Consensus on Man-Made Global Warming is Facing Inconvenient Challenge

[Dr. Shane]

So, you've given up on debating the science, which is all that matters?

Romeny accepts global climate changes - which is good. The political issue becomes how we adjust political policy to balance out environmental issues with economic issues. We seem to have a lot more control over economic issues as one nation can do a lot regarding their own economic policy however regarding the environment, if the US and Europe make big changes that are not followed by Latin America and Asia, it will have little environmental impact.

[phkrause]

Good points Shane

[Bravus]

Actually, it would: the US emits something like 25% of all greenhouse gases in the world. If it made big changes, big changes would happen. Of course it would be ideal if every country in the world got on board, but if every country waits for every other country we'd wait forever. Australia (which is an even larger per capita emitter than the US) has moved, the European Union has moved, even China is looking at taking action. The US also has a big role to play as a global example and influencer.

[phkrause]

Agreed Bravus, and if the US led in this, I would imagine that most other nations would follow suit. Uhm, that's an interesting thought.

[Dr. Shane]

I don't believe that other nations will follow some sort of environmental leader. Even as things are now, we see many companies relocating from countries with somewhat strict environmental standards to countries with lesser standards. It is a global problem and has to be dealt with globally through treaties that punish companies that move to dodge environmental rules.

The fastest growing countries with the fastest growing economies are in the developing world. Those are the countries that pose the greatest threat to the world's development and yet are the least likely to enforce environmental rules. Yet we live in a global marketplace so environmental treaties need to include all developing nations and have economic consequences for lack of enforcement. Such consequences could range from complete sanctions to specific bans of specific products which are being produced in violation of such regulations.

[Bravus]

...and then there is the equity issue: our present very pleasant lifestyles have been built on the backs of fossil fuels, and it's harsh and unfair to say to a poor Chinese person 'sorry, wrong time in history, mate, you have to stay poor'.

Regulation is part of the solution, but new technology is the other part: a part too often ignored. A way of lifting living standards for all without polluting is the target, not (as is often claimed) lowering living standards.

[Dr. Shane]

it's harsh and unfair to say to a poor Chinese person 'sorry, wrong time in history, mate, you have to stay poor'.

The impact of fossil fuels was not fully realized until recent decades. So the fact that developed nations were built by using them shouldn't be held against them. The argument that we have been burning fossil fuels for 100 years so now we have to let developing countries burn them for 100 years is a very faulty position to take.

[Bravus]

Which is why I didn't take it.