Global Warming Will Not Raise Sea Level

On September 24, Dr. Fred Singer, president of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, discussed the likelihood that sea level would rise due to global warming at a Cooler Heads Coalition science briefing for congressional staff and media.

Dr. Singer does not doubt that sea level has risen by about 18 cm over the last century. The most recent IPCC report finds that a little less than half of that rise can be accounted for by thermal expansion of the ocean and glacial melting. Moreover, an increase of ice accumulation over the Antarctic, as expected from warmer temperatures, reduces the rate of sea level rise. This leads Dr. Singer to conclude that most if not the entire sea level rise experienced over the last century is due to factors other than climate variations. Singer concludes that the rise is due to the long-term warming that began at the end of the Last Glacial Maximum.

Dr. Singer has also found that over shorter time scales there is an inverse relationship between global temperature and sea level rise. That is, as temperature increases sea levels fall. This is due to sea surface evaporation that transports moisture to the polar ice caps, expanding the amount of water locked up in ice at the poles. According to Dr. Singer, any warming that may occur due to human influences will slow down rather than speed up sea level rise over decades.

Over thousands of years, sea level will continue to rise at a rate of approximately 18 cm per year until the next ice age begins. The paper upon which Dr. Singers lecture was based can be found at www.sepp.org.

IPCC: Hedging Its Bets

Citing the futures unpredictability, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will not forecast a “best guess” scenario for greenhouse gas emissions for the next century. “There can be no best guess,” according to the draft special report released by the IPCC. “The future is inherently unpredictable and views will differ on which of the scenarios could be more likely.”

The report gives a range of possible CO2 emission scenarios from five times todays levels or 36.7 billion tons by 2100 to 4.3 billion tons, slightly lower than todays levels. There are 40 scenarios in all, based on four different sets of assumptions about population, economic growth and technological advances. The main forecasts, for each set of assumptions, range from 6 billion tons to 29 billion tons. The report “extends the range significantly towards higher emissions,” more so than the previous IPCC report (New Scientist, September 18, 1999).

Hurricane Floyd in the Press

Although Hurricane Floyd spawned its share of over-hyped press, the aftermath has been fairly balanced. The September 27, 1999 issues of three major newsmagazines, Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report all carried stories about Hurricane Floyd. Although each story raised the issue of global warming, they also discussed at length the fact that the current upswing in hurricane activity is due to natural, rather than manmade conditions.

The Time article claimed that global warming could increase ocean temperatures, leading to more intense hurricanes. Each one degree Fahrenheit rise in ocean temperature will increase hurricane wind speeds by 5 mph. This means that with global warming wind speeds could reach 200 mph. The North Atlantic is unusually warm this fall, and accounts for the peak size and strength reached by Floyd.

According to David Enfield, a researcher at the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory in Miami, there appears to be an upward trend in North Atlantic Ocean temperatures. “Like other oceanographers, Enfield believes this is the result of a natural climate shift, as opposed to human-induced global warming,” said Time.

According to Time, Roger Pielke, Jr., with the National Center for Atmospheric Research, says “its really not necessary to concoct ways to make hurricanes any more threatening than they already are. With or without global warming, there are going to be some whoppers in our future, and unlike Floyd, many of these will prove to be megadisasters. For the days when a big hurricane could make landfall in sparsely populated places are fast disappearingand that alone is cause enough for worry.”

All three magazines agree that global warming has little to do with current hurricane conditions. According to U.S. News & World Report, “Researchers do not yet know what might cause these long-term fluctuations, but they dont believe global warming is the culprit.” The Newsweek story discusses conditions under which hurricane activity could both increase or decrease in the event of global warming.

Perhaps most disappointing is a story that appeared in Time for Kids (September 24, 1999). The story treats Floyd as if it were as big as its pre-landfalling hype, referring to it as “Monstrous Hurricane Floyd, a 600-mile-wide superstorm.” The story noted that, “Many meterologists saw its incredible size and stength as proof that we are in an era of stronger and more frequent hurricane.” The article gives considerable more weight to theories that global warming is to blame than did its counterpart in Time for adults.

Pressure seems to be building for developed countries to forgive developing countries debt. The latest ploy has been the claim that pollution emitted by rich countries causes environmental damage to poor countries, constituting an obligation towards the poor countries. A new report by Christian Aid claims that the “carbon debt” by developed countries that is leading to global warming exceeds the financial debts of less developed countries. In fact, says the report, “heavily indebted poor countries” have credit of $612 billion when pollution is taken into account (The Independent, September 20, 1999).

Bush Attacks Kyoto

Those who are concerned about the adverse economic consequences of cutting energy use to prevent the dubious threat of manmade global warming were upset when presidential candidate George W. Bush said, “I believe there is global warming.” But during a September 1 campaign speech in West Des Moines, Iowa, Bush strongly criticized the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty that would require the U.S. to drastically cut energy use. “Its going to cost jobs,” Bush said. “I also dont appreciate the fact the United States bears the brunt of the goals of Kyoto while underdeveloped, developing nations are really excluded from cleaning up the environment.”

A Gore spokesman, Chris Lehane responded that “Its no surprise that the governor is parroting the right wings line on Kyoto. After all, hes carried the dirty water for some of Texass worst polluters for years.” He also claimed that “the last seven years have shown that choosing between the environment and jobs is false you can do both, as 19 million new jobs and the cleanest environment in a generation can attest” (Houston Chronicle, September 2, 1999).

In other election news, the Friends of the Earth political action committee announced its endorsement of former Senator Bill Bradley over Vice President Al Gore for the Democratic presidential nomination. FOE stated “both disillusionment with Gores environmental performance over the past seven years and recognition of Bradleys superior environmental credentials,” as justification for the endorsement. It also pointed out that Bradley had a higher environmental rating while in the Senate, as judged by the League of Conservation Voters, than did Gore, 85 to 66 percent (Washington Post, September 14, 1999).

Big Business Tries to Force the “Credit For Early Action” Issue

Credit for early action legislation that would give companies emission credits for voluntarily reducing greenhouse gas emissions have not made the splash that its sponsors and supporters had hoped for. Opposition from across the political spectrum has thwarted progress on this front. Now, those who would benefit most from such laws, namely big businesses, are seeking to force the issue.

At a September 13-14 conference on credits for early action sponsored by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, DuPont announced a plan to reduce voluntarily its greenhouse gas emissions by 65 percent below their 1990 levels by 2010. It will also use renewable energy to provide 10 percent of the energy it uses by 2010.

DuPonts vice president and chief operating officer Dennis Reilley, said, “Our bias should be for prompt and meaningful action where there is reasonable cause for concern. And there is no question in our minds about whether there is reasonable cause for concern” (BNA Daily Environment Report, September 14, 1999).

Businesses like DuPont are gaming the political process for economic gain, however. Its not surprising that supporters of credit for early action are big businesses that have the financial wherewithal and legal expertise to engage in early emission reductions and verification. By acquiring early credits, these companies can corner the market on emissions credits.

Companies who are unable to play the early action game will find themselves shouldering the burden of future Kyoto-style regulations. Those that do participate in early action will gain a huge competitive advantage over their smaller rivals (see CEIs On Point Policy Brief, “Early Action Crediting: Growing the Kyoto Lobby at Small Businesss Expense” at www.cei.org).

By taking such a step, DuPont will, in the event that Congress imposes Kyoto-style emissions limits, be able to claim that it deserves credit for what it has already done, thereby transferring the burden onto other businesses.

Condors Clash with Global Warming

For years we have been hearing the global warming will be the doom of endangered species. It now appears that global warming policy may be far more menacing. The National Audubon Society has launched a campaign to prevent construction of a wind energy project in northern Los Angeles County, historic habitat for the endangered California condor.

The wind farm project is part of an aggressive effort by the California state government to promote renewable energy. It awarded $7 million to the Houston-based Enron Wind Corp. for two wind farms. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service responded that the project would endanger the condor that has been reintroduced to the area at enormous cost to taxpayers. “It is hard to imagine a worse idea than putting a condor Cuisinart next door to critical condor habitat,” said Daniel P. Beard, the Audubon Societys senior vice president. The Audubon Society wants Congress to make wind farms within 10 miles of habitat of endangered birds ineligible for tax credits (Los Angeles Times, September 14, 1999).

El Nios Benefits Greater Than Its Costs

A lot of attention was devoted to the El Nio event of 1997-98. Most of the attention was focused on the negative impacts of El Nio. Droughts, floods, tornadoes and other severe weather events were attributed to the much maligned weather phenomenon. A new study appearing in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (September 1999) by climatologist Stanley Changnon, finds that El Nio was a net economic benefit to the U.S.

According to the report, the losses included 189 lives due to tornadoes, property and crop damages from storms, and losses to the winter recreation industry and snow removal industry due to the mild winter, as well as government relief costs. The benefits included 850 lives saved because of the mild winter, major savings in the use of natural gas and heating oil, record retail and real estate sales, fewer spring floods, record construction levels and savings in airline and highway transportation. El Nio also served to greatly suppress the number of Atlantic hurricanes, leading to zero losses as a result.

The estimated losses from El Nio for the U.S. amounted to about $4 billion while the benefits were about $19 billion, a net benefit of $15 billion. The accurate prediction of the 1997 El Nio by the Climate Prediction Center allowed for mitigation efforts, which also led to a decrease in potential losses.

“The Lost Squadron” Buried Deep in the Ice

Melting glaciers have been a major concern in the global warming debate, especially the major ice sheets, due to the potential devastating consequences of rising sea levels. The evidence about whether the ice sheets are growing or shrinking has been mixed, however. Scientists are still not sure how glaciers will respond to changes in temperature.

An interesting bit of evidence has come to light with the discovery of “The Lost Squadron,” as shown in a study by climatologist Robert Balling for the Greening Earth Society. In 1942, a squadron of eight airplanes was forced to land on Greenlands icecap due to bad weather. The planes were recently discovered buried under 268 feet of snow and ice.

The dynamics of Greenlands icecap are very complex. One study posited that 1 degree C of warming would increase the amount of ice on Greenland due to increased snowfall. Other studies have found, however, that Greenland has cooled. Temperature data from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that the area where the planes were landed has cooled 2.25 degrees F since 1942. One study found that the seven glaciers in the southern part of Greenland responded very differently to a fall in temperature. Yet another study showed that Greenlands mass ice balance increased between 1950 and 1991.

According to Balling, the discovery of “The Lost Squadron” tells us that “linking temperature trends to changes in ice packs involves a complicated set of processes that defy the simplistic notion that warming automatically yields a loss of mass over major ice sheets. Once again we learn that things in the real world are never so simple as they might seem. We should be skeptical of bold pronouncements permeating conventional wisdom about global warming” (www.greeningearthsociety.org).

Britains Birds Like Warming

Contrary to speculation by Green activists that global warming will be devastating to earths biodiversity, scientific studies have confirmed that in the past greater levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide and warmer temperatures were beneficial to earths biosphere. Further evidence to suggest that a warmer climate would help wildlife comes from the largest survey ever made of Britains common birds, conducted by the British Trust for Ornithology, the Joint Nature Conservation Committee and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds.

The survey found Britains “best-loved birds” are being helped by warmer weather. In Scotland, for example, species “which are experiencing a population boom outnumber those in decline by almost three to one,” reports The Scotsman (September 13, 1999). Fourteen of Scotlands species are experiencing population growth while just five are in decline. For the UK as a whole, thirty-three species are increasing their numbers while 20 are in decline.

Species that are in decline in England include mostly farmland birds, which are being hurt by the intensification of agriculture. In Scotland, however, farmland species are also doing well. According to David Noble of the British Trust for Ornithology, “It is obvious that some birds are doing better in Scotland, and that may be due to different farming practices there.”

“It is also possible climate change has allowed a northern expansion in the range of some birds, but that is only a theory,” said Noble. “More work is need on the causes of these trends.”

Etc.

  • Twelve confirmed cases of encephalitis, a form of yellow fever, and three deaths in New York have already sparked rampant speculation about a connection to global warming. An editorial by Mark L. Winston, a professor of biological sciences at Simon Fraser University, claims that global warming caused the outbreak. Hes just getting warmed up, however. According to Winston, global warming is bringing killer bees to the American Southwest; Fire ants from Argentina are now spread from California to Florida; and olive fruit flies from the Mediterranean were discovered in California last year (New York Times, September 11, 1999).

Winston mentions that man imported these pests to the American continent. How he implicates global warming is a mystery. Killer bees were imported to Brazil from Africa in the 1950s, for example. They “have been terrorizing South and Central America and are now spreading throughout the American Southwest,” says Winston. Its should be obvious that a newly introduced insect species could gradually and naturally expand its population and territory quite a bit over a 50-year time period. But Winston will have none of that, even though he doesnt present any evidence that the territorial expansion of these pests are temperature related in any way. He just asserts that its global warming related. The last time we checked, bees and ants and flies were surviving just fine in the cooler northern latitudes.

Energy Tax to Hurt Farmers

Britains proposed energy tax has come under fire from various sectors of the economy. Many industries have claimed that the levy would do serious harm, and have sought exemption from the tax. The latest economic sector to oppose the tax is agriculture.

According to the Country Landowners Association, the industry is in the midst of its worst recession in 60 years. An energy tax would threaten jobs and incomes and may well spell the end for many farm businesses. The association argues that the tax should not be imposed unless it is part of a European-wide global warming program. The association argues that this would protect British agriculture from unfair competition. “If a levy is required, it must be introduced on an EU-wide basis to safeguard UK economic interests by ensuring that all our major trading partners are subject to the same cost,” said Geoffrey Hopton, a regional director for the association.

Hopton also said that if introduced any surplus from the tax should be put towards a national insurance rebate to offset losses in farm income and other primary production income, and for the development of renewable energy sources (Birmingham Post, September 9, 1999).

Nuclear Power Needed Says IEA

If there is one thing that the Greens consider to be on par with global warming in terms of its danger to the environment it is nuclear power. Now the International Energy Agency, in a move sure to send the Greens into spasms, has told Switzerland, Finland and Poland that commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would prevent them from phasing out their nuclear power sectors.

In Switzerland, for example, nuclear power provides 40 percent of electricity. The Swiss government had decided to limit the operational lifetime of its nuclear plants in an attempt to move away from nuclear power. Both Finland and Poland seem to be moving to a greater commitment to nuclear power (Greenwire, September 9, 1999).

Is Weather Becoming More Extreme?

Those who would like to see massive cuts in energy use associate bad weather with global warming in an effort to promote their cause. One popular doomsayer, Ross Gelbspan, author of The Heat is On, recently wrote a letter to the New York Times (August 28, 1999) claiming that “The most likely cause of the intense downpour on Thursday in New York was global climate change.”

But is the weather really changing for the worse? An article in the USA Weekend (August 29, 1999) by two Weather Channel meteorologists, Colin Marquis and Stu Ostro, argues that the weather is pretty much the same as it has always been, only that our perceptions have changed.

One of the reasons why we may think the weather is wilder is the massive growth in media coverage. “Today, real-time multimedia communication means gripping images get beamed instantly from tornado alley into our living rooms or PCs. Its as if were all experiencing the bad weather, albeit vicariously,” say Marquis and Ostro.

The authors admit that it is getting warmer. But the change has been small, only 1 degree Fahrenheit this century. Moreover, they say, “it is important to remember that specific temperature records over land date back only about 120 years, and data over the oceans (70 percent of the globe) was quite sparse until about 25 years ago, when satellites became more versatile.” They go on to say, “precise measurements of temperature do not extend far into the past, a mere drop in the bucket when considering the realm of global climate change.”

The authors also believe that it is getting wetter. They cite a study by Tom Karl at the National Climate Data Center that found a 20 percent increase in heavy precipitation events for much of the U.S., Canada and Europe in the last century. (The increase may seem large but the paper actually found that there is only one additional day every two years that experiences rainfall of over 2 inches).

The number of land-falling hurricanes has fallen, according to the authors. There were 23 from 1940-69, but there have been only 14 since 1970. Damage from hurricanes has increased dramatically, however, from $36.8 billion from 1940-69 to $74.9 billion from 1970-96. This can be attributed entirely to the “nearly uninhibited growth continuing along the nations coasts.”

It is uncertain whether there has been an increase in tornadoes, say the authors. A dramatic increase in the number of reported tornadoes doesnt necessarily mean that there are more tornadoes. The authors believe that the numbers have increased due to more reporting, not more tornadoes. “Simply put,” they say, “there are more people to witness tornadoes.” Moreover, there are now storm chasers who were nearly nonexistent in the 1950s. There are literally hundreds of people who search out tornadoes and document them with palm-held camcorders.

Finally, Marquis and Ostro discuss the work of Richard Alley from Penn State University. He has shown “that global temperatures and precipitation in the last few thousand years have been as steady as any time during the last 100 millennia.” Long before man exerted any influence on the climate there were severe swings in both temperature and precipitation in periods as short as 10 years. “This evidence raises an interesting and provocative idea,” say Marquis and Ostro: “Perhaps wilder weather is actually more typical than benign weather. Whether humans are contributing to climate change or not, maybe the pendulum is beginning to swing back toward the wild side.”

More Benefits of CO2

We all learned in grade school that plants need CO2 to survive. Scientific research has confirmed this many times over. A new study by the Greening Earth Society argues that to feed the earths growing human population, CO2 must continue to increase. According to the authors, Keith and Craig Idso, at the Center for Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, to meet the dietary demands of the projected world population of 8.9 billion people by 2050, we will need to depend on both enhanced crop production technologies as well as enhanced ambient CO2 levels. The study can be found at www.greeningearthsociety.org.

The Clinton/Gore Administration claims that through the development of energy efficient technologies we can meet our Kyoto targets at little cost. A new report by the Mobil Corporation, however, argues that economic growth in the developing countries will overwhelm any emission reductions that may be made through technology development.

New advances in technology will be helpful in reducing energy emissions, says the report. But even if those technologies are implemented in both the developed and developing countries it will still be impossible to meet the Kyoto targets. The implementation of hybrid electric and fuel-cell vehicles, for example, could reduce developed country emissions to 1990 levels. Implementing the same technology in the developing countries would reduce their emissions by 8 billion tons per year by 2030. “Still,” says the report, “that represents less than 20 percent of the worldwide total for the year.”

“Sheer growth in developing countries simply overwhelms the emissions reductions that countries can achieve with advanced technology,” said Michael Ramage, chief technology officer at Mobil. “And by the end of the 21st century, developing countries are projected to contribute up to 80 percent of the worlds CO2 emissions,” he said (Octane Week, August 30, 1999).

Mounting Evidence Points to Sun

The sun continues to get increasing attention and study as scientists struggle to determine the causes behind climate change. One of the top scientists studying the suns influence on the climate is Dr. Sallie Baliunas, an astrophysicist with the George C. Marshall Institute and deputy director of Mount Wilson Observatory. In an article in the Wall Street Journal (August 5, 1999), Dr. Baliunas discusses the suns role in global warming.

Baliunas points out that computer models show that the climate should have risen by about 1 degree C over the last 100 years, but that the actual temperature rise has been only half that amount. Most of the rise occurred prior to 1940, but 80 percent of the manmade carbon dioxide was emitted into the air after 1940, making the carbon dioxide-global warming link tenuous at best.

A better explanation for the observed warming is changes in the suns brightness. The sun experiences magnetic cycles that last 22 years, during which the sun reaches peak brightness and then swings back to a dimmer state. Baliunas also points out that, “The length of the magnetic cycle is closely related to its amplitude; thus the sun should be brightest when the sunspot cycle is short.”

According to Baliunas, “Changes in the length of the magnetic cycle and in Northern Hemisphere land temperatures are closely correlated over three centuries.” She also argues that if the data are correct, “Changes in the sunspot cycle would explain average temperature change of about 0.5 degrees C in the past 100 years.”

Finally, Baliunas explains that the highly accurate satellite temperature data fail to show any warming over the last 20 years. Some scientists claim that the global warming that should have occurred, according to climate model forecasts, is being offset by industrial emissions of aerosols which cool the climate. But, says Baliunas, nearly all aerosols are emitted in the Northern Hemisphere, “leaving the Southern Hemispheres air free to rise with increasing carbon dioxide.” But so far there has been no temperature increase in the Southern Hemisphere.

Baliunas concludes that, “Introducing the suns impact in the models has shown that the human effects on temperature are much smaller than first projected, and perhaps insignificant compared with natural temperature changes.” A transcript of Dr. Baliunass Cooler Heads science briefing can be found at www.cei.org.

Chaotic Weather Sans Global Warming

Much has been made of severe weather phenomena of late. Anything that falls outside the realm of pleasant, benign weather is blamed on global warming. A recent news story on NBC News at Sunrise (August 12, 1999) even raised the possibility that the tornado that hit Salt Lake City was linked to climate change.

“With each of the freak and often deadly weather events this year the question keeps coming up, is our climate changing permanently in frightening ways?” asked reporter Robert Bazell. “Almost every weather scientist will say that no single event can be tied to overall climate change,” said Bazell. “But the earth is getting warmer, about one degree warmer since the beginning of the century.”

And what does this prove? Absolutely nothing! First, U.S. temperatures have remained flat over the last 80 years. Blaming weather events in the U.S. on warming on a global scale is just plain silly. Second, even if the “freak” weather events in the U.S. could be linked to higher global temperatures, that wouldnt explain this summers weather events. Summer global temperatures this year have been below normal, according to satellite temperature measurements.

Third, highlighting record-breaking weather events exhibits a profound ignorance of statistics. Extreme weather is a statistical certainty. As pointed out on a global warming website at users.erols.com/dhoyt1/annex12.htm, “The probability of breaking a weather record is equal to 1/n where n is the number of years for which measurements exist.” This simple equation means that on an average day 2 million square miles of the earths surface will experience weather that breaks a 100-year-old record.

Finally, at a convention of the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics in Birmingham, England, climate modelers Barrie Hunt and Anthony Hirst with the Mebourne-based Division of Atmospheric Research of Australias national research organization, revealed the results of a new climate model.

What they found was that even with stable CO2 levels the climate system is very chaotic. “Fifty percent of the globe seems to have a 10-year drying or wetting sequence within a 1000-year period,” said Hunt. As reported in the New Scientist (August 7, 1999), the model shows that “Some regions could suddenly be seared by intense heat and drought, or inundated by rain, for the best part of 30 years.”

So Whats Causing this Summers High Temperatures and Drought?

This years summer weather has been a major topic of discussion in the national press. Heat waves and drought conditions have certainly been unpleasant this year, but they are hardly the stuff of apocalyptic dimensions, and it certainly isnt because of global warming. According to U.S. News & World Report (August 9, 1999), “Those who deal with the global climate seem more certain that the summer heat and even the years drought, are not evidence of a profound change” in the climate system.

“This summer, weve had more than our fair share of heat waves,” says Ed OLenic, a meteorologist for the National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center. Other than “a persistent pattern of high pressure stuck over the middle part of the country,” scientists arent sure of the cause. “The fact that its hot for a week has nothing at all to do with global warming, which would be measured over decades, not days,” says National Weather Service meteorologist Richard Tinker.

The article states, “The total U.S. land area currently under drought is not in itself unusual; every year, about 10 to 15 percent of the country faces extremely dry conditions.” Its the pattern of drought that is unusual. The Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states almost never experiences severe drought conditions. Its shaping up to be the driest year in 100 years for those states.

La Nia is believed to be at least partially responsible. Even though La Nia usually causes drought in the Southeast rather than the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic, this year could be an exception. “We dont have enough long-term data on either El Nio or La Nia,” says OLenic. “Whats happening this summer may simply be a natural variation weve never seen before.”

Another article from the Environmental News Network (August 11, 1999) quotes Charles H.V. Ebert a professor at the State University at Buffalo, as saying that, “No, its (the drought) not global warming That could be occurring as well, of course, but based on 100,000 years of geological evidence, we just seem to be going through a warm phase of our climatology. He also argued that “Media attention combined with our poor memories of past weather, tend to generate unjustified alarm for our climatic future (www.enn.com/news).

Economic Growth and Energy Use De-linked?

The Worldwatch Institute recently put out a press release (widely reported as a study by the press) claiming that a recent decline in worldwide carbon dioxide emissions, amidst economic growth, shows that economic growth is no longer dependent on increasing energy use. Worldwatch Institutes numbers, based on figures from BP Amoco, show that worldwide carbon emissions fell by 0.5 percent. U.S. emissions rose only 0.4 percent even though the nations economy grew by 4 percent.

This, according to Worldwatch, proves that complying with the Kyoto Protocol will be much easier than claimed by treaty opponents. Of course if their claims are true it could also suggest that the Kyoto Protocol is unnecessary. A closer look shows a story quite different from the one given by Worldwatch. As pointed out in the World Climate Report, “Worldwatch/BP found dramatically reduced emissions in China, Japan, and Russia, with a smaller reduction in the European Union. What did these nations have in common in 1998? How about lowered growth, recession, depression, and stagnation, respectively?”

WCR also points out that due to the El Nio induced mild winter there was a 15 percent decrease “in the use of heating energy, which normally eats up $50 billion in fossil fuel” (www.greeningearthsociety.com).

Aggressive Global Warming Policy Would Create Jobs

A new study commissioned by the World Wildlife Foundation claims that aggressive policies to cut energy emissions “would spur substantial job and economic growth throughout the United States.” Cutting energy use would save the nation $43 billion per year and create more than 870,000 new jobs by 2010, according to the report.

“The results,” says the report, “come from a mix of policies designed to drive innovation in energy resources and technology, including: incentives for efficient vehicles and equipment; elimination of regulatory impediments; new efficiency standards for buildings, cars and other gear; enhanced R&D; and improvements in land-use and infrastructure. The measures also entail tax reform and reductions in subsidies to polluters.”

The benefits stem from massive reductions in energy use, which WWF terms as savings, and “sharp increases in renewable energy including wind, solar and biofuels made from plants, as well as a carbon cap that would yield a significant reduction in the use of highly polluting coal.”

The Global Climate Coalitions executive director Glenn Kelly responded, “They have one-upped the Administration study that economists called wildly optimistic.” Green activists like the WWF are “producing some very amusing economic analyses these days,” said Kelly. “No where on Earth can you find the kind of magic dust that produces estimates like these.”

There is a glaring error in WWFs claims that these types of policies can lead to increased efficiency and economic savings. Job loss in an industry is often a sign of increased efficiency. Two hundred years ago nearly the entire U.S. population was employed in agriculture. Now the percentage is between 2 and 3 percent. That is due to a massive increase in productive efficiency.

WWFs style of job creation would most likely occur as a result of moving from the use of efficient fossil fuels to inefficient renewables. While jobs would be created the cost would be tremendous. The study can be obtained at www.panda.org.

Clintons Biomass Program

In an obvious attempt to buy support from farmers for its global warming policies, the Clinton Administration has unveiled its latest scheme to reduce energy emissions. On August 12 President Clinton issued an executive order calling for an increase in the use of biomass to produce energy. The executive order sets a goal of tripling the use of biomass for energy generation in various industries by 2010.

The administration is claiming that the new executive order will result in $15 to $20 billion in new farm income by 2010 as a result of increasing the use of farm products as a fuel source. In a speech announcing the new plan President Clinton said, “One hundred years from now, people will look back on this time and compare it to the time when Mr. Burton (a chemist who launched the modern petrochemical industry) figured out how to get more out of every petroleum molecule if we do our jobs.” Its far more likely that this will be remembered like all other government energy projects: a massive boondoggle wasting billions of hard-earned tax dollars (New York Times, August 12, 1999).

Airline Industry: Rushing to Appease

The British aviation industry is running scared due to the possibility of being taxed for using energy. According to Charles Miller, policy director of the British Air Transport Association, “A tax is not staring us in the face. But it is the option we are most concerned about. It is the solution that has been mooted more than others.” In an attempt to head off a carbon tax the industry is putting forth a proposal in which the airline industry would voluntarily agree to increase fuel efficiency by 23 percent by 2010 (Financial Times (London), August 14, 1999).