IER's Bradley calls global warming a red herring, warns of "open-ended journey" paved with cash.
There is an even bigger problem for California than the $3 billion alleged cost of meeting the Kyoto Protocol (see "Knocked out by Kyoto Protocol?" Public Utilities Fortnightly, Oct. 1, 1998). Kyoto does virtually nothing to stabilize climate. Thomas Wigley of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (National Science Foundation) had documented that perfect compliance with the Kyoto Protocol would reduce anthropogenic warming by less than 0.1 degree C by 2050 and less than 0.2 degree C by 2100 under all model warming scenarios. This impact, warns Wigley, means that "the influence of the Protocol will be undetectable for many decades."fn1 Regarding a sea level rise from a model-assumed warmer world, Kyoto would be good for about a one-inch reduction by the year 2100, leaving about 17 inches of alleged man-made increase for future Kyotos to address under an activist agenda.fn2
Jerry Mahlman of Princeton's Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory told Science last December that "30 Kyotos over the next century" would be needed to control man-made global warming.fn3 This is somewhat exaggerated given the precise calculations of Wigley, but the point is clear. The Kyoto Protocol is not "precautionary" or "buying a little insurance." It is an open-ended journey to an ambiguous destination, the first steps of which are paved with good money. This is why the seemingly moderate message for "early action" on the non-ratified Kyoto Protocol is a bait-and-switch strategy.