🚀 go-pugleaf

--------------A01082EB71AE92507E69516B
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> If (and I stress the if) the predictions regarding climate change are
> right, then it may well have a far greater impact on many of the items
> you mentioned above than the problems which the above remedial action is
> designed to counter. I personally believe we have to take climate change
> very seriously indeed - at least while we do more to find out what is
> really going on.

Richard:

You are absolutely correct.  We should take it seriously while we find on what is
really occurring.  The recent discovery of Antarctic core samples showing that an
ancient ice age might have ended in a matter of decades further muddies the
environmental radar we utilize.

In our report, "Evaluating the Kyoto Approach to Climate Change"
(http://www.reason.org/kyoto.html), you will find a very matter-of-fact discussion
of the potential risks of climate change (admitting they MAY be significant many
years from now.What we are urging is a more reasoned approach to these issues.
Sure there are some folks who might think it is all a hoax.  We are saying we
can't be sure one way or the other.  As such, the best risk reduction strategy
entails reducing risks that we are certain we can have an impact on and continuing
the process of scientific inquiry on those we need more data from.

Look at the issue this way.  If you took your pulse for two minutes and then tried
to predict changes in your lifetime average heart rate, you would have nearly the
same relevance that our temperature data has on the entire history of the earth.

Just as airbags have countervailing impacts for some people (small women and
children) while saving others, no risk reduction strategy is totally pure.   We
just need to make sure consider these risks in the bigger picture.


> As for the cost of implementing Kyoto, I believe that more money can be
> found for environmental change than you suggest. Many of the
> environmental improvements that can be made actually benefit companies
> and governments financially (waste reduction, etc.), for example. To say
> that we can't afford environmental improvements today is to push that
> cost onto tommorow - with inflation.
>

You may be right that more money is available for environmental improvements.
Doing so, however, still has impacts that must be considered.  The other element
here to think about is the correlation between income and safety (risk
prevention).  As we draw resources away from this pot, it comes from somewhere,
whether the GDP (which will impact a great many people) or other sources.

Incidentally, our study has a good discussion of this income-risk model too.

George

> Richard Vialls              (please replace nospam with demon for email & WWW)
> Black Cat Electronics - contract electronics design
> Bodrwyn, Cerrigceinwen, Bodorgan,                     Phone: +44(0)1407 720717
> Anglesey, LL62 5EF, UK.                    Email: rvialls@blakcat.nospam.co.uk
>                                           Web: http://www.blakcat.nospam.co.uk



--------------A01082EB71AE92507E69516B
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>

<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>If (and I stress the if) the predictions regarding
climate change are
<BR>right, then it may well have a far greater impact on many of the items
<BR>you mentioned above than the problems which the above remedial action
is
<BR>designed to counter. I personally believe we have to take climate change
<BR>very seriously indeed - at least while we do more to find out what
is
<BR>really going on.</BLOCKQUOTE>
Richard:

<P>You are absolutely correct.&nbsp; We should take it seriously while
we find on what is really occurring.&nbsp; The recent discovery of Antarctic
core samples showing that an ancient ice age might have ended in a matter
of decades further muddies the environmental radar we utilize.

<P>In our report, "<A HREF="http://www.reason.org/kyoto.html">Evaluating
the Kyoto Approach to Climate Change</A>" (<A HREF="http://www.reason.org/kyoto.html">http://www.reason.org/kyoto.html</A>),
you will find a very matter-of-fact discussion of the potential risks of
climate change (admitting they MAY be significant many years from now.What
we are urging is a more reasoned approach to these issues.&nbsp; Sure there
are some folks who might think it is all a hoax.&nbsp; We are saying we
can't be sure one way or the other.&nbsp; As such, the best risk reduction
strategy entails reducing risks that we are certain we can have an impact
on and continuing the process of scientific inquiry on those we need more
data from.

<P>Look at the issue this way.&nbsp; If you took your pulse for two minutes
and then tried to predict changes in your lifetime average heart rate,
you would have nearly the same relevance that our temperature data has
on the entire history of the earth.

<P>Just as airbags have countervailing impacts for some people (small women
and children) while saving others, no risk reduction strategy is totally
pure.&nbsp;&nbsp; We just need to make sure consider these risks in the
bigger picture.
<BR>&nbsp;
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>As for the cost of implementing Kyoto, I believe
that more money can be
<BR>found for environmental change than you suggest. Many of the
<BR>environmental improvements that can be made actually benefit companies
<BR>and governments financially (waste reduction, etc.), for example. To
say
<BR>that we can't afford environmental improvements today is to push that
<BR>cost onto tommorow - with inflation.
<BR>&nbsp;</BLOCKQUOTE>
You may be right that more money is available for environmental improvements.&nbsp;
Doing so, however, still has impacts that must be considered.&nbsp; The
other element here to think about is the correlation between income and
safety (risk prevention).&nbsp; As we draw resources away from this pot,
it comes from somewhere, whether the GDP (which will impact a great many
people) or other sources.

<P>Incidentally, our study has a good discussion of this income-risk model
too.

<P>George
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>

<P>Richard Vialls&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
(please replace nospam with demon for email &amp; WWW)
<BR>Black Cat Electronics - contract electronics design
<BR>Bodrwyn, Cerrigceinwen, Bodorgan,&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Phone: +44(0)1407 720717
<BR>Anglesey, LL62 5EF, UK.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Email: rvialls@blakcat.nospam.co.uk
<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Web: <A HREF="http://www.blakcat.nospam.co.uk">http://www.blakcat.nospam.co.uk</A></BLOCKQUOTE>
&nbsp;</HTML>

--------------A01082EB71AE92507E69516B--