As the major political parties shape up for an historic election, a new book to be published by Connor Court shows that the greenhouse policy initiatives to be debated in election are a waste of money, whether the science is right or not.
The book by Mark Lawson, a senior journalist on the Australian Financial Review and former science writer, takes a layperson’s tour through the science. But it also looks at the economic costs and benefits of cutting emissions, as well as the proposals for carbon trading schemes, international efforts to limit emissions and alternative energy projects.
The book’s conclusion from this tour is that efforts to cut emissions are a waste of time and money. The economic case for cutting emissions relies on morals, not on economics, and the major proposed means of cutting emissions, carbon trading and wind energy, have never been shown to be effective. To top it all off, an enforceable international agreement with strict limits on emissions is nothing more than a green fantasy. If any of the dire temperature projections issued by the IPCC are to be taken seriously then mitigation – preparing for rising seas and higher temperatures – is the only solution. For their own reasons the government and the green movement has never shown any interest in that approach.
But can we rely on the temperature projections? As the book also shows, despite many public statements by distinguished scientists, those much vaunted projections are a commercial forecasting exercise, not a scientific one at all. As a starting point the projections of the amounts of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere involves economics just as much as science, and there is evidence that those projections have been badly mishandled.
The main result of the global warming debate is to divert attention from the real climate issues, such as problems with land use and over fishing.
Book Release date: July 26th
