Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (8) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: jck101 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 971  
Subject: US under Bush better than EU on GW emissions Date: 12/18/2006 1:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
How do you reduce CO2 output less than the US under GWB? Its amazing how we go on and on about European models for stuff like Dutch wind farms, German solar program, yet it doesn't produce results better than the business as usual in the US. Data apparently doesn't include new EU countries.

An editorial in today's WSJ (for subscribers only) adds some interesting statistics to this picture. From 1990-1995 and 1995-2000, the growth of carbon dioxide emissions in the U.S. was significantly greater than in the E.U. Since 2000, however, this has changed, as illustrated below.

U.S. E.U.

1990-1995 6.4% -2.2%
1995-2000 10.1% 2.2%
2000-2004 2.1% 4.5%


http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2006_12_17-2006_12_23.shtml#1166449696
Print the post Back To Top
Author: BenSolar Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 947 of 971
Subject: Re: US under Bush better than EU on GW emissions Date: 12/18/2006 2:22 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
US EU
2000-2004 2.1% 4.5%


Picking a 4 year period that includes a US recession and the 911 attacks, then claiming our 'business as usual' resulted in lower CO2 growth than Europe seems a bit disingenuous.

B.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jck101 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 948 of 971
Subject: Re: US under Bush better than EU on GW emissions Date: 12/18/2006 4:06 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Picking a 4 year period that includes a US recession and the 911 attacks, then claiming our 'business as usual' resulted in lower CO2 growth than Europe seems a bit disingenuous.

By business as usual I meant that the US didn't pretend to be working towards limiting CO2. Working further to the claim of my original statement was US GDP growth 2000-2004 was 2.5%, EU for the same period was 1.4%. If anything the EU should have had the advantage regarding lower CO2 emissions due to lower growth, but in fact they had both lower growth and higher emissions.


Print the post Back To Top
Author: BenSolar Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 949 of 971
Subject: Re: US under Bush better than EU on GW emissions Date: 12/18/2006 4:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Working further to the claim of my original statement was US GDP growth 2000-2004 was 2.5%, EU for the same period was 1.4%. If anything the EU should have had the advantage regarding lower CO2 emissions due to lower growth, but in fact they had both lower growth and higher emissions.

Good point. I'd assumed that they grew more, given our recession.

B.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Sebb Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 952 of 971
Subject: Re: US under Bush better than EU on GW emissions Date: 12/19/2006 10:49 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
This is severe cherry-picking of data (as the Op Ed page of the WSJ is wont to do on this subject). Since 1990 (the Kyoto baseline) the US has increased CO2 emissions by *20%* :

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggrpt/carbon.html

That's on top of a baseline that was already something like 5x the world's average (per head). At least the WSJ is finally (implicitly) accepting that reducing CO2 is a good thing, although they point to a reduction in growth for their favorite 4 year period, rather than an actual reduction in emissions.
What the WSJ doesn't say is whether they think it's therefore OK for the US to sign up for Kyoto because the US's retarded approach to energy management and global warming is somehow so naturally superior to Europe's that it will create superior reductions in CO2 going forwards. If they are not happy with that, why not?

Sebb

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jck101 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 953 of 971
Subject: Re: US under Bush better than EU on GW emissions Date: 12/19/2006 11:14 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
This is severe cherry-picking of data (as the Op Ed page of the WSJ is wont to do on this subject). Since 1990 (the Kyoto baseline) the US has increased CO2 emissions by *20%*

That data is actually in the WSJ article, I'm the one doing the cherry picking because I wanted to make a point regarding EU CO2 policies vs Bush CO2 policies. Of course I could have made the point about Clinton and Gore vs. Bush and Cheney where again the emissions are much less under Bush, even if you take the difference in the economy into account. I chose to give Clinton a pass though due to the fact that people were really taking cutting CO2 emissions seriously at least until Kyoto was brought up and maybe not until around when was ratified, so I decided that 2000 was a decent year with enough time to get EU to have all their ducks in a row and up to date policy.

If I was the EU I'd have to look at what I'm doing and would probably come to the understanding that something is not working and policies need to change. If I was the US, I wouldn't follow the EU's lead in this, I would go full bore investing in ethanol instead, as that is clearly the way. Kidding, but you know what I'm saying. A couple more years probably need to pass before we can evaluate EU's carbon exchange market to see how well it is doing too.

What the WSJ doesn't say is whether they think it's therefore OK for the US to sign up for Kyoto because the US's retarded approach to energy management and global warming is somehow so naturally superior to Europe's that it will create superior reductions in CO2 going forwards. If they are not happy with that, why not?

I think the answer to the first question is obvious from the WSJ. For the second I think they are gloating while they point out how the EU is wasting its time and money, they don't really want the US to do anything.


Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Sebb Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 955 of 971
Subject: Re: US under Bush better than EU on GW emissions Date: 12/19/2006 3:06 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I think they are gloating while they point out how the EU is wasting its time and money, they don't really want the US to do anything.

It's a cliche but it really seems to fit: I've watched various individuals and organizations go through the traditional 'grief' path to understanding change : climate change : and the WSJ is no exception (they are at step 2):

1) Denial
2) Minimization/bargaining (It's true but it doesn't matter / something else is more important / it doesn't apply to me / the free market or technology or God or the Great Spaghetti Monster will fix it for us)
3) Despair (We can't fix it and either I'm going to party till the lights go out, or I'm going to crawl into a cave and weep)
4) Engagement (combined with "I knew it all along" or "it wasn't worth engaging then, but it is *now*, so that's why I changed my mind)
5) Making money out of it (any ideas??)

Sebb

P.S. I score myself a 3.5

P.P.S. OK, this isn't quite the traditional grief curve, but you know......

Print the post Back To Top
Author: cmatos69 Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 963 of 971
Subject: Re: US under Bush better than EU on GW emissions Date: 2/27/2007 2:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
i know this was an old topic just wanted to point out that europe has 3 times the population then the USA.
population of Europe: 799,466,000
population of USA: 299,102,661 (2006 estimate)
which factors into the CO2 emission problems.

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (8) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement