tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5384056639369168576.post6039671772654872886..comments2023-10-08T08:55:06.836-07:00Comments on Mostly Harmless Science Blog: Chris Fellowshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03020350770567584929noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5384056639369168576.post-17203195975676716112009-01-30T12:21:00.000-08:002009-01-30T12:21:00.000-08:00Back in 2007 I mentioned:Clearly, having an econom...Back in <A HREF="http://marcoparigi.blogspot.com/search/label/Climatechange" REL="nofollow">2007</A> I mentioned:<BR/><BR/><I>Clearly, having an economy tank is an obvious way to reduce emissions, but no environmentalist is seriously suggesting it (except Peter Garrett before he became a politician:)). </I><BR/><BR/>One of the other assumptions of climate models is that BAU is predictably continuing exponential growth in emmissions, while several examples since 1990 (Russia and China come to mind) show respectively that BAU with a collapse in industry/economy, and BAU with high economic growth of a previously underdeveloped economy dwarf the discretionary decisions of leaders on policy. <BR/><BR/>Some policy decisions, such as whether to save the American auto industry (letting it collapse would reduce US emmissions considerably) are more relevant than others, like subsidising ethanol (arguably is an emmissions neutral policy).<BR/><BR/>Where the economies go, the emmissions statistics will follow.Marco Parigihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00702055111711651319noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5384056639369168576.post-17303873509478285392009-01-28T21:59:00.000-08:002009-01-28T21:59:00.000-08:00Well, of course, that would be nice... Unfortunate...Well, of course, that would be nice... <BR/><BR/>Unfortunately it is the sort of curve that you can look at either way, but my point was just- I think- is that the motivation for taking drastic action is entirely from the output of climate models, and the best model from 20 years ago can't really be said to have done a very good job at predicting what would happen. <BR/><BR/>I think the one thing we can say with absolute certainty, looking at the graphs in the post before this one, is that there are lots of factors influencing the climate, and it is not easy to say how important different ones are.Chris Fellowshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03020350770567584929noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5384056639369168576.post-73220049331391005462009-01-28T21:14:00.000-08:002009-01-28T21:14:00.000-08:00does this mean we started some years ago? I've alw...does this mean we started some years ago? <BR/>I've always thought the whole climate change thing was a bit open to interpreting the outcome anyway you like.<BR/><BR/>Skeptic<BR/>change: our efforts to stop this have not done anything, therefore its a natural cycle.<BR/>No change: your model was wrong, there is no climate change.<BR/><BR/>Believer<BR/>change: we didn't try to fix it soon enough, we're all doomed<BR/>no change: Hey, we fixed it by our actions.<BR/><BR/>There's no controls, I'd be criticized for designing an experiment like this. We need a second planet Earth.Jennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12909466417710679436noreply@blogger.com