The reality of Kyoto begins to surface
What’s the difference between refusing to sign the Kyoto accords, and signing them and refusing to meet your commitments? Hypocrisy?
Although the US is portrayed as the ecological villain for refusing to sign up to the agreement, 10 out of the 15 European Union signatories - including Ireland, Italy and Spain - will miss their targets without urgent action, the Institute for Public Policy Research found.
And I love this bit:
Tony Grayling, the institute’s associate director, said the world was near the point of no return on climate change. “We have little time left to start reducing global greenhouse gas emissions before irreparable damage is done. It is vital that EU countries keep their promises to cut pollution. They must take action now to get back on the Kyoto track, including energy saving and investment in renewable energy.”
Opinion spoken as irrefutable fact - all to advance a political agenda. Kyoto is bad science based on suspect (if not outright bogus) data - the infamous hockey stick (technical discussion of the statistical errors made is here, in PDF format). Certainly there is room to debate the significance of the errors made by Mann et al - but Grayling ignores the errors altogether and presents his side as fact. More chicken little environmentalism based on feeling rather than fact.