Mark Carney Reith Lecture & BBC edits-out his, "first best option" . . . why?
Click logo to return to 'links-page'
C&C & Doing Enough Soon Enough for UNFCCC-Compliance
Preparations for COP-26 in 2021 are well under way.
Mark Carney - C&C "the first best option"
A question that concerns these is the recent BBC deletions of parts of Mark Carney 4th Reith lecture broadcast originally on BBC R4.
His whole exchange with Neil Record Chair of the IEA was edited out of the transcript the BBC TV version but included in the podcast.
Why and for whom were these 'edits' made?
Rajan's Global Carbon Reduction Initiative plan, referred to by Carney, is here
It is essentially the same as the: -
BACKGROUND
- Global Carbon Incentive Fund plan by Robin Russell-Jones
- Global Sustainability initiative by Harley Wright
- Original C&C (Well Tempered Climate Accord) plan from GCI in 1996.
- Talanoa Dialogue submission from Plan-B
- UK Climate & Health Alliance proposal
- What would Gandhi do
- Personal Carbon Rationing plan by Tina Fawcett
- The original proposal at COP-2 1996
and has a lot of support
In 1994 William Nordhaus (US economist author of "Climate Change - To slow or not to slow") was
tipped to become the Convening Lead Author for the IPCC Second Assessment Economics Section.
He made the arguments that: -
1. Given the America Dream, all countries aspire to be like the US;
2. if it gets warmer agriculture is only 3% of US GDP;
3. and we have shopping malls and air conditioning.
Unsurprisingly, he was rejected (by a delegation of Africans) for making those arguments.
Nordhaus wrote a letter to GCI suggesting we objected to the numeraire being the $,
adding a little caustically, "you can have it all in spotted-owl equivalents if you prefer."
As you can imagine, there was to be a huge row about all this.
His replacement authors (Pearce et al): -
1. had come up with a Global Cost/Benefit Analysis of climate change;
2. it showed it was cheaper to adapt to climate change;
3. despite "15 climate-dead statistical Chinaman =1 statistical climate-dead Englishman."
GCI published a critique of the whole affair asking: -
1. if a spotted-owl equalled a spotted-owl
2. why didn't a human equal a human?
An extra fully international meeting was convened in Montreal (truly) to resolve this momentous question.
It wasn't resolved. A frail consensus was substituted to the effect, 'some feel life has a value beyond the market'.
The whole thing became known-as the Economics of Genocide. There was a huge outcry
C&C was numerically born of that hopeless, schizophrenic and increasingly lethal inequality squabble.
Mark Carney at least made a frail effort ("First Best.") that was nonetheless edited out by the BBC.
Recaptured from the orginal radio broadcast (see first page here )
NB the original argument was made in 1995/6 & published by Springer Verlag in 1999.
The IEA Chair came back on Mark Carney saying his 'bouquet' substitute for Rajan's (First Best) argument,
was 'economically inefficient' and Carney agreed with him! Really, you couldn't make this stuff up.
http://www.gci.org.uk/Documents/C&C_First_&_First_Best.pdf
In the 'natural' world, all things that fly need both wings to do so.
Last year William Nordhaus got the Nobel Prize.
Why? It was for failing to resolve the economics of climate change (I kid you not)!
BLAME GAME
The point here is that Mark Carney, the BBC et al are now knowingly all part of this deadly schizophrenia.
The Raghuram Rajan argument referred to by Carney at least seeks to heal part of this schizophrenia.
That is why the BBC 'edits' are deliberate and are censorship as we approach the last chance saloon of COP-26.
Why and for whom? For a bunch of guys? Utterly culpable and even criminal idiocy.
Even ignoring the 'inequivalence paradox' . . . . .
All political revolutions assume 'equality', simply/cynically (?) to get people on the same page (here for UNFCCC-Compliance).
To delete this is suicidally stupid, as it guarantees failure of the event & the longer and larger effort at UNFCCC-Compliance.
Worse, the consequence of doing this is again already clear - in advance, BLAME THE CHINESE for the failure. Niall Fergusson
(promoting Bjorn Lomborg in the BBC broadcast) is the tiniest little tip of this huge but increasingly ice-cap-melting arrogance.
Probably not too difficult to imagine what the Chinese feel about all this.
All the best, have a care and have a happy new year from Aubrey
COMMENDATIONS
UNFCCC-Compliance "inevitably requires" C&C UNFCCC Executive
Massive Support for C&C principle remains completely unrivalled
12 UN Bodies support C&C Principle
Support from High Ranking Eminent Persons (Asia Development Bank - see below)
Extensive Political Support from Eminent Persons for C&C principle
Support for C&C Principle from many Blue Planet Award winners & others
All UK Political Parties strongly endorsed C&C
C&C supporting Early Day Motions (EDMs) in the UK Parliament
C&C becomes the UK Climate Act in 2008
"The C&C principle is unchallenged" Herman Daly
Huge support for C&C Principle accompanies this submission to UNFCCC 2012
An ALLIANCE FOR UNFCCC-COMPLIANCE
.png)
