Why Kyoto failed
Sunday, 26 October 2008 08:07 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
bens_dadWhile looking for confirmation that the UK government falsified results of Salters' Duck experiments (http://rblanchard.users.btopenworld.com/technologies.htm is the bet I;ve found so far) I came across
http://www.martininstitute.ox.ac.uk/NR/rdonlyres/06C527B7-D0DA-4D57-A38C-EDD6C5863112/0/TheWrongTrousers.pdf which is a long critique of Kyoto and why it failed in its own terms. It takes a long time to get going but there are some interesting bits in it.
http://www.martininstitute.ox.ac.uk/NR/rdonlyres/06C527B7-D0DA-4D57-A38C-EDD6C5863112/0/TheWrongTrousers.pdf which is a long critique of Kyoto and why it failed in its own terms. It takes a long time to get going but there are some interesting bits in it.
no subject
Date: 2008-10-26 08:20 am (UTC)Over 60% of all energy R&D undertaken around the world during the past forty years has been spent on developing nuclear power. That was an opportunity/cost choice against other investments in large scale renewables, notably ocean kinetic (wave power capture; ocean current turbines etc.) and solar sources.
The previous page talks about investing in technology R&D:
It is not a case of having to start from scratch, either: many of these technologies already exist; they just need the investment to take them to the production levels that would make them economically competitive.
So if we had invested in renewable energy twenty years ago we probably would not be in a mess now.