Why Trying To Slash Greenhouse Gasses Planet Wide To Fight Global Warming Isn't Going To Work
17 Nov, 2006 by	John Hawkins
One of the points I've tried to hammer home is that even if you think mankind is causing global warming, at present, there's no feasible way for us to cut greenhouse gas production enough to do anything about it.
The latest UN climate Talks show you exactly why that's the case:
"Global talks to widen a fight against climate change reached gridlock on their final day on Friday after scant progress overnight to encourage rich nations to help Africa.
The two weeks of talks of some 190 countries were meant to set out next steps to work out a stronger pact beyond 2012 to rein in emissions mainly from burning fossil fuels in power plants, factories and cars widely blamed for heating the planet.
After overnight talks, some 70 ministers agreed to encourage rich nations to fund emissions cuts in Africa, but remained deadlocked on the broader extension of the U.N.'s Kyoto Protocol for fighting warming beyond 2012.
"It's not a very strong statement that encourages (rich) countries — who are willing to do so — to consider initiatives including financial support," said Janos Pasztor, the U.N. climate body's coordinator of such funding, said of the overnight deal.
"Some will do it and some won't."
Under Kyoto rich states have contributed over $5 billion to clean energy projects in developing countries over 2 years. The money has largely bypassed Africa, and the new initiative is meant to cut investor risk by funding startup costs.
But talks had ground to a halt on setting out steps to extend the Kyoto Protocol, which some developed countries want linked to a review of the pact — too slow for some African countries.
….The Kyoto Protocol is supposed to be a tiny, first step towards solving climate change — the planet's top problem alongside conflict and poverty, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan told the Nairobi conference this week."
Kyoto is a "tiny, first step," huh? So, put another way, Kyoto in and of itself will have no significant impact on global warming. Well, since that's the case, why should the United States sink an estimated "$397 billion dollars annually" into Kyoto if it isn't going to accomplish anything?
Moreover, if Kyoto is a "tiny, first step," then what is the next step? Having everyone drive around in stone cars, using their feet like the Flintstones?
Here's the key problem the global warming fanatics never seem to address: even if you believe global warming is occurring and that it's caused by greenhouse gasses produced by man, there is currently no way to cut the amount of greenhouse gasses produced by man enough to make a difference.
In fact, the only two ways we could possibly cut the greenhouse gasses produced by man by a truly enormous amount (with our current technology) would either be to wipe out a significant portion of the earth's population (and I wouldn't be surprised at all if there's some greenie nutjob working on "Twelve Monkeys" style biological weapons to try to pull that off as we speak) or a wacky sounding geoengineering solution that we would probably be well advised not to even try until we have a better understanding of how our climate works.
So, at present, the practical way to deal with the issue is to continue to study the climate, continue to work on and promote non-greenhouse gas using technologies, and to spend some money on geoengineering solutions in case we need them a few decades down the road. But, these Kyoto style agreements are pointless and have no hope of producing a solution to the problem, that is, if we even have a problem.