Bali – the morning after

Some papers tell me the world has changed, that giant steps have been made to saving the world.

Meanwhile, this morning the frost is so cold I will have to run the heating for longer. It’s 8.47 and I still need the electric llights on as it is dark.

I have not heard from Mr Benn about how the UK will suddenly turn from increasing its carbon output – as it has been doing in recent years – to cutting it. Maybe he hopes the credit crunch will get out of control, for a recession would lower our collective carbon footprint.

The Bali people could have saved their journey and waited for a meeting attended by a new President of the USA who may like them enjoy such junkets and be prepared to sign up to all sorts of cooling words.

The issue is, how does any of this change our behaviour?

This entry was posted in Blog. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

9 Comments

  1. apl
    Posted December 16, 2007 at 11:12 am | Permalink

    JR:

  2. Brian
    Posted December 16, 2007 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

    1)It raises awareness amongst the public.
    2)It should lead to governments imposing more regulations, both as incentives for technology and prudence, and rationing (disincentives) for damaging activities.
    3)In doing so it might overthrow the destructive economic paradigm in existence.

    Also, it might be argued (though I'm unsure) that we have a responsibility to try to do 'something' even if it's either too late, too futile or too risky.

    There is more to 'the environment' than global warming and an awareness of the scarcity of land/water/oil/gas is basically a good idea

  3. nigel
    Posted December 16, 2007 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

    What worries me is why people believe all this CO2 hype.*
    It is simply an excuse to raise taxes and eliminate private transport. The first is bad enough, but the latter ought to scare people to death.

    Transport accounts for less than 20% of all so-called manmade CO2, yet 100% of the effort is directed against it.

    Even if add the other 80% of manmade, we are still only talking about less than half of one percent of ALL CO2 !

    * the gullible are the Europeans. The rest of the world doesn't seem to have lost its sanity yet.

  4. Posted December 16, 2007 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

    It is easy for a political leader to sign up to commit his successors to do something, however impossible it might prove to be. Today's spin is unlikely to lead to tomorrow's delivery; particularly if the successor has to deal with more immediate problems like a recession.

  5. Posted December 16, 2007 at 5:43 pm | Permalink

    The time the Sun comes up is dependent purely on orbital alignment but yes you are right. It has been getting colder since 1998 & 2007 is in line to be coldest yet.
    http://motls.blogspot.com/2007/12/rss-msu-novembe

    On the Andrew Marr show this morning one of the invited guests reviewing the papers took a swipe at the Telegraph for saying this & denied that it was true. Marr agreed with him. This is what the BBC use as a substitute for honesty these days. I can see why they always say "climate change" not "global warming" now.

  6. DennisA
    Posted December 16, 2007 at 10:08 pm | Permalink

    The big question is, what would a change in our behaviour have done? The answer? Zilch, to use the vernacular. For the greatest increase in CO2 emissions in the 60's and 70's, UK temperature fell over a 40 year period.

  7. Bazman
    Posted December 16, 2007 at 11:31 pm | Permalink

    apl! Surely you are not real son? Anyone who comes up with a real way to reduce Britains carbon output will also have the answer to immigration.
    Daily Mail, immigration, Nazi gold, marriage, stupidity. etc.

  8. Geoff
    Posted December 17, 2007 at 6:04 am | Permalink

    Yes Neil, "climate change" means it can get hotter, colder, wetter or drier next year and still it is all my fault for leaving the hallway light on yesterday – and taxpayers money will keep flowing in to pseudo-science research budgets.

  9. Posted December 18, 2007 at 11:54 pm | Permalink

    Getting countries to sign up to reduce emissions is just the first step, they do actually have to make reductions. The Tories in the 80/90s built more gas power stations that were more efficient which did make a difference. And Tory councils often have better recycling rates.

    To suggest that we shouldn't even bother even to sign up at Bali is just giving up, is this the attitude that has seen us see off dictators since William 900 years ago? Were responsible for a significant amount of emissions, we have a duty to the world to act on this. Instead were falling behind, the rest of Europe has higher recycling rates and more renewable energy. We need to convert the rhetoric into action.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, He graduated from Magdalen College Oxford, has a DPhil and is a fellow of All Souls College. A businessman by background, he has been a director of NM Rothschild merchant bank and chairman of a quoted industrial PLC.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page