From today's Times:
“The number of people claiming climate change isn’t happening is minuscule, and they have no authority among the scientific community,” [Chris Smith, head of quango The Environment Agency] says. “They are mavericks, not backed up by the evidence.” It is irrelevant, he says, that the world has recently been getting cooler. “You have to look at the trend over 20 years, and that clearly shows global warming. There are alarming new phenomena — the floods here two years ago, the glaciers melting. The evidence is all around us.”
That's on page 44 of the print edition. From a different article on page 47:
Alpine ski resorts have welcomed a first blanket of snow, allowing some to open early and raising hopes of a bumper season despite the economic downturn. In Verbier, Switzerland, where one in five tourists is British, more than a mile of ski runs opens today for weekend skiing. It is the earliest start to the winter season for 11 years thanks to the 50cm (19in) of snow that has fallen this week...*
----------------------------------
While we're on the topic of the underlying warming trend, I'm still number 1 and 2 out of 1,980,000 Google results. Sit on that and swivel, ye warmenists!
----------------------------------
Moving on, Chris Smith doesn't understand basic economics either. It is indisputably true that there are some cliffs on our East Coast that have been crumbling into the sea for centuries, and that in time, houses that were originally built half a mile from the cliff edge will have to be demolished when the cliff finally crumbles underneath them. What's his solution?
Lord Smith is urging the Government to provide money for local authorities to buy cliff-top properties at risk of tumbling into the sea over the next 20 years. “We estimate there are 200 to 250 properties. The local authority would purchase property from the current owner, then lease it back to them. Then, if it gets to a stage where they can’t live in it any more because of the erosion, they would have the funds to move somewhere else. You are talking not just about a temporary flood: it’s the permanent loss of someone’s property through no fault of their own.”
If we expect that a property will fall into the sea in twenty years' time, the value of that house is the NPV of twenty years' rent (say) £10,000 per year, discounted at (say) 5% means the house is worth £125,000. If the owner sells the house for £125,000 and then pays rent of £10,000 a year for twenty years, he will have spent all the original money again and he won't have any "funds" left to move somewhere else - unless the government overpays and/or undercharges, and I don't see why they should be using taxpayers' money to buy 200 to 250 votes.
And it is, to some extent, their fault - them there cliffs have been crumbling for centuries,and whoever built or bought such a property made a trade-off between having a lovely view and a short walk to the beach with the fact that the house won't be there forever (and the the view gets nicer and the walk gets shorter every year, of course). You pays your money and you takes your choice.
* OK, to be fair, the article continues with "The drop in temperature across the Alps comes after a week of jitters in some resorts as people made the most of the unseasonably warm weather of up to 65F (18C) dressed in shorts and T-shirts."
Yet another mRNA conspiracy
1 hour ago
8 comments:
"There are alarming new phenomena — the floods here two years ago, the glaciers melting. The evidence is all around us."
There's a big problem with that statement: There isn't any evidence of a link between the floods and global warming.
Some quotes from articles linked about the 2007 floods:-
Researchers say it is possible that Britain's dire weather is linked to the La Nina system which is bringing cool conditions to the Pacific this year.
"It is not possible to say that any single event is caused by climate change," he says. "What we are able to do is estimate the changes in the risk of extreme events occurring due to climate change.
"In the UK, extreme rainfall is likely to increase in winter, but in summer the predictions are unclear. Improved modelling and understanding in the future will help us to reduce this uncertainty for the UK." (Those two are from the chief forecaster at the Met Office)
"It's a sexy subject and people like to stick labels on things. Global warming is the latest bandwagon going past so whenever we get a heatwave or floods they blame it on that." (That's Jim Dale at the British Weather Services)
Didn't the scientists recently come out and say that people exaggerating the science of global warming was actually doing it a disservice because of exaggerations in the media? And here's Chris Smith doing precisely that.
Tit
I notice he says that “The number of people claiming climate change isn’t happening is minuscule" and then goes on to suggest that these people are the same as those who claim that global warming isn't happening, which of course, they are not. As OC said, "Tit".
The leader here is just an idiot
One cannot assign any short term effect and prove climate change is real.
It must be done over at least centuries. This HAS been done. Lets get over it and focus on the real problem, not our vested interests
Climate change is entirely an economic problem. There is 10000 times more free energy than we currently use, readily available
Move on...
I know a part of the crumbling East coast well. It has been going on at a fairly constant rate for centuries. Anyone who buys a property that's in danger will get it for next to nothing. If they inherited it and it's not worth what it once was that's just bad luck.
I don't know that anyone genuinely thinks this is a problem that needs to be solved with public money. A few may well be trying it on, but everyone there knows the score. There is no injustice, no problem, (and no climate change), just life doing what it does. The idea is a ludicrous waste of money.
But that, of course, is what politicians are for.
One cannot assign any short term effect and prove climate change is real. Its still need a deep studies on this issue.
We all have to wake up before we get too late. Its a most serious issue before today's man kind.
I was waiting for where you said the solution for the crumbling East coast cliffs was land value taxation.
I couldn't see how it could be, but I had confidence that you'd work it in somehow.
Mark, you have disappointed me.
WY, I would have thought that the LVT solution was blindingly obvious (which is why I didn't mention it).
Either these properties are worth saving or they are not - somebody just has to do a cost/benefit analysis. Now, if they are worth saving, who will benefit from this? (answer, local land-owners), and so who should pay for it? (answer local land-owners).
Whether you call this "land value tax" or "shared expedniture", it all comes to the same thing.
There is certainly no reason for UK taxpayers in general to be asked to foot the bill.
Post a Comment