It
is an indisputable fact that the earth’s climate is
constantly changing. Scientific data shows that the earth’s
temperature has been several degrees warmer - and colder -
than it is today. What the future holds is difficult to
predict in detail, but there will be cooler periods and warmer
period, as well as the inevitable floods, droughts and storms.
While humans have survived ice ages, there is no doubt that
warmer periods are easier.
There
are many theories as to why the climate changes, but most
agree that solar effects, such as sunspot activity and the
Sun’s magnetic fields, are major factors. In that context,
the influence of carbon dioxide and other so-called greenhouse
gases, is regarded as minor.
Data from
Britain
’s Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research shows
that over the last 100 years, there was an increase in the
earth’s temperature of around 0.4 degrees centigrade from
1920 to 1940, from 1940 to 1975 there was a cooling of about
0.2 degrees, and from 1975 to 1998 there was an increase of
about 0.5 degrees. This makes a total increase over the whole
20th century of 0.7 degrees.
From
1998 to the present time there has been no evidence of further
warming, which makes the recent plunge into the global warming
debate of our Prime Minister difficult to comprehend –
unless of course it is a calculated strategy to divert
attention away from other controversial domestic matters as
well as to boost popular support by jumping on the fashionable
environmental bandwagon.
Earlier
this month, Lord Nigel Lawson, a member of the House of Lords
and a former British Chancellor of the Exchequer, addressed
the issue of Climate Change in a lecture to the Centre for
Policy Studies entitled “The Economics and Politics of
Climate Change - An Appeal to Reason”. Lord Lawson is
delighted that his speech is being featured as the NZCPD guest
commentary this week and as it provides an excellent analysis
of this complex issue, I would urge you to read the full text.
In
his speech, Lord Lawson asks whether global warming is
actually occurring, if it is, why, and finally what should be
done about it?
It
is clear from the evidence that some modest warming of the
climate (0.7 degrees) has taken place over the last hundred
years, but whether it is a man-made as a result of carbon
emissions is debatable.
According
to Prof. Bob Carter of the James Cook University of
Queensland, in his article The Global Warming Emperor Has
No Clothes, The first period of warming between 1918 and
1940 took place “well prior to the greatest phase of world
industrialisation, and cooling occurred between 1940 and 1965
at precisely the time that human emissions were increasing at
their greatest rate” (to view the article and graphs of the
earth’s temperatures over the last 6 million years - click here
>>>).
The
cases often cited as evidence of global warming, including
extreme weather events such as Hurricane Katrina, the melting
of the Greenland ice cap, and rising sea levels, all have
alternative explanations: there were worse hurricanes than
Katrina back in 1900 well before industrialisation caused
increases in greenhouse gas emissions; while the edges of the
Greenland ice cap are melting, the centre is thickening; and,
although sea levels have been gradually rising with no sign of
acceleration, the total increase would be less than a quarter
of an inch per century.
The
real issue however is, if the climate is changing as the
scaremongers are claiming, what should we be doing about it?
The
Labour Government’s answer was to be at the front of the
queue to sign us up to the Kyoto Protocol, a complex carbon
credit trading mechanism which was supposed to force countries
to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide and other
greenhouse gases. But many countries have refused to sign up
to Kyoto: the USA will not sign because China, India and
Brazil have refused, and they have refused because they are
not prepared to turn their back on inexpensive carbon-based
energy, which has traditionally been used by developing
countries to achieve prosperity.
A
further flaw in the
Kyoto
approach is that as the price of carbon-based energy rises in
countries that have signed up to the Protocol,
energy-intensive industries will seek to relocate to those
countries which are not signatories where energy is still
cheap. The end result will be a global shift in carbon
emissions rather than a reduction.
One
of the consequences, of course, of this drive away from
plentiful, cheap energy sources like coal, is that nuclear
energy suddenly becomes more of an option since wind and solar
power are neither reliable nor efficient enough, and with the
Green movement blocking the construction of new
hydro-generation facilities, there are few options left.
In
his speech, Lord Lawson refers to the damage being inflicted
by ‘eco-fundamentalists’ who have embraced climate change
as a new religion, but in their fervor, care little about the
adverse impact of escalating energy costs on economies – and
citizens who may well find themselves priced out of energy
intensive life-saving technological advancements.
The
question of what we should do if the earth moves into a warmer
cycle remains. Surely the sensible answer is to adapt: sell
the holiday home on the Gold Coast in favour of one in the
Bay
of
Islands
, and start planting coconuts, bananas and pineapples! In
other words, take advantage of the situation because it may
not last.
In
August, the United Press International reported that the Head
of Space Research at the
Russian
Academy
of Sciences Astronomical Observatory is predicting a period of
global cooling in coming decades similar to a period known as
the ‘Little Ice Age’.During the last Little Ice Age in the 16th century, the
Baltic Sea
froze so hard that hotels were built on the ice for people
crossing the sea in coaches. The Little Ice Age is believed to
have contributed to the end of the Norse colony in
Greenland
, which was founded during an interval of much warmer weather.
These
predictions, which are based on the measurement of solar
emissions, indicate that the cooling will begin within a few
years and reach its peak between 2055 and 2060.
Asked
about the Kyoto Protocol and global warming, the scientist
Khabibullo Abdusamatov had this to say: "The
Kyoto
initiatives to save the planet from the greenhouse effect
should be put off until better times. The global temperature
maximum has been reached on Earth, and Earth's global
temperature will decline to a climatic minimum even without
the
Kyoto
protocol." (To view the news report click here>>>)
The poll this week asks:Do you believe there is sufficient scientific evidence
to justify New Zealand's support for the Kyoto Protocol?Click
here to vote >>>
Your comments and contributions are welcome. Send your comments here
>>>.
Opinions expressed are those of the contributors, and do not
necessarily reflect those of the editorial staff.
The NZCPR does not receive
any government funding or support from any political party and has no
party affiliations.