Download here

Carbon dioxide is NOT a Pollutant
• Without CO2 we would not be here. If it is a pollutant, then
so is water (H2O), which is the other main effluent from
fossil fuel combustion
• We do not any of us breathe out black smoke, pace SBS
and ABC.
• The increase in atmospheric concentration from 280 ppm
in 1750 to 384 ppm at end 2007 is trivial (growth rate is
c0.2% p.a.)
• CO2 is a fertilizer, without which we would starve.
• Minister Wong spoke about the “ethics” of dealing with
climate change at LSE 2 weeks ago. Her Carbon Pollution
Reduction Scheme is based on a falsehood.
The Garnaut Review: A Critique
Tim Curtin
Associate, RMAP
Copies of main paper and ppt version available
from [email protected]
History of CO2 and global temperature
Global temperature 1958-2007
GISS Gobal Temperatures 1958 to 2007
15
14.8
14.6
14.4
14.2
14
13.8
13.6
13.4
13.2
13
Actual
2006
2003
2000
1997
1994
1991
1988
1985
1982
1979
1976
1973
1970
1967
1964
1961
1958
Log. (Actual)
How to create alarm and despondency
The IPCC method (please do not mention the scale)
Global Annual Anomaly 1850-2007 (from average 1951-1980)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8
2005
2000
1995
1990
1985
1980
1975
1970
1965
1960
1955
1950
1945
1940
1935
1930
1925
1920
1915
1910
1905
1900
1895
1890
1885
1880
1875
1870
1865
1860
1855
Annual Anomaly
1850
0
The Science of the Garnaut Report
Science of Climate Change
• Stephen Hawkings: “one cannot predict
future events exactly if one cannot even
measure the present state of the universe
precisely”
• IPCC 2007: Oceanic Uptakes < Terrestrial
• Garnaut 2008: Oceanic Uptakes >
Terrestrial
The Carbon Budget
• Year on Year Change in the atmospheric concentration of
CO2 = Ct – Co
• Annual Emissions (E) of CO2 from all sources
• Uptakes (U) of CO2 by the oceanic and terrestrial
biosphere (mainly photosynthesis)
• Ct – Co = Et – Ut,
• but measuring Ut is difficult, so
• We derive Ut = Et - (Ct – Co)
• But in reality (Ct-Co) is the residual/dump, and Ut is an
independent variable with a life of its own largely
determined by the ENSO, but that is not how it is treated
by the IPCC & Garnaut models (MAGICC etc).
MAGICC
• This model goes back to Ian Enting and
Tom Wigley et al. CSIRO 1994 and Wigley
& Raper 2001
• It was the basis for much of the modelling
by the IPCC 2007 (WG1, ch.8, SI) and was
“tuned” to the output of 19 other models.
• But no room for “sinks” in the parameters.
“Saturation” of the terrestrial sink implies that it is
already or soon will be impossible to raise crop
yields and forestry output. How so?
Saturating Sinks?
400.00
La Nina
300.00
250.00
200.00
150.00
100.00
El Nino
50.00
Index Em
Index Up
Index Atm CO2
20
07
20
05
20
03
20
01
19
99
19
97
19
95
19
93
19
91
19
89
19
87
19
85
19
83
19
81
19
79
19
77
19
75
19
73
19
71
19
69
19
67
19
65
19
63
19
61
-
19
59
Indices 1959 = 100
350.00
Saturating Sinks?
Falling trend of the Airborne Fraction
1.20
El Nino
1.00
0.80
AF
Linear (AF)
0.60
0.40
La Nina
0.20
20
05
20
03
20
01
19
99
19
97
19
95
19
93
19
91
19
89
19
87
19
85
19
83
19
81
19
79
19
77
19
75
19
73
19
71
19
69
19
67
19
65
19
63
19
61
19
59
-
Rising (?) Trend of Airborne Fraction
(Canadell data)
90.00
El Nino
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
Airborne Fraction %
Log. (Airborne Fraction %)
20
08
20
05
20
02
19
99
19
96
19
93
19
90
19
87
19
84
19
81
19
78
19
75
19
72
19
69
19
66
19
63
19
60
-
19
80
19
81
19
82
19
83
19
84
19
85
19
86
19
87
19
88
19
89
19
90
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
Rising (?) trend of the Airborne
Fraction (CDIAC data)
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
La Nina
-
AF
Linear (AF)
Emissions and Uptakes are directly related,
pace Canadell et al. 2007
Canadell's Saturating sinks. Carbon Dioxide
CO2 Emissions and Uptakes 1960-2007
8.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
Emissions of CO2 (GtC)
Uptakes
Linear (Uptakes)
8.
17
7.
50
7.
12
6.
80
6.
84
6.
49
6.
20
6.
31
6.
11
5.
76
5.
46
5.
13
5.
19
5.
40
5.
04
4.
62
4.
64
4.
23
3.
80
3.
41
3.
15
2.
85
2.
59
-
2.
46
Uptakes of CO2 (GtC)
7.00
The Airborne Fraction of CO2 emissions is a function first
and last of ENSO
12
90.00
80.00
70.00
8
60.00
50.00
6
40.00
4
30.00
20.00
Airborne Fraction (%)
10
2
10.00
El Nino
07
05
20
03
20
01
20
99
20
97
19
95
Airborne Fraction %
19
93
19
91
19
89
19
87
19
85
19
83
19
81
19
79
Total Uptakes
19
77
19
75
19
73
19
71
19
69
19
67
Total Emissions
19
65
19
63
19
19
19
61
-
59
0
19
Emissions and Uptakes GtC
El Nino
Log. (Airborne Fraction %)
Food
Temp
CO2 @ ML
Fertilizers
20
20
20
20
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
03
02
01
00
99
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
86
85
84
83
82
81
80
Indices 1980=100
Food Production relative to Fertilizers, Temperature
and CO2
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Atmospheric CO2, Rain, and Wheat yields,
Temora 1959-1999
(Data from Geoff Smart, GFS Genetics)
SUMMARY OUTPUT
Wheat Yield at Temora 1959-1999 as function of
Annual rainfall and level of Atmospheric Concentration of CO2
Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.765839
R Square 0.586509
Adjusted R Square
0.564746
Standard Error
0.455124
Observations
41
ANOVA
df
Regression
Residual
Total
SS
MS
F
Significance F
2 11.16481 5.582403 26.95018 5.16E-08
38 7.871238 0.207138
40 19.03604
Coefficients
Standard Error t Stat
P-value Lower 95%Upper 95%
Intercept -3.832531 0.811148 -4.724825 3.12E-05 -5.474614 -2.190448
Rain pa
0.002023 0.000497 4.068131 0.000231 0.001016 0.00303
Atmos CO2 0.012479 0.002132 5.852681 9.07E-07 0.008163 0.016796
Atmospheric CO2 and Wheat Yield, Temora
1959-1999
Atmos CO2 Line Fit Plot
3.5
3
Yield
2.5
2
Yield
Predicted Yield
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
200
400
Atmos CO2
600
Rainfall and wheat yields
Temora 1959-1999
Rain pa Line Fit Plot
3.5
3
Yield
2.5
2
Yield
Predicted Yield
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
500
Rain pa
1000
A recipe for famine?
Impact of 90% reduction from 2000 emissions by 2050 with ongoing uptakes
(If Uptakes fall instead of rising as depicted, food production also falls pro rata)
Pre-industrial CO2 & Food
Output
400
350
10
300
5
Emissions 10% of 2000 level in 2050
250
0
200
-5
150
-10
100
-15
50
-20
0
Fossil fuel emissions 1994-2004, growth 3.2%pa to 2012, declining 7% p.a.2013-50
Total Terrestrial & Oceanic Uptake, extrapolated at actual growth 3.4% p.a. 1994-2004
Net atmospheric uptake of Carbon Dioxide Emissions (Gt C)
Atmospheric CO2, total in ppm, after emissions reduction to 10% of 2000 by 2050
Atmospheric Concentration of
CO2 ppm
15
450
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
20
12
20
14
20
16
20
18
20
20
20
22
20
24
20
26
20
28
20
30
20
32
20
34
20
36
20
38
20
40
20
42
20
44
20
46
20
48
20
50
Emissions and Uptakes (GtC)
20
Business Council of Australia
• Reductions in EBIT for 14 case studies under
the Green Paper compensation scheme,
2020
• THREE BUSINESSES MUST SHUT
• SEVEN BUSINESSES MUST REDUCE
• OPERATING COSTS IN SOME WAY
• FOUR BUSINESSES MUST REVIEW
OPERATIONS
• Source: PJPL (Rod Simms).
180.00
160.00
140.00
120.00
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
P@$20& EBIT 20% sales
P@$45 EBIT 20%
st
ee
l
&
Iro
n
Al
um
in
a
ic
s
er
am
C
co
al
Bl
ac
k
Pi
gs
ca
ttl
e
ai
ry
D
Sh
ee
p
en
t
em
C
Be
ef
ca
ttl
e
-
Al
um
in
iu
m
Effective Tax rate of ETS % of EBIT
How to wipe out Rio Tinto
and the National Party
P@$20 EBIT 30% Sales
P@$45 EBIT 30%
ETS: the mother of all slush funds
• The ETS with full coverage of all sectors would
raise c$8 billion from sale of permits at the initial
fixed price of $20 per tonne of CO2, and more
than $16 billion after auctions lead to convergence
with the EU price of $45 per tonne.
• Allocating as proposed half of such sums ($4 to $8
Billion) to helping the poor (in targeted
constituencies) to keep on buying electricity, gas
and petrol as usual creates a slush fund beyond the
dreams of even Robert Mugabe.
Prisoners’ Dilemma and Free
Riders
• Australia’s best course of action is to be a free
rider. On our own we can have no impact on
“climate change” (even if the ACT Greens believe
the ACT can on its own prevent global climate
change!).
• China cannot be a free rider. Without its total
support, there will be no reduction in climate
change from which it would benefit without
incurring any costs.
St Petersburg Paradox
• The great Daniel Bernoulli anticipated Garnaut by
noting the potential declining marginal utility of
money (the more one has, in theory, the less one
values each extra dollar (tell that to the Murdochs,
Lowys, and Packers!).
• But he also noticed that this means the marginal
utility of costs of an ETS on one earning say
$50,000 now will exceed the dollar for dollar
utility of benefits of avoided climate change even
if still alive and earning $100,000 by 2100.
The “greatest market failure” (Stern &
Garnaut)
• “Market failure” involves creators of social costs,
like pollution, or the free rider problem of the
tragedy of the Commons, not paying for the costs
they impose on society.
• But “Carbon Pollution” creates as we have seen
higher yields across global agriculture and
livestock for which the beneficiaries pay nothing,
clearly also a market failure.
• In Australia’s case, with its primary exports the
largest in the world (per capita), the world owes us
for all the CO2 those exports have soaked up.
The last windmill, Wedmore in North
Somerset, UK, c.1895.
• Closed c1905 when it
could not compete with
flour millers using
electricity supplied by the
Wedmore Power Co
• That electricity was not
subsidised by an ETS, but
produced cheaper flour
than the windmill could,
unlike the Wong ETS and
its Lake George Wind
Farm.