Why? Because Carbon emissions have been rising despite the glorious Kyoto deal that was supposed to fix all our global climate change woes:
"From 2000 to 2005, the growth rate of carbon dioxide emissions was more than 2.5% per year, whereas in the 1990s it was less than 1% per year..."
But how can that be? We were told by our enlightened Liberal overlords that Kyoto was achievable not unrealistic and saner than Public Healthcare. We could meet our Kyoto targets by the deadline by everything they said. And it didn't matter that they were going to magically evaporate their Kyoto reductions by trading carbon credits on a new "Carbon Market" - Free lunches can happen in Liberal land. That's what we were told. That's what we were promised. Can it be that Emperor Kyoto has no clothes?
"'There has been a change in the trend regarding fossil fuel intensity, which is basically the amount of carbon you need to burn for a given unit of wealth,' explained Corinne Le Quere, a Global Carbon Project member who holds posts at the University of East Anglia and the British Antarctic Survey."
But isn't that what Bush, and Harper have talked about reducing for years as an alternative to reducing Carbon emissions on bulk? Ralph Klein in Alberta mused about putting targets for reducing carbon intensity didn't he?
That's ridiculous. The Enviro-Enlightenend like Al Gore couldn't be wrong could they?
"'The other trend is that as oil becomes more expensive, we're seeing a switch from oil burning to charcoal which is more polluting in terms of carbon.'"
'The Project does not have data on precisely where this is happening, but there is anecdotal evidence of increases in charcoal burning in parts of Asia and Africa.'
Anecdotal evidence? I see "anecdotal evidence" of environmental science befuddling everyday but that just be me with my errant unenlightened perspective. Because afterall truth is only relative if it supports a particular world view that's best expoused by people in big Cities and yuppy lifestyles. Good. My blinders are back on firmly.
"'At these rates, it certainly sounds like we'll end up towards the high end of the emission scenarios considered by the IPCC,' commented Myles Allen from Oxford University, one of Britain's leading climate modellers."
"The 'high end' of IPCC projections implies a rise in global temperature approaching 5.8C between 1990 and the end of this century. "
Time to get that ground shelter built and start buying rations. We're all going to die folks. Time to take our cash out of the family bank and start cultivating tofu in the bathtub.
Of course there have been times in earth's history when the climate was a few degrees warmer than today, but let's forget about that and drink our environmental Koolaid.
"At the recent United Nations climate summit in Nairobi, a number of delegations, including those of Britain, Australia and the US, pointed out that they had managed to grow their economies without significant increases in carbon emissions."What's this? The US and Australia - the climate devils - managed to grow their economies without significant increases in carbon emissions? You're telling me that two non-Kyoto countries did better than Enviro-saint Pro-Kyoto countries?
"But, said Corinne Le Quere, the latest data showed this approach would not be enough to curb emissions in the future."
The world has been turned upside down.