throwing it away, are the largest investors in USA biofuels projects. Heh. What a deal.
If there’s one thing that really annoys me, it’s people who use a complicated word in place of a perfectly exceptable simple one. It betrays a distinct lack of concise thought.
Now, back on topic. Pinxi has pretty much hit the nail on the head. Kyoto may not have been discussed for a number of reasons. Most likely, it’s just too soon after the election or, hopefully, there is a more comprehensive carbon trading scheme being formulated that the US will be part of. Time will tell.
…that should be acceptable….not exceptable.
“Saudis … are the largest investors in USA biofuels projects”
Take note of that. They have strategic market foresight from information on oil reserves that our ‘free’ markets lack.
You are confabulating again pinxiii, Saudis invest in biofuels therefore they must be……(insert relevant conspiracy theory)
You are blowing violent winds out yr arse again roggi
(insert relevant rect-ifying device)
I wish to complain about the infantile squabbling on this thread. It’s simple – if we don’t sign Kyoto the drought will go on forever.
It’s time that Phil carried out an intervention and hauled you back to those Unwanted Scientific Blog Comments Anonymous meetings
Besides which, the dems don’t quite have free reign to push thru any old legislation of their choosing, some of the dems are more industry than enviro. Despite the swing, in the current climate Kyoto would be political suicide for their next election chances
Definition of Infantilism:
“I wish to complain about the infantile squabbling on this thread. It’s simple – if we don’t sign Kyoto the drought will go on forever”.
This effort makes all the sense in the world to me… why wouldn’t we (The U.S.) want to curb greenhouse gases?
I don’t think Kyoto is needed to have sensible environmental policies, however the greater the sum of mankind’s effort to curb greenhouse gases is desirable. Remove the politics and it is possible.
One problem – the dominant greenhouse gas is water vapour.
Not CO2, and what effect CO2 is is purely theoretical, not evidence based.
Louis talking rubbish. He’s been told at least 100 times – presented with the evidence – fails/refuses to read. The old water vapour ruse eh?
can’t teach an old dog new tricks. you just kick them until they roll over
dog or dogged?