The Stern Report

[Totally_Baffled]

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,, ... 63,00.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6095680.stm

The report looked at the impact of global warming on economic output, or gross domestic product (GDP), until 2100.

The comments come ahead of a report expected to warn climate change may cut global annual economic output by up to 20%.

So let me get this straight - the government acknowledges peak oil, although they predict a peak date of 2030. Lets for a moment assume they are correct.

Lets also an ultra optimistic peak for global natural gas of 2050, coal at 2050 and uranium of 2070.

Even with this ludicrous set of assumptions - what on earth makes the Stern report think that GDP reduction will only be 20% AT THE VERY WORST!?

How lacking in credibity is a report on climate change when it doesnt consider the reserves of the very thing causing climate change?

Insane..

[Totally_Baffled]

The influential report by economist Nicholas Stern is due to be published on Monday.

Ahh maybe this is the answer -he is an economist!

[smiffy]

Lets try and connect all the dots here:

American vice present holds secret energy talks (papers still clasified) PENAC plans war in Iraq, cheany had all the oil wells marked on map, British north sea oil and gas goes off cliff, Blair gets informed about global energy security, Blair is informed that Allies will be welocmed in Iraq with flowers and roses and is told he can share in the oil bonanza, Britains energy woes are over!

War started on false pretences in Iraq, Oil ministry first allied target for occupation as well as oil feilds, war turns into a bloodbath, we wont leave because of oil. Public want us to leave because they are nieve and dont realize unlike the bush and Blair gang that we are at Peak oil. BUsh Blair et al still bullshit us that there is 40 years of oil left in the world, Peak oilers dont believe it neither does the messenger, hence thats why they invaded Iraq.

Carl Rove BUshes Brain publicly says we cannot leave Iraq at the moment because the terrorists will control the oil wells.

Still nobody wants to tell joe public the truth because it will cause global panic and a stock market crash, mass unemployment and economic meltdown, so no matter how unpopular BUsh and Blair are, they just cannot tell us the truth. Every dimpson who wants us to leave Iraq doesnt understand that if we do, he and all his/her mates who went to the anti war rallies will never be able to drive there 4X4 ever again.

Then, 6 o'clock news comes on with a new anti climate change agenda, because this is a better way to scare the public into curtailing there energy usage rather than telling them that by 2010 the world will be on the downside of huberts peak and there will be natural gas scarcity.

What a bunch of wankers the lot of them.

[Vortex]

Lets try and connect all the dots here:

American vice present holds secret energy talks (papers still clasified) PENAC plans war in Iraq, cheany had all the oil wells marked on map, British north sea oil and gas goes off cliff, Blair gets informed about global energy security, Blair is informed that Allies will be welocmed in Iraq with flowers and roses and is told he can share in the oil bonanza, Britains energy woes are over!

War started on false pretences in Iraq, Oil ministry first allied target for occupation as well as oil feilds, war turns into a bloodbath, we wont leave because of oil. Public want us to leave because they are nieve and dont realize unlike the bush and Blair gang that we are at Peak oil. BUsh Blair et al still bullshit us that there is 40 years of oil left in the world, Peak oilers dont believe it neither does the messenger, hence thats why they invaded Iraq.

Carl Rove BUshes Brain publicly says we cannot leave Iraq at the moment because the terrorists will control the oil wells.

Still nobody wants to tell joe public the truth because it will cause global panic and a stock market crash, mass unemployment and economic meltdown, so no matter how unpopular BUsh and Blair are, they just cannot tell us the truth. Every dimpson who wants us to leave Iraq doesnt understand that if we do, he and all his/her mates who went to the anti war rallies will never be able to drive there 4X4 ever again.

Then, 6 o'clock news comes on with a new anti climate change agenda, because this is a better way to scare the public into curtailing there energy usage rather than telling them that by 2010 the world will be on the downside of huberts peak and there will be natural gas scarcity.

What a bunch of wankers the lot of them.

You have a certain way with words smiffy ... but, yes, we will be conned by global warming BS in order to mask the fact that, as a nation, we can't afford natural gas & oil imports. Peaking is just the icing on the cake.

[Totally_Baffled]

The other interesting point you make smiffy is that in the end, natural gas shortages would still be a massive issue for the UK even if the Iraq was a success and Iraq was producing 10 million barrels of oil per day!

Which begs the question, what was the flipping point!?

[Billhook]

Smiffy -

I too enjoy your writing, but if you're proposing that GW is merely a convenient cover-story to justify FF cuts,

you are, sadly, mistaken.

I've been campaigning on the issue since the '80s, and it is for real.

I wish to God it weren't.

Its impacts on subsistence agriculture globally are liable to make losses due to PO look piffling.

But your critique of the Stern Report's parameters-of-mind look to me spot on.

Regards,

Bill

[Vortex]

Billhook, having re-read MY post I too may have "disrespected" the reality of GW ... it was unintentional ...

[MisterE]

Smiffy you had me shouting "ALRIGHT brother stick it too them" nice writing

[smiffy]

Fro the record, i never ever ever disputed GW

[smiffy]

what will come first? The catoclysmic effects of global warming or peak oil and peak gas?

I personally think that NG & PO will get us first? And can anyone actually believe that everyone will willingly give up there car and there 2 weeks in Spain because of GW? Most people i know will dismiss you until the very end game!

Joe public is more intrested in making as much money from property speculation and retiring in spain as they possibly can. They some how think that everything will be ok. I have personally seen the effects of GW whilst living in Malta, waves of African migrants crossing from Africa with there children due to desertification and massive crop failure. The exodus has been going on for quite a while.

what strikes me the most is the governments hipocracy, airport enlargments, Browns delusions about never ending economic growth, mass imigration for short term economic benefit, HSBC giving unpayable loans for over priced energy nightmare hosuing, global bankers playing the game to the very end as if they are immune? It beggers beleif.

Even the global financial system is totaly flawed, time to go back to Bretton woods and re-think the whole balls up, it's either that or mass riots and the capitalists will be the ones hung from the lamposts.



Next week and this christmas it will be business as usual, people flying off the the far edges of the earth, cheap chinese plastic toys flown in, Sainsbury tesco morrisons continuing there rape and pillage of the planet screwing UK farmers, Tony Blaur and Gordon Brown will still boast about the posative effects of globalization. I cant believe that sugar beat production has been shut down in favour of flying it in from Africa.

Anyone get the feeling that all the chikens are beggining to come home to roost?

[clv101]

Even with this ludicrous set of assumptions - what on earth makes the Stern report think that GDP reduction will only be 20% AT THE VERY WORST!?

Isn't the 20% GDP reduction based on the damage caused by climate change rather than resource depletion. Surely Stern doesn't imagine that material energy resources are going to be a problem - I mean the market will provide substitutes if anything did become scarce.

[DaBeeeenster]

I personally think that NG & PO will get us first? And can anyone actually believe that everyone will willingly give up there car and there 2 weeks in Spain because of GW? Most people i know will dismiss you until the very end game!

I think this is a very important point. The fact of the matter is that the only thing that will cause the majority of the developed world to change their behaviour with respect to fossil fuels is to increase the price of the fuel, either naturally through a decrease in supply, or artificially through taxation, carbon credits etc.

Almost all of my friends are educated to degree level (many post-graduate), have good, working minds, and are fully aware of the situation at hand with regards to climate change and peak oil. NONE of them are changing their behaviour to a significant degree. The ONLY thing that is going to make them change their ways is if through price increases in fuel. It's as simple as that.

The government need to start acting and implement a carbon credit/TEQ system RIGHT NOW. They also need to start lobbying the international community to set up an international contraction and convergence system, RIGHT NOW.

Instead, they will do something impressive, Impose a 50p tax on light bulbs, and then lose the election to "Dave" Cameron who will no doubt remove it.

[Billhook]

Taxation plainly has its place, but it is a very blunt tool indeed in its usual form.

Particularly, the impact of taxes on energy sales is usually around 0.4, that is, if energy prices are raised, say, 25%, energy sales will fall by only 10%.

And we need to cut GHG emissions (not specifically energy use) by over 90%.

By relying on sales taxation alone for that 90% cut, we'd need to raise prices by 225%.

More to the point, there are creative and more direct approaches to be applied, such as :

First, remove all subsidies from fossil fuel supplyers. (These preclude the competitiveness of the sustainable energies).

Second, end the advertizing of any transport goods & services that use fossil energy. (The public is highly vulnerable to such conditioning).

Third, apply the BRED tax on FF Corporations' shareholders' profits.
These are the people who mandate those corporations' annual Budgets for Research, Exploration & Development. [BRED].
The BRED tax would at best be revenue neutral and would charge most to those corporations with the worst ratio of FF BRED to Sus. En. BRED.

Fourth, introduce the full TEQ system without delay, but with two critical additions:
a/. charge enough to raise >20Bn/yr ring-fenced for Sustainable Energy development.
b/. swing massive publicity onto the present and projected casualties of GW -
specifically starving children. In their millions. Due to unprecedented droughts.

Personally I think that only that this massive hit on the immorality of ignoring GHG emissions could really change peoples' behaviour sufficiently.

Regards,

Bill

[Vortex]

We can do all we like in the UK ... the rest of the world will carry on as usual.

The Americans won't cut back. For example I was on a US eco site where some moron was saying that he was getting rid of his domestic aircon ... and could someone please point him at a decent portable aircon! He had his heart in the right place ... but simply does NOT "get it".

Only a global military "eco force" or some natural disaster will prevent every last drop of oil and every last chunk of coal being burned.

Just take a look around: how many of your neighbours will be prepared to give up their car, their foreign holidays, their nice foods, their warm houses - or even cut back say 20%?

Unless the petrol stations close or the electricity goes off, it won't happen.
We will then of course be in real social trouble ... who would be prepared to tell Mr Gold Chain and his inner city mates that this is the way it will be FOR EVER ... and it will get worse year on year?

Taxing all energy sources won't do it either - the very poor will simply die of cold. Many commuters will have to give up their jobs. We will end up with rich and poor - and a much reduced middle class. The economy will simply keel over ... with possibly drastic social consequences.

As a famly we have recently changed almost all our lighting to use eco bulbs, we grow lots of our own food and so on. However this is only 50% for global benefit - we are also getting ready to survive a future with expensive and/or stuttering power suplies

Repeat after me: We are SO stuffed.

[Ballard]

Chris say's

Surely Stern doesn't imagine that material energy resources are going to be a problem - I mean the market will provide substitutes if anything did become scarce.

So the g?ment see that the UK energy situation is looking dire, they need to reduce consumption, raising prices can achieve this by ?rationing by price?.
The stern report would seem to be a part of the softening up process, in effect it is saying that we must cut our carbon output, this can be directly translated into the g?ment ?cutting? the use of fossil fuels by imposing green tax?s. Link this with the David Milliband ?leak? that green tax will be instigated and you have:-

Problem - UK energy provision up S**t creek
Justification - Global warming must be tackled, the stern report confirms this.
Solution - Rationing by price or ?Green tax?

That is not to say that I do not believe in AGW, it is undoubtedly a real issue.