The Malta Independent has an interesting report on a parliamentary discussion on 'climate change'. If there was a need for further proof that this class of political representatives is totally incompetent and detached from reality this must be surely it. They are scientific and economic illiterates, regargarising junk science and economics and mistaking myth for fact. If one does not have the facts right, the policies that will follow will be wrong, i say they will be catastophic. Let us get some REAL FACTS sorted out before we we turn our scrutiny to this so called parliamentary discussion. Contrary to what you have been fed by the media: 1. There is no scientific consensus that the world is warming, the global mean temperature has actually dropped for the past seven consecutive years. 2. CO2 is not harmful, it is an inert gas without which life would be impossible. 3 The levels of climatic change are within the parameters of natarul variability. mean temperature difference over the past century has been about .5 of degree celcius and if you take the last few years into consideration it is practically ZERO. 4. The percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere is .04% and this is why it is known as a trace gas. 5. The contribution of man to this .04% is of 3.3% and Malta's contribution to this 3.3% of .04% is less than .1%. Hence Malta's contribution to C02 in the atmosphere is .04 x 3.3 x .1 = .0132 of a percent. Malta is bound to cut it's CO2 emissions by 20% by 2020, ie: by 2020 Malta CO2 levels would have to be 80% of .0132 = .01056 of the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. It is as close to zero as you can get. Now for all this it is estimated that you, joe public will have to come up with over 800,000,000 Euros for direct infrastructural investment at least by 2016. No one knows (let alone debated in parliament) what the real costs to the economy will be in competitiveness, carbon leakage etc. If the evidence coming out from Spain is anything to go by either stock up your candles and learn how to cycle or flee to somewhere where the politicians and the media have a semblance of sanity. 6. The current levels of CO2 are actually amongst the lowest they have ever been in earth's history. if anything we are impoverished of CO2. 7. The earth has experienced warmer periods even in the last few thousand years, notably the Bronze, Roman and Medieval periods - let us not forget that five hundred years ago, Greenland was actually fertile enough to support Viking colonies. Warmer periods are actually associated with greater prosperity. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out why - the cold is a greater killer, and warmer periods have rendered greater soil fertility and harvest yields. 8. Malta has still to pay a penny from the 300,000,000 Euros of capital it borrowed to invest in the Delimara Power Station. It has only been paying interest so far. You have to add all this with over 4,000,000,000 (most probably it is even higher) Euros of national debt. You would have thought that all this would have led to a sober debate in Parliament on whether this whole expensive exercise from which we might never actually recuperate was really the wisest way to go wouldn't you? Alas, "Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi said the debate came at a time when climate change was on everyone's lips." Is it really?, from all the polls that i have seen locally and abroad is that as a priority the vast majority of respondents place it rock bottom. If it's on people's lips it's because they are wondering how their leaders can actually be so dumb to indulge in such an orgy of public spending with very dubious benefits. 
Malta's version of Al Gore continues "The strategy not only outlined a plan but opened people's eyes to the danger of doing nothing". So the people need their eyes opened, even though climate change we're told is on 'everyone's lips'. I think, the people are at a stage where they are absolutely terrified whenever the Government actually proposes to do something - because they know it will simply translate to incompetence and more taxation. "Within six years of doing nothing, he said, the economy would no longer be sustainable and Malta would be paying a high price" Really how? where is the quantification? Your climate change committee has admitted it lacks the data to even make a rough estimate. Has Gonzi become a prophet now too? or perhaps, just perhaps, did he mean that we would be incurring EU penalties if we did not tow the line? and why did he sign up to these EU targets if he did not have the data to quantify the effects on the economy in the first place? biex nidhru sbieh? this is what our MPs should be debating. but no, "It was time for Malta to respond maturely, he concluded." No, Prime Minister, It is time to have your head examined. The only person who seemed to speak some sense was Labour MP Mizzi. who invited: "the Prime Minister to take his advice and entrust a team of experts with preparing a report on the energy sector in Malta, so people could have a clear picture of what it meant to reach the targets and its cost."
"Labour spokesperson for Media and Education Evarist Bartolo said reducing emissions would contribute positively to the quality of life. The problem, he said, was that documents issued by the government were good in themselves, but the work was either not carried out, or the opposite happened."
- Evidently he was confusing CO2 with actual pollutants. CO2 is not harmful Mister Bartolo, you exhale it all the time - without it you die, there would be no plants, there would be no life. But the most hilarious statement comes from that pompous lawyer cum MP wannabe scientist Franco Debono: "if Malta didn't invest as it should, it would be investing in new hospitals.(ha ha ehh ehh nearly choked, look up CO2 Franco, pick up a book of elementary organic chemistry or else just keep your big mouth shut. You're in parliament for God's sake, not in a Kazin in your constituency, where such crass ignorance might have been politely overlooked, and i say politely because even the most illiterate of peasants have a better scientific understanding of the natural world - just ask those farmers who pump CO2 into their greenhouses to hasten the yield and growth of their crop!) But by God, he wasn't finished: "Dr Gonzi came up with a proposition which made a lot of sense, he said, a proposition to declare the duties to future generations. He appealed that Malta start looking into hydrogen, a promising alternative source." Now letting aside the self righteousness with which he utters these pompous statements. Mr Debono is again encouraged to learn some science. For starters: Despite it being the most common element in the universe, Hydrogen is NOT an energy source, it is an energy CARRIER. Commercially, hydrogen is mainly produced from fossil fuel and to a lesser extent by electrolysis using energy produced from fossil fuels. Basic Research Needs for the Hydrogen Economy states, “Hydrogen is currently produced on an industrial scale through steam reforming of natural gas.” Hydrogen produced from either fossil fuels or by electrolysis involves a loss of energy and results in high emissions of greenhouse gases. In the Future of the Hydrogen Economy: Bright or Bleak? published on April 15 2003, Ulf Bossel says “The efficiency of hydrogen production by autothermal reforming is about 90%, but may be less”, and further on says, “Also, more CO2 is released by this indirect process than by direct use of the hydrocarbon precursors.” - But Franco knows more. Not to be outdone, the notary, now turned energy expert Francis Zammit Dimech, who is mostly famous for attending cocktail parties and social events jumps in: "Nationalist MP Francis Zammit Dimech said the strategy emphasised the importance of a change in mentality. This was a government with a serious policy on the matter." - Yes Francis, we need a change in mentality - back to one which elected people who knew what they are talking about for a start. and now for the pearl of wisdom: "The biggest mistake people could ever make would be to give priority to the recession over climate change, as it would be like an individual with a terminal illness concentrating on the paint peeling off his walls." Prepare to feed your family on carbon credits. Lunacy, sheer lunacy. The more you think about it, the more striking the phrase used by Martin Newland becomes. His "moral infantilism" so aptly labels much of what is currently wrong with society – or, more specifically, our leaders. Arguably, the inability correctly to assess priorities – to distinguish between what is truly important and what is irrelevant fluff – is one of the key signs of "moral infantilism". It accounts for the disconnect between our leaders and the rest of us, and between the media and us. They have lost that vital ability to focus on the important. Then, when you thought you heard enough, comes George Pullicino who said: "that in the past Labour MPs jeered at a Nationalist government which tried to put climate change on the agenda. Labour MP Leo Brincat picked on details, but did not go into the most important proposals. Mr Pullicino was afraid the reluctance to give feedback was a strategy to be liked by everyone. Climate change merited a serious policy." Like infants, with less knowledge than infants they delight in exchanging diatribes. This is what our highest national institution has been reduced to. My suggestion is that if they really wanted to contribute anything, they should just stop exhaling CO2 and let us who actually do reside on this planet, get on with our lives.
|
MCAST Open Weekend – Visits and Tours to Industry
