Conferencia de Bali: occidente cae en la trampa climática

Por qué es una trampa?

The environmental left, centred in the UN, has achieved stunning success in building and pushing the climate change/sustain-ability bandwagon. They have done this first by funding, then hijacking, scientific research via the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. They have also promoted and allowed access to an ever-proliferating group of activist NGOs (Bali, significantly, is overrun by the non-elected «representatives» of scores of radical organizations, who have in turn forced similar numbers of industry representatives to follow them). NGOs have also had great success in pushing their alarmist message through a sympathetic media and thus –along with more direct lobbying–in achieving grossly disproportionate influence with democratic politicians. «Progressive» pols, meanwhile, have embraced environmental alarmism because it gives a much-needed boost to their flagging relevance.

Ahora las consecuencias:

The rapid and unexpected explosion of economic growth — and emissions — in China and India has created a wrinkle. The United States and Canada claim that the ballooning emissions of these prospective economic superpowers mean that they must be part of any «solution.» China and India, by contrast, assert –encouraged by their «poor» colleagues in the Third World bloc — that since this «problem» was created by the developed countries, the developed countries must deal with it.

Bali will see nothing but posturing and preening, «tough» negotiations, and an agreement to talk further, in yet more exotic locations. But we should remember that the object of the exercise is not to deal practically with the problems of poverty, or to realistically address the challenges of extreme weather, whether caused by humans or otherwise. Bjorn Lomborg has eloquently pointed out why Kyoto-style approaches represent a very poor return on investment, and why we would be much better to deal directly with the specific threats of drought, flooding, malaria or hurricane damage, and with the broader issue of how to promote development. But that criticism misses the real significance of Kyoto and KyoTwo. They are not about effectively addressing specific problems, they are about exploiting ignorance about climate science, and continuing to demonize capitalism, in order to make ecocrats feel good, make others feel bad, pad incomes, and expand travel schedules.

Democratic governments have no choice but to cater to the ignorance/alarm/hypocrisy engendered in their electorates. This catering in turn reflects greater or lesser degrees of cynicism, skepticism, or moralistic bloviation.

The Australian delegation was feted on the first day of Bali because the subcontinent’s new government chose at last to sign on to Kyoto, even though the agreement lay in ruins, and would have had virtually zero impact on the climate anyway. Canada’s Environment Minister John Baird — who must cope with the fact that his Liberal predecessors signed Kyoto without any plan or intention of fulfilling their obligations– must sing from the U.N. hymnbook while keeping a firm hand on the nation’s collective wallet. And preparing for the next meeting.

El dedo de Peter Foster sobre la llaga. Ahora, señores, a pagar.