There is more than one kind of skeptic in this climate conundrum.

I don’t see anyone as being skeptical about changes in the climate, do you?

But I do see variations in what people think can be gained from the various prescribed programs….carbon credit buying, especially.

Don’t leave that to what a few posters might speculate about, here.

Look to what others in a few countries have to say:

I have given some evidence from a CBC program on China earlier in this thread.

Take a look at India, and what Greenpeace in India has to offer. People will not need reminding that Greenpeace is hardly a conservative body.

This is what they have to say about using stats in the ‘per capita’ mode. It is quite telling:

http://www.greenpeace.org/india/press/releases/hiding-behind-the-poor-english

“According to the report, the average CO2 emissions of an individual from the highest income group of above Rs 30,000 (1494 KG) is 4.5 times that of one from the lowest income group of below Rs 3000 per month (335 Kg). 14% of the Indian population, which earns more than Rs. 8,000 / per month, contributes to 24% of the country’s CO2 emissions.”

“…According to the proposed national strategy on climate change India will not abide by any international commitment to mandatory reduction of greenhouse gas emission. India’s approach of measuring world GHG emissions is per capita emission rather than country-wise emissions which is the approach of the developed nations. Although India is the sixth largest carbon emitter in the world, it has one of the lowest per capita emission rates. Greenpeace proposes a third approach of measuring emissions by differentiating the carbon footprint of the various income classes in the country thus calling for climate change mitigation that addresses international and national climate justice.”

Move along now to Japan, and how they plan to cover their requirements….NOT by actually reducing emissions at home, but by buying the glut of cheap ones from old Soviet nations.

While you are reading how that happens, check out how Russia got away with slipping off so easily.

http://globalisation-and-the-environment.blogspot.com/2007/11/carbon-credits-japan-to-buy-from-just.html

“Today’s FT reports that Japan is looking to hoover up shed loads of carbon credits on the cheap to meet its Kyoto agreements.

…. The problem with buying carbon credits is that it does not necessarily reduce emissions by a single tonne of CO2. What then is the point exactly?

The collapse in eastern European heavy industry means they have an excess of credits to sell (and is one reason why Russia signed up in the first place despite dragging its heals for many years).

..Japan will announce as early as next week that it intends to buy carbon credits from Hungary, a move that could foreshadow a much larger purchase from Russia – and one that would provoke criticism as a means of meeting its obligations under the Kyoto protocol.

The memorandum of understanding with Hungary could lead to similar deals with Poland and the Czech Republic, officials from Japan’s trade ministry said, and would test the waters for a contract with Russia.

….. eastern European countries, including Russia, lost much of their industry following the collapse of the Soviet Union, so their emissions today are much lower than in 1990. This means they have large numbers of -carbon credits, known as “assigned amount units” or AAUs, for sale.

Japan is interested in Hungarian and Russian credits because they are much cheaper than the alternative, which do result in emissions cuts……

Toshihiro Mitsuhashi, director of the trade ministry’s office for the promotion of the Kyoto mechanism, said Japan was reluctant to pay what he said were the “crazy prices” being fetched by CERs….

“There’s some criticism that buying AAUs somehow doesn’t help the earth,” said Mr Mitsuhashi. “We have promised to meet our Kyoto obligation but we will use any means necessary. These AAUs exist. There’s no reason we can’t use them.”

Mr Mitsuhashi said that, to forestall criticism, Japan would insist that countries selling carbon credits set aside the proceeds for green projects. But he acknowledged that any deal with Russia would invite suspicion that the money would not be spent on the environment, but instead “go into the pocket of [Russian] bureaucrats”…..

Mark Partington, a consultant to EEA Fund Management, a carbon asset manager, said threatening to buy from Hungary and Russia was Japan’s way of signalling it was not prepared to “comply at any price”.

Japan is reluctant to spend vast amounts to comply with Kyoto as the US has never ratified the treaty and India and China have no obligation to cut emissions. Mr Mitsuhashi said Japan had to think about its own taxpayers as well as the environment.”

It could only be considered foolish to *not* think about its own taxpayers, as well as the environment.

Hi Second, Yes, you have it nailed. I, over the last few years have been keeping my eyes and ears open, docs, news ‘bits & bits’ and I don’t like what I see going on in China. All the while Canada was giving $125 million every year in aid to China they were in turn spending billions beefing up their military. Why? Under Chretien, we have numerous ‘trade’ missions with China. We sent them nuke reactors, at the same time frame Paul Martin pulled his ship building from our own east coast and moved it to China. After Chretien left politics, he spent more time in China than Canada for a while.

I’d say the wise would stand back and take that second look, wouldn’t you?

L

Never argue with a fool. People might not know the difference.