Skip to content

GWPF Think-Tank Sets Out Areas Of CO2 Dispute With Royal Society

|
LTT/TransportXtra

Lord Lawson’s Global Warming Policy Foundation has set out the areas of scientific agreement and dispute about whether man’s carbon dioxide emissions pose an environmental threat.

Foundation director Benny Peiser outlined the issues in a letter to the Royal Society, which defends man-made warming theory and recently offered to put the GWPF “in touch with people who can offer the Foundation informed scientific opinion”.

Peiser says [he] agrees with the dominant scientific establishment that:

• the greenhouse effect is real;

• CO2’s warming potential follows a logarithmic curve with diminishing returns at higher concentrations;

• absent of feedbacks, a doubling of CO2 from pre-industrial levels would warm the atmosphere by about 1.1ºC; and

• since 1980 global temperatures have increased at an average rate of about 0.1ºC per decade.

But [he] says a lack of understanding about feedbacks means the climate sensitivity of rising CO2 concentrations is a “matter of vigorous scientific debate”.

He says the decline of summer sea ice in the Arctic has happened as sea ice in Antarctic has increased. “This is more consistent with regional albedo changes due to soot than with global temperature changes due to global warming.”

He adds: “There is no consensus that recent climate change has affected the variability of weather or the frequency of extreme weather events.”

[Peiser] says the lack a global temperature rise for the last 16 years is at odds with the so-called “scientific consensus” of man-made warming.

“Predictions of increasing humidity and temperature in the tropical troposphere, a key prediction of rapid greenhouse warming, have been falsified by experimental data, casting doubt on whether the warming of 1980-2000 was man-made,” he adds.

On policy responses, Peiser says: “Policies to decarbonise the economy using today’s technology are likely to be harmful to human welfare and natural ecology… Adaptation may be a cheaper and less harmful policy than mitigation.”

LTT/TransportXtra 31 May 2013