But never mind that, Mr. Perry suggests; those scientists are just in it for the money, “manipulating data” to create a fake threat. In his book “Fed Up,” he dismissed climate science as a “contrived phony mess that is falling apart.”
I could point out that Mr. Perry is buying into a truly crazy conspiracy theory, which asserts that thousands of scientists all around the world are on the take, with not one willing to break the code of silence. I could also point out that multiple investigations into charges of intellectual malpractice on the part of climate scientists have ended up exonerating the accused researchers of all accusations. But never mind: Mr. Perry and those who think like him know what they want to believe, and their response to anyone who contradicts them is to start a witch hunt.
We identified 26 analogous situations, such as the alarm over mercury in fish. Government actions were demanded in 25 situations and carried out in 23. None of the alarming forecasts were correct, none of the interventions were useful, and harm was caused in 20.
Emphasis mine. No links, no evidence... nothing to support that outrageous claim. I'm looking for documentation on the efficacy of the EPA regulations.
In America one-in-six children born every year have been exposed to mercury levels so high that they are potentially at risk for learning disabilities and motor skill impairment and short-term memory loss. That type of mercury exposure is caused by eating certain kinds of fish, which contain high levels of the toxin from both natural and man-made sources such as emissions from coal-fired power plants. One government analysis shows that 630,000 children each year are exposed to potentially unsafe mercury levels in the womb. If the government and its scientists know about the mercury problem, why do so many people continue to be poisoned?
...
In February 2004, a new analysis by the Environmental Protection Agency revealed that "about 630,000 children are born each year at risk for lowered intelligence and learning problems caused by exposure to high levels of mercury in the womb," nearly double the previous EPA estimate.
Looks like regulation is not doing enough:
Why is that relevant to this blog? Because some in congress are trying to castrate the EPA, which is trying to limit CO2... and if they succeed, it may put civilization at risk
...
And those supplies aren’t keeping pace. Conventional oil production has been flat for four years; in that sense, at least, peak oil has arrived. True, alternative sources, like oil from Canada’s tar sands, have continued to grow. But these alternative sources come at relatively high cost, both monetary and environmental.
Also, over the past year, extreme weather — especially severe heat and drought in some important agricultural regions — played an important role in driving up food prices. And, yes, there’s every reason to believe that climate change is making such weather episodes more common.
So what are the implications of the recent rise in commodity prices? It is, as I said, a sign that we’re living in a finite world, one in which resource constraints are becoming increasingly binding. This won’t bring an end to economic growth, let alone a descent into Mad Max-style collapse. It will require that we gradually change the way we live, adapting our economy and our lifestyles to the reality of more expensive resources
I have huge respect for Krugman... but I think he needs to show his work when he claims that our economy can continue to grow in a finite world.
Paul's rosy prediction can happen. There are two ways to grow: by getting bigger or through development. Climate change will force us to stop getting bigger. If we respond correctly, climate change will also force us to develop more efficient and environmentally friendly sources of energy, and encourage people to live more ecofriendly lifestyles.
But throughout history civilizations have collapsed because they ignored the warnings and continued their economic and lifestyle practices even though their resources or economic model could no longer support it.
I love Wikipedia:
It may be that economic growth improves the quality of life up to a point, after which it doesn't improve the quality of life, but rather obstructs sustainable living.[27] Historically, sustained growth has reached its limits (and turned to catastrophic decline) when perturbations to the environmental system last long enough to destabilise the bases of a culture.[27]
And the convergence of climate change with peak everything is going to put enormous strains on everything and everybody.
What's going to happen when gas is routinely $4/gal? For starters, suburban home values will stagnate, or even go down. Imports will get expensive, and people will have less money to buy stuff. That's a recipe for recession.
I think the Locavore movement has great value. As does the self provisioning community. By being early adopters of this lifestyle we'll be somewhat insulated from some of the worst parts of hitting the walls of our finite world.
