The entire focus of Kyoto is to reduce anthropogenic emissions of what are currently thought to be greenhouse gases. But we simply don't know whether reducing such emissions will mitigate climate change. We certainly don't know that reducing such emissions will be the most cost-effective way of stabilising the climate. A Climate Stability Bond regime would not prejudge how the climate is to be stabilised. They instead would reward people for achieving climate stability however they do so. So a bond regime would reward efficiency, rather than adherence to a conclusion based on the fossilised science of the 1990s. Click to see a short article describing Climate Stability Bonds.
5 comments:
All this nonsense about climate presupposes there is something actually wrong with it. More preposterous is the idea that we actually might be causing whatever is supposed to be wrong with it. Even more arrogant is the notion that we might even control it. Theres nothing wrong with the climate - Kyoto is a complete and utter waste of resources. Better to direct the Social Policy Bonds idea into something that actually has some chance of succeeding.
Interesting comment, though you make it on the same day as reports are published saying global warming is 'twice as bad as previously thought'. The point, surely, is that we don't know what is going on and there is a nonzero probability of major climatic disruption. Climate Stability Bonds would minimise costs of achieving a stable climate regardless of what (if anything) is happening to it and who (or what) is causing it to happen.
I suppose if you have to throw money at a perceived problem you may as well use Social Policy Bonds as anything else. My point really is not to throw any money at it at all - better surely to apply Social Policy Bonds to a real problem. Incidently the mentioned news item is nothing more than a prediction from a computer model. I guess I need to be on Climate Change blog ;-)
Thanks for your comment. There is legitimate debate as to whether climate change is a real problem. Some think not but most scientists think it is. It doesn't matter under a bond regime. One of the features of the bonds is that they minimise costs depending on the market's view of how serious the problem is. If everybody agrees with you that climate change is not a problem, then any Climate Stability Bonds issued would sell at a price very close to their redemption value. The cost to the bonds' backers then would be minimal. The market minimises costs, and reveals valuable information about the likelihood of how serious the problem is and the estimated cost of solving it.
nice blog...
this blog is very important for me ... thank you ...
Post a Comment