IPCC Climatologist: "It would ruin the US economy and it wouldn’t save the climate either"

BILLINGS-  As debate over climate change legislation heats up on Capitol Hill, the Director of the University of Montana’s Climate Change Studies Program, and a co-author of a Nobel Prize winning report, says cap and trade legislation could ruin the US economy.

During a Wednesday morning interview with statewide radio talk show host Aaron Flint on “Voices of Montana,” Dr. Steve Running said any climate change solution needs to involve all nations.

“We have to have all the major nations in agreement on future progress,” said Running.

Running is a co-author of the Nobel Prize winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and founder of the Climate Change Studies program at the University of Montana.

He added, “If the US passed a cap and trade and other countries did not, it wouldn’t work.   It would ruin the US economy and it wouldn’t save the climate either. So this is a global issue, the global climate statistics are global in nature, global carbon emissions are global in nature, and we really have to have an international consensus of what to do. That is going to stretch our international diplomacy to its limit, there’s no doubt about that.”

Nonetheless, Running called on the United States to show leadership on the issue of addressing climate change, saying other countries will follow suit.

“Voices of Montana” is a Northern News Network talk show that airs statewide on more than a dozen radio stations each weekday morning.

CLICK TO LISTEN: Dr. Running on Cap and Trade legislation

71 thoughts on “IPCC Climatologist: "It would ruin the US economy and it wouldn’t save the climate either"

  1. Global governance is what this is about; limits on carbon use and emissions is but the first step.
    Next will come carbon-equivalent taxes on alternative energy sources.

  2. Cap & Trade absolutely will harm the economy. It also will feather the nests of Wall Street bankers and the various politico insiders. If something is going to be done, it is much better to have a corporate carbon tax with offsetting reductions to corporate income taxes rather than an easy to manipulate Cap & Trade scheme. Please contact your members in Congress.

  3. I think the headline is misleading, although I wish it were true. It should include the initial word “Unilateral” or some such qualifier.
    REPLY: I agree, and since the story is just a few minutes old, I’ve updated the headline, thanks for pointing it out. – A

  4. Typical liberal pinhead:
    1. We know other major countries are not going to do it.
    2. It’s going to bankrupt us.
    3. Let’s do it anyway and lead the lemmings off the cliff…

  5. Everyone joining in on the fun won’t save us from economic devastation, it will simply add more countries to the list of bankruptcy applications.
    Mark

  6. I should add, I wouldn’t doubt if the typical liberal pinhead doesn’t already know this. The “green movement” is bent on killing economic growth in order to save Gaia. The governments are on board because that gives them the power they so desparately crave.
    My thanks to Daniel and Ken for material used in this post. 😉
    Mark

  7. Could someone please tell me WHY we should believe the Chinese, if they went along with this stuff. You KNOW they are untrustworthy and would do whatever it took to get their economy ahead. Then there’s the Indians, more trustworthy, but not at all inclined to go along with our proposals. The whole thing is pointless.

  8. Um? Have we forgotten about the premise? Cap and Trade is great…assuming theer exists a scientific basis for the thing we’re Capping and Trading in the first place!!!
    Even if every country on Earth agreed to a C&T policy, that wouldn’t make the science correct.

  9. You know, he’s almost there, but it’s always amazing how a supposedly intelligent man can ignore the obvious. Yes, it will ruin this country – and it will ruin us whether we jump off the cliff with other countries or not!!!
    Not to mention that China and India have already announced that they’re not going for this nonsense, so this ship has already sailed.
    I suppose this is an improvement of sorts – even the supporters are no longer trying to argue that this will help the economy by creating mythical “green jobs.”

  10. Anthony failed to mention what Professor Running thinks about the current state of surface stations in the U.S. He states that the problem of bad stations was identified 20 years ago and has been fixed. Listen to the response yourself, a caller Lynn from Kalispell commented on the state of surface stations at 16:43 and Mr. Running gives his unfortunately hurried response. The mp3 is available at the following URL for one week only.
    http://archive.northernbroadcasting.com/nbs/BergInTheMorningSeg2-Wednesday.mp3
    REPLY: thanks for pointing that out – A

  11. Face it. Humankind’s destiny is to burn up all available fossil fuels. If we don’t do it the more populace parts of the world will be happy to sop up what we don’t want to buy.

  12. Well I still disagree with the headline. “Cap and trade would ruin the US economy.”
    Is more accurate; but then that is not what Professor Running said is it. Incidently I have had discussions with him about trees and global warming. He seems like a nice guy. Also my Oceanography CO2 guru at Scripps, in La Jolla, knows Steve Running and says he’s a good guy; also asked me to apologise for him, to Dr Running, for siccing me on to him (Running that is).
    If I was Running, I would be running from anything to do with the IPCC.
    REPLY: Well I changed it yet again, I was aiming for a short headline, so I just used the whole quote now. No more changes


  13. Ken Roberts (09:09:21) :

    Next will come carbon-equivalent taxes on alternative energy sources.

    A point I made a week or two back; there WILL be an ‘equality of result’ imposed on us through fees or open ‘taxation’ of any alternate energy sources one happens to employ (e.g. solar), because, this is not just about ‘carbon footprints’ BUT control of our very lives …
    .
    .
    .

  14. Ken Roberts (09:09:21) :

    Global governance is what this is about; limits on carbon use and emissions is but the first step.
    Next will come carbon-equivalent taxes on alternative energy sources.

    Carbon equivalence is why France is rated as a ‘high carbon’ country by the EU. Nuclear doesn’t count LOL
    DaveE.

  15. Yeah, what’s the big deal, anyway?
    This is what:
    Message from China to US… “What you worried about, What Me Worry?”.
    You have plenty of Territory to trade with China for more cheap goods and loans.

  16. And by the way, the site I referred to above is really bad, but the news articles on global climate in relation to Montana are often repeated at his site. When you visit websites such as the one above, it reminds you that ignorance and intelligence can live together in the oddest ways. It is what makes bigotry and ignorance appealing to many. It can sound and look intelligent. Something those of us who abhor bigotry and wish it gone would do well to remember.

  17. Montana is such a bell weather state. It sits in a climate zone that allows cold trends to show up there earlier than other places in the US. Notice how Arctic air invades the general area in a deep loop. Looking at trends across Montana is a place to look for early signs of climate trends that are coming our way in the lower 48.

  18. Quoting Ayn Rand from Atlas Shrugged:
    “Now you have placed modern industry, with its immense complexity of scientific precision, back into the power of unknowable demons- the unpredictable power of the arbitrary whims of hidden, ugly little bureaucrats. A farmer will not invest the effort of one summer if he’s unable to calculate his chances of a harvest. But you expect industrial giants-who plan in terms of decades, invest in terms of generations and undertake ninety-nine-year contracts-to continue to function and produce, not knowing what random caprice in the skull of what random official will descend upon them at what moment to demolish the whole of their effort.”

  19. Why would any country follow our lead when it’s to thier advantage to let us fall on our economic sword?
    The laughter around the roaring fireplaces in Beijing, Moscow, and other un-stupid capitals of the world cannot believe their good fortune. The US is proceeding to light itself on fire in protest. Yeah, we’ll show ’em.

  20. Nonetheless, Running called on the United States to show leadership on the issue of […fill in the blank…], saying other countries will follow suit.
    Because we all know that happens all the time. ;->
    Paul

  21. @Pamela Gray: “Montana is such a bell weather state…” Correct, but you might have meant “bellwether”, which can be defined as “a leading indicator”. However, I was assailed by mental images galore when I remembered that bellwether is a good old word from the old world meaning a castrated male sheep which is used to lead the flock. Now, of course this would not apply to the vast majority of Montana males, who are entire; but it could easily apply to the leading proponents of AGW.
    Sitting here 3 miles from Professor Running’s office, it’s very difficult to restrain myself from going there and spray-painting “Wether” on his office door.

  22. George E. Smith (09:39:41) :
    Of course he’s a “nice guy”.
    They all are.
    Thst doesn’t mean that they are not naive, misled, ignorant, stupid, confused, bewildered, etc.
    We do not have a sudden explosion of brilliant, talented, objective and dedicated climate scientists suddenly coming on to the market.
    We have an explosion of the naive, misled, ignorant, stupid, confused, bewildered, etc. (not to mention the devious, the corrupt, the exploiters, the dishonest, etc, who can clean up by jumping on any passing bandwagon).
    Steve Running has already thrown his stupid hat into the ring. He has no scientific credibililty and I see no point in featuring his outlandish views here.
    Thanks,
    Jack

  23. “…the global climate statistics are global in nature, global carbon emissions are global in nature…”
    I guess he earned his Ph.D. from the department of redundancy department. 🙂

  24. Burch seymour
    ” But you expect industrial giants-who plan in terms of decades, invest in terms of generations and undertake ninety-nine-year contracts-to continue to function and produce, not knowing what random caprice in the skull of what random official will descend upon them at what moment to demolish the whole of their effort.”
    And we are seeing the effects of uncertainty now. EON have put on hold their plan for a new coal fired power plant in Kent. BP pulled out of the London array windfarm project. Business can plan because they don’t know what that the rules that apply today will be the same tomorrow. Car producers don’t know what regulations will be foisted on them in the next round of horse trading: will it be a particular co2 emission target, will there be a subsidy for electric or hybrid? And it is all because policy makers are running around like headless chickens, throwing together one ill conceived plan after another.

  25. @Tim McHenry
    As an example of how well communist nations adhere to international treaties look no further than how the Soviet Union stuck to the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling.
    Once the deal was signed the Soviet whaling fleet proceeded to kill every single whale they could find and then lied about it.

  26. A couple hundred years ago, when the global temperatures were a little cooler, we had the Age of Reason. Today, we are immersed in the Age of Stupid Idealism and Utopian Dreams. We yern for world peace, global cooperation, the end of poverty and hunger; and we follow any pied piper who says he/she knows the way. It’s probably just a temperature thing. Right? Or the water? Do you think it might be something in the water?

  27. It should be kept in mind that the U.S. Senate’s 95 – 0 vote against Kyoto was based on the objection that the rules would not apply equally to every country.
    If the Senate were to vote for a treaty or any other agreement that gives other countries a free pass to pollute, while hobbling the ultra-clean U.S., then the Senate would be representing the citizens of those other countries over the citizens of the U.S.
    They should hear from us: click.
    Ask them: who do they represent?

  28. JamesInEH (09:33:47) :
    Anthony failed to mention what Professor Running thinks about the current state of surface stations in the U.S. He states that the problem of bad stations was identified 20 years ago and has been fixed.

    Are you sure he didn’t say “and the fix is in”?

  29. How is it that the proponents of cap and trade completely ignore he fact that emission control schemes for co2 have failed across the board ? Not only have they plunged much of the EU into economic turmoil – which has been exacerbated by the current crisis – but co2 emissions have actually increased over the last decade . It is mindless .

  30. The climate models predicted that Colorado ski seasons would get shorter and there would be less snow. Instead they have gotten longer with record snow. I have 18 inches out my window and it is 27 degrees. This has been the coldest October on record.
    The models demonstrably don’t work, so why are climatologists still paying attention to them?

  31. rbateman (09:52:21) :
    Yeah, what’s the big deal, anyway?
    This is what : Message from China to US… “What you worried about, What Me Worry?”. You have plenty of Territory to trade with China for more cheap goods and loans.

    Yes, we do.
    http://i38.tinypic.com/wv8ql4.jpg

  32. Gary Hladik (11:00:57) :
    “…the global climate statistics are global in nature, global carbon emissions are global in nature…”
    I guess he earned his Ph.D. from the department of redundancy department.
    VFF

  33. Nonetheless, Running called on the United States to show leadership on the issue of addressing climate change, saying other countries will follow suit.
    So all countries should ruin their economy without “saving climate”?
    This is funny.
    Saving private Ryan was better.

  34. Running’s formal background is in remote sensing. Any climate-related “knowledge” he has concerning climate science rubbed off on him from his association with the others on the Nobel team. He has, I think, been associated with the U. of Montana since his graduate school days.

  35. jlc (12:06:04) :
    Subtle. Like a kick to the head. 😉
    I’m sure that as others have said, Dr. Runner is a nice guy. However, it is small comfort when having ones throat cut to know the guy doing it is a nice guy doing it for the right reasons.
    DaveE.

  36. “‘We have to have all the major nations in agreement on future progress,” said Running.”
    AH yes, the old “it’ll work if we all do it together” trick. Just goes to show the statist view that the only good misery is shared misery.

  37. There is something very odd about the whole “global warming/climate change” issue. Since when have our political elites ever been far sighted about anything? They claim to be worried about future climate, and they encourage huge changes in our economic system (mostly tax increases) now to prevent theoretical cataclysm later. Meanwhile, these same politicians blithely spend trillions of taxpayer dollars on “stimulus” that is totally focused on the short-term and probably toxic long-term. I smell a rat. I think the real reason these politicos love the climate change issue is because it gives them cover to do what they love to do anyway: raise taxes and increase government control over our lives. This could also explain why liberals are much more likely than conservatives to think “global warming” is a problem we must solve.

  38. “That is going to stretch our international diplomacy to its limit, there’s no doubt about that.”
    Stretching international diplomacy to its limit will not be sensible. In the interest of the sustainable defense of civilization, a major [balanced & serene, not radical] rethink is in order; a lot is at stake, such as the environment [which is not going to be best-protected if an era of instability arises].

  39. It’s a claptrap framework for global socialism … I say they prove man made global warming is real. And furthermore, how much will be changed with trillions in new taxes.
    Anybody know how it’s actually possible to measure global temperature?

  40. Funny I thought the economy had already tanked and was still on the way down. Does he mean it might affect the recovery, or won’t he notice the real economy until he’s put out of a job too?
    Running is one of those responsible for showing us the satellite obs that the planet is actually greening, which is excellent work and certainly something I’d never have guessed from all the current academic hand-wringing about the Amazon. I wonder why he didn’t point this out to the rest of the IPCC who still seem to think that deforestation is responsible for 20% of the CO2 buildup. Based on models of course…. It’s actually quite funny to hear Stiglitz’s deforestation group writing about the need to set up a satellite system to observe the increasing deforestation when in fact Running has done that already and it shows net natural REforestation. Well, funny and sad at the same time.

  41. “”” tarpon (13:33:35) :
    It’s a claptrap framework for global socialism … I say they prove man made global warming is real. And furthermore, how much will be changed with trillions in new taxes.
    Anybody know how it’s actually possible to measure global temperature? “””
    Well it’s very simple and any 8th grade science student can tell you how to do it. It must be easy because Gaia does it all the time.
    Using the MKS system of Units; you place a thermometer in the middle of each 1 x 1 metre cell of the earth’s surface, and you read all of them (simultaneously) once per second for a year which is about pi x 10^7 seconds. Then you simply add up all of those temperature readings; divied by the number of seconds in a year (pi x 10^7) and divide by the surface area of the earth; and the result is the mean global temperature averaged over a full earth orbit of the sun. What could be easier than that.
    But Gaia is much more thorough than that crude method. She has a thermometer in each and every single molecule in the whole planet; nad she reads them so fast it would make your head spin.
    But that way; Gaia gets the correct mean global temperature always.
    So how many thermometers does Hansen have and does he really read each of them twice a day. Seems like Anthony throws some doubt on that score.
    But the more important question Tarpon, is what the blazes are you going to do with the information once you have it.
    Can you figure out which way the wind is blowing; is it a good time to go sailing; how about soaring in a glider; will tonight’s Newdelphia BBseries game be rained out; shopuld I invest in Potato futures ?
    Well if you can’t do any of those things who cares what the earth’s mean temperature is. Well we know that the mean temperature of the whole earth will fry your brains; so maybe we should restrict the question to some portion of the whole planet.
    Does anybody know what portion of the planet they are trying to measure; it certainly isn’t the surface. How many of Anthony’s owl boxes are sitting on the ground reading the surface temperature ? is it 60 inches or two metres above the surface ? Izzere a thermometer on the top of Mt Everest ? If so is that a surface temperature or the not so lower troposphere ?
    Who cares anyway ?

  42. Invest in the housing market, oops it tanked. invest in the oil market, wow i’m paying a lot in gas. invest in cap and trade market, now i’m paying a lot for gas, fuel for my house and a tax on my personal carbon foot print. Hell may freeze over sooner than you think.
    A nice thought, Snowbird ski resort has a nice new base of snow and more on the way. Very early for October and it cold as hell outside.
    Smile and get those snowboards ready.

  43. It is often stated by politicians that “if we lead, the other will follow”. This has been stated by both the Australian Government and the US who are both pushing Cap & Trace/ETS/CPRS or some other acronym for curtailing development.
    There are many things done first by governments that other countries do not copy. By what authority can our governments claim that being an early adopter in the AGW case will lead to other following in their footsteps?
    I fear that Australia and the US may look back after this debacle has calmed down and only see their own footsteps and no others.

  44. “”” Smokey (11:35:55) :
    It should be kept in mind that the U.S. Senate’s 95 – 0 vote against Kyoto was based on the objection that the rules would not apply equally to every country.
    If the Senate were to vote for a treaty or any other agreement that gives other countries a free pass to pollute, while hobbling the ultra-clean U.S., then the Senate would be representing the citizens of those other countries over the citizens of the U.S.
    They should hear from us: click.
    Ask them: who do they represent? “””
    To follow up on your point Smokey; if the US Senate voted 95 to zip to not endorse Al Gore’s signing of the Kyoto treaty; would incoming President George Bush be wise to press for US agreement to abide by Kyoto, given such total political opposition to that position, or did the President do the right thing by taking that not so subtle hint from the US Senate; and by inference from the US people to stay away from such an idiotic proposal.
    Enquiring minds want to know; has Obama come out in favor of ratifying Kyoto yet ?

  45. “”” jlc (11:00:42) :
    George E. Smith (09:39:41) :
    Of course he’s a “nice guy”.
    They all are.
    Thst doesn’t mean that they are not naive, misled, ignorant, stupid, confused, bewildered, etc. “””
    Well jlc, the context in which I ran into Professor Running was in relation to a highly publicised paper issued by a couple of groups of rocket scientists; one at Stanford University, and the eother At the Lawrence Livermore National Lavatory; home of Energy Secretary Steven Nobel Prize Chu.
    These two eminent groups issued a story that said that arboreal forests were a global warming cause, because they displace what would otherwise be snow fields; that raise the albedo of the earth; whereas arboreal forests look rather black to incoming solar energy (by design of the pine tree morphology). Ergo arboral forest are bad. This story made newspaper front page headlines, sometime in the last 48 months.
    Well in the first place, there is a reason for all the snow falling in those regions. It has some relationship to the fact that there is very little solar energy falling there anyway, so what albedo contribution there is from that snow is highly debatable. In any case snow that is more than about 24 hours old just isn’t as reflective as you would think; not much better than grass.
    Then there is the additional fact that the solar energy that is efficiently captured by those conical forests that look just like an anechoic chamber; generally is combined with CO2, to both remove said CO2, and replace it with a substance commonly referred to in the trade as “wood”. This prevents it being turned into waste “heat”
    This silliness on the part of these two august research establishments was called to task (publicly) by that very Professor Running in his guise as a Professor of Forestry or some such at the U of Montana.
    As a result (besides getting my attention), Running caused these two dummy factories to have to recall their silliness.
    And yes he is still a nice guy; and yes, he is somewhat astray himself; but probably salvageable.
    The peer pressure in Academia must be hard to resist, as it seems that too many emigres from those institutions immediately get religion and recant once they escape from that tyrany of the publish or perish envirinment.

  46. George E. Smith (14:49:09) :

    But Gaia is much more thorough than that crude method. She has a thermometer in each and every single molecule in the whole planet; nad she reads them so fast it would make your head spin.

    You forgot that there’s also an hygrometer at each & every point, so the total energy is also known. In fact, only Gaia knows the exact chemical composition of the atmosphere & every part of the ocean & land mass..
    DaveE.

  47. Pedantic, I know, but one has to try one’s best…
    “bell weather” should read “bell wether” which is a castrated ram, usually older than the rest of the flock, which knows its way around its “patch” and knows the routine. It thus is used to lead the flock and is identified to the shepherd by the bell around its neck. Experiments over the last 100 years or so seem to indicate that the older ewes make better bell wethers, but the shepherds are still considering the results.
    Whilst on the subject of animals, has anyone come across any scientific studies of their recent migratory behaviour? My own observations lead me to believe that the swallows and swifts have left England noticeably early and the hedgehogs in my garden have taken up residence in the hog-homes I have constructed and placed around my garden much earlier than hitherto in the last five years.

  48. George E. Smith (14:49:09) :
    But Gaia is much more thorough than that crude method. She has a thermometer in each and every single molecule in the whole planet; and she reads them so fast it would make your head spin.

    Of course, statistical thermodynamics says that “temperature” is not really defined for individual molecules, but rather is a property associated with large collections of atoms and molecules vibrating and (in the case of fluids) colliding with each other. But your point is well taken nonetheless…

  49. I’ve read Running’s article at another Site. He’s “still” thinks AGW is “real” and only that “all” the countries need to be involved to combat AGW. My thought is this, CO2 is “not” the problem. It’s more complex than that, even if ALL the countries were involved! Wow, the United States has to “sacrifice” it’s economy to get other Countries involved to do something that will not make any difference! Our “Dollar” is already devalued to the point of “no return”.

  50. TH (11:51:07) :
    The climate models predicted that Colorado ski seasons would get shorter and there would be less snow. Instead they have gotten longer with record snow. I have 18 inches out my window and it is 27 degrees. This has been the coldest October on record.

    B-b-but, TH, don’t ya know we’ve ALWAYS said Colorado ski seasons and the two square feet outside YOUR window would be the exceptions in a steadily heating world…. !!!! People go skiing in Colorado, we’ve always known that. 😉

  51. Stephen Brown
    “Whilst on the subject of animals, has anyone come across any scientific studies of their recent migratory behaviour?”
    Not very scientific, but niether are some of the “science” reports on CAGW I have read lately. I go to Scipps (SIO) nearly every day. I always spend one hour on a bench about 80′ above the ocean. Two weeks ago (about 6 to 7 weeks early) I statrted seeing the gray whales migrating south. I was seeing about 25 an hour.

  52. Stephen Brown (16:13:34) :
    and
    David (19:33:43)

    On the migration of animals bit…
    Here in Kabul, Afghanistan the swallows departed about 7 weeks earlier than last year.
    And many of the Kuchis (nomadic herders) who wintered in Kabul last year, headed south about three days before our first snowfall in the mountains to the west of town (16 September). Methinks nomadic herders are more in tune with Gaia than geeks sitting in front of computers.
    Last year the first snowfall visible from the city occurred on 31 October and the peaks had been snow free from the end of May. This year the last snow didn’t melt until 27 August, so we only had about 20 days without snow on the peaks vs about 150 days last year. Now the snow has worked its way down to the 3000m line…about 2.5 months earlier. It’s going to be a frigging cold winter here this year.

  53. “Nonetheless, Running called on the United States to show leadership on the issue of addressing climate change, saying other countries will follow suit.”
    I mean really. How can he possibly know this? He’s chanelling the Chinese dictatorship?
    Wishful thinking. Which means it is unscientific.
    The Warmers are in disarray. The only reason it’s not commonly understood that they are in disarray is because the press is also in disarray and is becoming increasingly embarrassed at the history of its own coverage on this issue. No one knows what to believe.
    Why? Because the science is unsettled and will continue to be unsettled for a long time.

  54. Yep that is very true the minute the environmental police go after me I will be homeless as well and have no roof under my head. I am sick of the fake environmental movements thinking they are helping planet earth when in reality they are helping the elite.

  55. Tim McHenry (09:25:11) :
    Could someone please tell me WHY we should believe the Chinese, if they went along with this stuff. You KNOW they are untrustworthy and would do whatever it took to get their economy ahead. Then there’s the Indians, more trustworthy, but not at all inclined to go along with our proposals. The whole thing is pointless.

    Not sure what you mean by untrustworthy. The Chinese want the same standard of living as you have. They will do whatever they need to do in order to obtain it. You can hardly call them “untrustworthy” because they choose not to follow the West into la la land.
    ” (…) but not at all inclined to go along with our proposals.
    The proposals are delusional. Why would anyone, not part of the delusion, go along. If the West wants to run around naked in the snow with a flower in it’s collective ass I’m sure the Chinese [rest of the world] will worry about our sanity and try to usher us inside but they will not join us.

  56. Well, you’ll be glad to know that the UK public don’t buy this scaremongering.
    There’s a poll going on at the Science Museum in London asking the public whether they believe global warming is a problem or not and apparently they don’t think it is. Botanist David Bellamy went in on Wednesday to cast his own vote and got the running state of the poll at that point.
    So it seems that, just like Christianity, the number of non-believers who may end up going to church to pay their tithes might be quite high….
    The question which remains is: why will they be going to the church in the first place?

  57. We need to first understand the root of the cap & trade scheme…
    This isn’t about the environment, it’s about money.
    ————–
    “No Longer Free Goods
    The foundation for today’s pollution futures market was laid by policymakers who believed that by extending property rights to environmental goods and making them sellable, new markets would be created.
    Instrumental in realizing the potential of pollution futures is Richard Sandor, currently the Chairman and CEO of the Chicago Climate Exchange.
    “Air and water are simply no longer the ‘free goods’ that economists once assumed,” Sandor said in a 1992 interview with the Wall Street Journal. “They must be redefined as property rights so they can be efficiently allocated.”
    At a 2005 Milken Institute Conference, Sandor said, “The right to use water or air is more valuable than food, and we can use the price system to allocate that right.”
    http://www.ejmagazine.com/2006a/futures.html

  58. It is crazy to think that if the US shows leadership, other countries will follow suit. I seem to remember a time not too long ago when the US was being attacked for unilateral action . . . but now it’s ok? It’s not ok and other countries will not follow suit. They have been waiting for a chance to get a leg up on the US, why squander it? Write your legislators and tell them you do not support this disastrous cap and trade legislation at http://tiny.cc/XFyUz.

  59. “”” Frank K. (17:24:57) :
    George E. Smith (14:49:09) :
    But Gaia is much more thorough than that crude method. She has a thermometer in each and every single molecule in the whole planet; and she reads them so fast it would make your head spin.

    Of course, statistical thermodynamics says that “temperature” is not really defined for individual molecules, but rather is a property associated with large collections of atoms and molecules vibrating and (in the case of fluids) colliding with each other. But your point is well taken nonetheless… “””
    Well Frank, I don’t think the problem is with a definition of temperature; that is quite clear. But in practice, because of the chaotic nature of the intermolecular collisions, which redistribute energy among the molecules, in practice you do have a distribution of energies, and although we can study the statistics of those distributions; we cannot so easily determine the energy of any single molecule; and of couse even if we could, it would immediately change, and according to Heisenberg; even in the attempt to measure it, we would change it.
    But of course Gaia does know what each one of those is, and she can correctly calculate the statistically significant summation of all of the components.
    But yes it keeps her busy and maybe she is overworked; which is why we try less arudous ways to get close to her real time processing.

  60. Yeah, this figures. I am actually in the climate change studies program, and have had the “honor” of having Dr. Running as my teacher for the introductory class, in the science portion (during which time, you guessed it, the other side was given NO time to voice their opinion). All it has been for the last semester is inane liberal spitting, constantly spinning everything in their favor. You want another great Runningism, as I call them? He said, basically, all people need to make is 20 thousand dollars a year to be happy. That is what he said. You can’t buy a home on that salary. I have to ask, how much does he make a year, cause he seems pretty happy trecking all over the world in those evil carbon-emitting airplanes to compalin to his equally insane collegues about how climate is going to destroy us all!

Comments are closed.