|
Climate consensus collapsing |
|
|
|
Written by John Wilson
|
|
Friday, July 03 2009, 8:30 PM |
President Obama’s cap and trade climate change legislation, the Clean Air Act, recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives, will be presented at the World Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in November 2009, as the U.S. contribution to a cleaner world.
Another less obvious reason for haste may be to avoid facing a collapsing climate change consensus. In recent months the voices of dissent have been rising sharply in Australia, New Zealand, Europe, Japan and the U.S.
In the case of Australia, its government is preparing to kill its own carbon trading legislation after failing to receive more proof from a silent Obama administration. In New Zealand, a new government’s first action was to suspend its weeks-old cap-and-trade system. In France, President Nicholas Sarkosy has nominated Claude Allegre, as minister of industry and innovation. Mr. Allegre, a geochemist, was one of the first scientists to champion the dangers of man-made global warming. He has since recanted. In Japan, Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an environmental physical chemist, who was a contributor to the UN’s Climate Report, proclaims man-made global warming is “the worst scientific scandal in history.” There are now, at least 700 scientists who disagree with the UN’s panel on climate change. The collapse of the so-called “consensus” on climate change is being driven by peer-reviewed research, questioning the status quo.
Governments around the world are becoming concerned about the huge cost of addressing a problem that may not exist. In the U.S. the Clean Air Act, will result in the largest transfer of wealth in recent history from consumers to corporations. It would seem that U.S. corporations have hijacked the environmental agenda from environmental groups, and since a number of these groups happily receive corporate funding, that’s probably no coincidence.
Canadian government officials have already warned the U.S. government not to use the Clean Air Act as a new tool for trade protectionism, but refuses to consider an independent policy based on a full range of scientific research. Instead, it will meekly follow the American model, regardless of the inevitable serious economic consequences for Canadians.
|
