Tuesday, November 08, 2005
Kyoto to bring chaos to UK economy (says right wing think tank)
According to a new report from the pro-market think tank, International Council for Capital Formation (ICCF), the UK’s economy will be devastated if it attempts to meet its Kyoto targets.
Meeting its obligations will knock 1.1% off its economy by the mid-point in the target period, 2010.
This is terrible news.
What this means is that in June 2010 the UK economy will stand at just $2,026,240,000,000 – 14.8% higher than in 2005, instead of a paltry $2,045,850,000,000, just 13.7% higher.
If the UK economy is to reach the dizzy heights of that non-Kyoto scenario, UK residents will have to wait until another 4½ months beyond June, until mid-October. Clearly, this is unacceptable.
Clive Hamilton called this irrational obsession with economic expansion at all costs, a growth fetish.
This silly report from a rather obscure – and utterly right-leaning – think tank seems to be getting far more coverage than it deserves.
But the timing’s right; the Kyoto renegades are buoyed by the continued recalcitrant position of Australia and the US and UK Prime Minister Tony Blair’s has apparently weakened his – up till now – firm pro-Kyoto stance. A new climate change regime is on the horizon. One driven by altruism and sharing technology, not milestones.
While the UK public service buckles under the weight of government imposed targets, Blair obviously feels that any carbon emissions reduction regime doesn’t need them.
Instead, all that's required is a few weasel words like ‘commitment’ and ‘moving forwards’ and then we blame it all on those dam Chinese who all seem to think they have a right to own a fridge. Meanwhile, we demand energy to relay ourever-expanding backsides up an escalator because we are too lazy to walk.
Economics is accountancy without numbers. Plug in any assumption you like and you’ll get the answer you want. And never, never ask your theoretical model a question you don’t want to know the answer to, like what is the cost to economy of say, the Maldives, if greenhouse gas emissions are not curbed by 2010?
Meanwhile, the World Energy Outlook suggests that global energy demand will grow by 51% by 2030. If no inroads are made to reduce emissions (and lets face it, strong rhetoric will achieve very little), mitigating the greenhouse effect will start to become very costly indeed.
Kyoto to bring chaos to UK economy (says right wing think tank)
Posted by Living with Matilda at 7:58 PM
According to a new report from the pro-market think tank, International Council for Capital Formation (ICCF), the UK’s economy will be devastated if it attempts to meet its Kyoto targets.
Meeting its obligations will knock 1.1% off its economy by the mid-point in the target period, 2010.
This is terrible news.
What this means is that in June 2010 the UK economy will stand at just $2,026,240,000,000 – 14.8% higher than in 2005, instead of a paltry $2,045,850,000,000, just 13.7% higher.
If the UK economy is to reach the dizzy heights of that non-Kyoto scenario, UK residents will have to wait until another 4½ months beyond June, until mid-October. Clearly, this is unacceptable.
Clive Hamilton called this irrational obsession with economic expansion at all costs, a growth fetish.
This silly report from a rather obscure – and utterly right-leaning – think tank seems to be getting far more coverage than it deserves.
But the timing’s right; the Kyoto renegades are buoyed by the continued recalcitrant position of Australia and the US and UK Prime Minister Tony Blair’s has apparently weakened his – up till now – firm pro-Kyoto stance. A new climate change regime is on the horizon. One driven by altruism and sharing technology, not milestones.
While the UK public service buckles under the weight of government imposed targets, Blair obviously feels that any carbon emissions reduction regime doesn’t need them.
Instead, all that's required is a few weasel words like ‘commitment’ and ‘moving forwards’ and then we blame it all on those dam Chinese who all seem to think they have a right to own a fridge. Meanwhile, we demand energy to relay ourever-expanding backsides up an escalator because we are too lazy to walk.
Economics is accountancy without numbers. Plug in any assumption you like and you’ll get the answer you want. And never, never ask your theoretical model a question you don’t want to know the answer to, like what is the cost to economy of say, the Maldives, if greenhouse gas emissions are not curbed by 2010?
Meanwhile, the World Energy Outlook suggests that global energy demand will grow by 51% by 2030. If no inroads are made to reduce emissions (and lets face it, strong rhetoric will achieve very little), mitigating the greenhouse effect will start to become very costly indeed.
Posted by Living with Matilda at 7:58 PM
Disclaimer:
| I am employed by Brisbane City Council. All views expressed in this blog are my own and in no way reflect the views of my employer. |
Weasel Word(s) of the day:
From WeaselWords.com.au
Recent posts:
1 Comments:
Yeah, the same arguments are happening everywhere. The "economic" argument seems to be closely aligned with the global warming denial argument. Here's an item on the debate in NZ from RB's Hard News:
http://www.publicaddress.net/default,2247.sm
Post a Comment
<< Home