On several occasions I have pointed out how much better foreign media are at presenting reports either skeptical of anthropogenic global warming or addressing the failings in government sanctioned solutions.
Last week, the BBC did a report on the European Union’s carbon trading scheme failing so miserably that CO2 emissions in the region have actually increased since the strategy was implemented.
Think any American television news division would touch this story save maybe Fox News?
Regardless of the answer, BBC.com presented some of the findings on June 5 (h/t Willis Eschenbach):
The EU's carbon trading scheme has increased electricity bills, given a windfall to power companies and failed to cut greenhouse gases, it is claimed.
An investigation by BBC Radio 4's File on 4 programme has found that after two and half years the scheme has yet to cut in carbon dioxide emissions.
The consumer body Energywatch said customers are getting a raw deal.
Can you imagine Katie, Charlie, or Brian logging such a report? The article continued (emphasis added):
[The EU’s Emission Trading Scheme] is essentially a permit to pollute.
Power generators received their allowances free of charge but were allowed to reflect the value of those in increased prices to customers, as if the companies had actually had to buy the allowances.
Energywatch believes this increased electricity bills by about 7% in 2005.
And according to one government estimate, that delivered windfall profits of up to £1.3bn to the generators in that year - higher than environmental campaigners had claimed last year.
However, so far the carbon scheme has brought no clear payback in terms of cutting emissions.
Provisional government figures from the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) suggest CO2 output in Britain actually went up, by 1.25% last year wiping out a slight drop of 0.01% in 2005.
It is also reckoned that CO2 emissions across the EU also rose by between 1 and 1.5% over the last two years.
Amazing. Any questions why this will likely never be reported in America?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Which is interesting since AF
June 14, 2007 - 13:33 ET by dscottWhich is interesting since AFP is reporting on 2005 instead of now.
Overall greenhouse-gas emissions by the European Union (EU) edged downwards in 2005 but rose in Italy and Spain, which are now badly adrift of their pollution-cutting targets under the Kyoto Protocol, according to data released on Thursday.
Emissions by the 15 EU nations that made a collective commitment under the UN pact fell by 0.8 percent between 2004 and 2005, the Copenhagen-based European Environment Agency (EAA) reported.
...British emissions were down by 0.5 percent in 2005, and like France it too is on track. The 2012 objective is a cut of 12.5 percent over 1990; so far, the reduction is 14.8 percent.
Sounds like someone is trying to spin the fact that the Kyoto targets aren't obtainable.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
Shock! You mean carbon credit
June 14, 2007 - 13:36 ET by nnptcgradShock! You mean carbon credits are probably only in existence to give a small number of people the oppotunity to scam others of money? And have no use in limiting carbon outputs? I am shocked I tell you, shocked!
Mother nature is a bitch - Ninth Corollary of Murphy's Law
Shock! You mean carbon credit
June 14, 2007 - 13:36 ET by nnptcgradHate it when I double click by accident
Sometimes all I can do is lau
June 14, 2007 - 13:53 ET by mattmSometimes all I can do is laugh. (That increases CO2 emissions too, right?)
Libs will always claim that
June 14, 2007 - 14:08 ET by WiggyLibs will always claim that Kyoto is great and carbon credits/offsets work. Here is a good article from The Financial Times on the subject of carbon credits.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/48e334ce-f355-11db-9845-000b5df10621.html
Thanks, Wiggy
June 14, 2007 - 14:15 ET by Cool ArrowThere's always a new twist in the world of Ponzi schemes.
Saw this three years ago when Al Gore was put on the board of directors of the Waterless Urinal Company. One was installed at work and removed within two months.
Waterless Urinal.....Eeeww.
June 14, 2007 - 14:36 ET by nnptcgradWaterless Urinal.....Eeeww.
Mother nature is a bitch - Ninth Corollary of Murphy's Law
Guys invented that one long
June 14, 2007 - 14:39 ET by sarcasmoGuys invented that one long-ago. Many of us are worried about "Google Earth" these days. Very worried...
JMR
Eeeww, but entirely Treeww
June 14, 2007 - 14:40 ET by Cool ArrowHe's a nasty B#sturd for sure.
I was wondering about those,
June 14, 2007 - 14:47 ET by dscottI was wondering about those, Sloan was making them too. I saw one at Disney a while back. hmmm
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
Carbon credits were supposed
June 14, 2007 - 14:45 ET by bassndudeCarbon credits were supposed to reduce CO2 output, but seems like it is having an action-reaction. They were valued at $100.00 each at first, but have sense droped to about .10 cents per credit. This dident take long to fall apart. And algore wanted to be president??? He cant even run a ponzi scheme without screwing it up.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Speaking of increased pollution caused by enviros...
June 14, 2007 - 15:45 ET by RJSpeaking of increased pollution caused by enviros...here's a couple of reports on the pollution caused by ethanol:
"...the Environmental Protection Agency is introducing a new rule that will allow ethanol refineries to emit 150 percent more pollution than they currently do - without any penalties."
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200706/NAT20070613b.html
"...marketed as environmentally friendly and called a "cornerstone of America's energy policy", the ethanol industry is dirtying air and water supplies across the heartland..."
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200706/NAT20070613a.html
A strange article if I may sa
June 14, 2007 - 19:36 ET by M J BA strange article if I may say so.
It is only a few weeks since ,on this site, the BBC was ridiculed for being LEFT leaning.
Now ; which is it?
We believe the BBC or we don't?
Or do we cherry pick untill our our views are met?
Or do we cherry pick untill
June 14, 2007 - 19:38 ET by Jack BauerWorks for me. Even a broken clock gets the time right once a day - twice if it's analogue.
Guilt, anyone???
June 15, 2007 - 01:00 ET by UnsaneLet me guess...overwhelmed with guilt at living in the First World???
MAKE WAY FOR THE SAN ANTONIO SPURS!!! THE 1999, 2003, 2005, AND 2007 NBA CHAMPIONS!!!!
Carbon Credits
June 14, 2007 - 20:56 ET by pbthinkerIsn't this the business Al Gore is in? Do you mean he's making money off a ponzi scheme? The shock of it.
One problem I do have, with this report, is the idea that Fox many cover it. Glenn Beck and CNN have done more coverage, on the Global Warming farce, than Fox has. Perhaps it's because Mr. Murdoch has become a believer!
Never argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Power generators received the
June 15, 2007 - 02:43 ET by BricklayerPower generators received their allowances free of charge but were allowed to reflect the value of those in increased prices to customers, as if the companies had actually had to buy the allowances.
Energywatch believes this increased electricity bills by about 7% in 2005.
And according to one government estimate, that delivered windfall profits of up to £1.3bn to the generators in that year - higher than environmental campaigners had claimed last year.
I wonder if these companies are publicly traded?