The UnAustralian

Tuesday, June 24, 2003
 
Ian Castles on Global Warming

As readers of my blog well know, Ian Castles (and to a lesser degree, his co-conspirator David Henderson) are a pet obsession for me. So in the interests of carrying on this saga, it will be informative to post on the latest non-twist.

Ian Castles has had a letter published in today's Canberra Times titled "Fears of Global Warming Grossly Overblown" (it's also important to note, that the headline was probably written by a Canberra Times journo). He replies to an earlier article which apparently states that the IPCC has "predicted" that global temperatures could rise by up to six degrees in the next hundred years.

He notes the following (with my extra observations in brackets):

* the IPCC scenarios are projections, not predictions (he got slammed for making this mistake in his Energy & Environment paper).

* he has argued that "scenario quantifications had been miscalculated because of a major technical error by the modellers" and "it was unlikely that by the end of this century the average incomes of the entire world population would be several times higher than that of the most wealthy countries in the world at present, as envisaged in most of the scenarios".

* that 15 of the IPCC emission scenarios authors have responded and that the "technical issue remains unresolved" (hopefully he plans to detail what issues remain unresolved, personally I feel that his argument has been shredded).

* that they have also said that the projected incomes of developing countries in high growth scenarios are unlikely to occur (this is simply because they are meant to represent the upper limits of growth).

* and that in the absence of climate policies, these high growth scenarios could still lead to relatively low CO2 emissions (it should be important to note here, that none of the emission scenarios include climate polices - however, many of the low emission scenarios include environmental policies which are considered to be "interventionist").

* he concludes with "[t]here is every reason to believe that a rich world would have the means and the will to ensure such an outcome".


| 8:55 PM