May 7 2008
http://timblair.net/
Terry Dunleavy considers New Zealand's fate should it pursue carbon
reduction:
New Zealand produces about 0.2 per cent of the world's man-made
production of CO2. Even if NZ totally eliminated CO2 emissions, the
difference would be to reduce the annual rate of increase in the
atmosphere by 0.2 per cent of 1.5ppm, equalling 0.003ppm which equals 3
parts per billion. This of course is a far lower amount than can even be
detected.
Are we seriously going to shatter our economy, restrict ourselves to a
fragile electricity system, cost every family in the land $1000 to $1500
per year in electricity expenses alone, seriously damage our agriculture
industry, etc. by trying to reduce New Zealand's minuscule CO2
contribution?
But it's worse than that. The Government's stated goal is to reduce our
CO2 emissions by 20 per cent. So if we were to succeed in this, and
thereby reduce New Zealand's 3 parts per billion contribution to 20 per
cent of this figure, the reduction in global CO2 arising from our action
would amount to 0.6 parts per billion per year.
Thus will the planet be saved.
--
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
"Consensus is neither a scientific fact nor important in science, but it
is very important in politics." Dr. Timothy Ball, Chairman of the
Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP.com), Former Professor Of
Climatology, University of Winnipeg
|
