Contrapeso En defensa de la libertad y el sentido común
Calentamiento Global
Selección de ContraPeso.info
9 febrero 2007
Sección: ECOLOGIA, Sección: Asuntos
Catalogado en:


ContraPeso.info presenta un dos comunicados del Instituto de Libre Empresa, de Perú. Tratan el tema del calentamiento global y son de gran pertinencia en estos momentos para lograr una visión objetiva del tema.

También se presenta información del Fraser Institute al respecto. En resumen, es irresponsable alarmar sobre el calentamiento  global cuando no se tiene evidencia cierta: se estarían tomando medidas costosas sobre evidencias débiles.

ILE FORMA COALICIÓN GLOBAL JUNTO CON 25 ORGANIZACIONES PARA PROMOVER EL DEBATE RACIONAL ANTE EL ALARMISMO INJUSTIFICADO DEL CAMBIO CLIMÁTICO

4 de febrero de 2007  Lima, Perú – Ante el lanzamiento del último informe alarmista del Panel Intergubernamental del Cambio Climático, un grupo de 26 organizaciones de la sociedad civil, de 23 países, ha formado una nueva coalición global. La Coalición de la Sociedad Civil sobre Cambio Climático busca ofrecer un enfoque más racional al tema, basado en evaluaciones independientes para influir en las políticas públicas.

”Es un poco exagerado afirmar que existe una “temperatura global” a partir de estadísticas globales de temperaturas locales, ni menos que haya un equilibrio termodinámico mundial, de manera que no se puede hablar de una sola temperatura en el mundo” dijo José Luis Tapia, Director del Instituto de Libre Empresa, miembro de la coalición, un centro de pensamiento que opera en Lima. “Es irresponsable alarmar al mundo pasando como científico un promedio de temperatura del mundo que no existe” concluye Tapia. Para más información, contactarse con José Luis Tapia, teléfono [51-1] 9992-1060 o email: info@ileperu.org

La Coalición de la Sociedad Civil sobre el Cambio Climático busca educar al público en temas del cambio climático de una manera imparcial. Fue establecido como respuesta a los muchos y tendenciosos reclamos alarmistas sobre el cambio climático inducido por el ser humano, que son usados para justificar la acción gubernamental.

La coalición agrupa a 26 organizaciones independiente de la sociedad civil de 23 países quienes comparten una obligación  de mejorar el entendimiento público acerca de una amplia gama de temas de políticas públicas. Todas son organizaciones no lucrativas independientes de partidos políticos y gobiernos.

Estudio independiente del cambio climático refuta reclamos alarmistas hechos en el “Resumen oficial para los diseñadores de políticas” de las Naciones Unidas

Febrero 6, 2007  Lima, Perú—Un estudio independiente del cambio climático contradice en muchos aspectos al Resumen Oficial para los Diseñadores de Políticas publicado el viernes en Paris – poniendo en duda la validez de los reclamos hechos por la ONU.

El nuevo informe fue producido por el reconocido Instituto Fraser, miembro de la Coalición de la Sociedad Civil del Cambio Climático. Estudio que fue elaborado por un panel de 10 expertos internacionalmente reconocidos, con el propósito de evaluar el borrador de la primera sección del próximo informe del Panel de las Naciones Unidas del Cambio Climático (IPCC).

“El debate alrededor del cambio climático ha llegado a ser altamente politizado y alarmista. Entonces, preguntamos, a un equipo de científicos altamente calificados para que miren el Informe del IPCC y elaboren un resumen sobre el real estado del clima. Nuestra intención  con este informe es permitir a la gente que vean por ellos mismos lo qué es ya conocido y lo que aun mantiene alta incertidumbre  respecto de la ciencia del cambio climático” dijo el Dr. Ross McKitrick, coordinador del informe.

Este  “Resumen independiente para los diseñadores de política“” concluye:

• “Sobre la base de la mayoría de medidas exactas disponibles – de satélites por ejemplo- hay poca evidencia del calentamiento atmosférico desde 1979 (cuando los satélites empiezan a registrar).

• Ninguna evidencia señala que hay cambios peligrosos o sin precedentes en el clima y menos que estén en curso.

• No hay ningún patrón consistente en precipitaciones de largo plazo que tienda a cubrir áreas de nieve, o eleven la profundidad de estas.

• Los datos actuales sugieren una subida global del nivel del mar entre dos y tres milímetros por año.

• El cambio observado del clima no se puede atribuir a una causa específica, tal como concentraciones atmosféricas crecientes del gas del invernadero. Los estudios que descansan en simulaciones por computadora no consideran la incertidumbre inherente en los modelos del clima, ni explican adecuadamente muchas influencias potencialmente importantes tales como aerosoles, actividad solar, y cambios de la utilización del suelo.

Independent summary shows new UN climate change report refutes alarmism and reveals major uncertainties in the science

February 5, 2007 London, UK - An independent review of the latest United Nations report on climate change shows that the scientific evidence about global warming remains uncertain and provides no basis for alarmism.

In 2006, independent research organization The Fraser Institute convened a panel of 10 internationally-recognized experts to read the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) draft report and produce an Independent Summary for Policymakers. The result, released today, is a detailed and thorough overview of the state of the science. This independent summary has been reviewed by more than 50 scientists around the world and their views on its balance and reliability are tabulated for readers.

“While a lot of effort goes into producing the large IPCC reports, its complex message is often obscured by its accompanying Summary for Policymakers. That summary report does not come from the scientific community. Instead it is developed through political negotiations by unnamed bureaucrats from various governments. Critics of past summaries point out they downplay and gloss over areas of uncertainty and data limitations,” said Dr. Ross McKitrick, coordinator of the independent review and senior fellow with The Fraser Institute.

“The debate around climate change has become highly politicized and alarmist. So we asked a team of highly qualified scientists to look at the IPCC report and produce a summary that they felt communicates the real state of knowledge. Our intent with this document is to allow people to see for themselves what is known and what remains highly uncertain within climate change science.”

The Fraser Institute’s Independent Summary for Policymakers carefully connects summary paragraphs to the chapters and sections of the IPCC report from which they are drawn, allowing readers to refer directly to what is in the IPCC Report.

According to The Fraser Institute’s independent summary of the IPCC report:

• Data collected by weather satellites since 1979 continue to exhibit little evidence of atmospheric warming, with estimated trends ranging from nearly zero to the low end of past IPCC forecasts. There is no significant warming in the tropical troposphere (the lowest portion of the Earth’s atmosphere), which accounts for half the world’s atmosphere, despite model predictions that warming should be amplified there.

• Temperature data collected at the surface exhibits an upward trend from 1900 to 1940, and again from 1979 to the present. Trends in the Southern Hemisphere are small compared to those in the Northern Hemisphere.

• There is no compelling evidence that dangerous or unprecedented changes are underway. Perceptions of increased extreme weather events are potentially due to increased reporting. There is too little data to reliably confirm these perceptions.

• There is no globally-consistent pattern in long-term precipitation trends, snow-covered area, or snow depth. Arctic sea ice thickness showed an abrupt loss prior to the 1990s, and the loss stopped shortly thereafter. There is insufficient data to conclude that there are any trends in Antarctic sea ice thickness.

• Current data suggest a global mean sea level rise of between two and three millimeters per year. Models project an increase of roughly 20 centimeters over the next 100 years, if accompanied by a warming of 2.0 to 4.5 degrees Celsius.

• Natural climatic variability is now believed to be substantially larger than previously estimated, as is the uncertainty associated with historical temperature reconstructions.

• Attributing an observed climate change to a specific cause like greenhouse gas emissions is not formally possible, and therefore relies on computer model simulations. These attribution studies do not take into account the basic uncertainty about climate models, or all potentially important influences like aerosols, solar activity, and land use changes.

• Computer models project a range of future forecasts, which are inherently uncertain for the coming century, especially at the regional level. It is not possible to say which, if any, of today’s climate models are reliable for climate prediction and forecasting.

“There is no evidence provided by the IPCC report that the uncertainty around climate change can be formally resolved from first principles, statistical hypothesis testing or modeling exercises,” McKitrick said.

“What does this mean for the average person? It means that while scientific evidence shows the climate is naturally variable, we still don’t know the extent to which humans are contributing to future climate change and whether or not such change is a good or bad thing. People who are bewildered by the intense global warming alarmism of the past few years should read the Independent Summary for Policymakers to get a more accurate and balanced understanding of the real state of knowledge on this important subject.”

[The Fraser Institute is an independent research and educational organization based in Canada. Its mission is to measure, study, and communicate the impact of competitive markets and government intervention on the welfare of individuals. To protect the Institute’s independence, it does not accept grants from governments or contracts for research.]

Independent Summary for Policymakers: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report

Reporte completo aquí en PDF

Executive Summary: The Independent Summary for Policymakers is a detailed and thorough overview of the state of climate change science as laid out in the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) draft report. This independent summary has been reviewed by more than 50 scientists around the world and their views on its balance and reliability are tabulated for readers. It carefully connects summary paragraphs to the chapters and sections of the IPCC report from which they are drawn, allowing readers to refer directly to what is in the IPCC Report, including:

• Data collected by weather satellites since 1979 continue to exhibit little evidence of atmospheric warming, with estimated trends ranging from nearly zero to the low end of past IPCC forecasts. There is no significant warming in the tropical troposphere (the lowest portion of the Earth’s atmosphere), which accounts for half the world’s atmosphere, despite model predictions that warming should be amplified there.

• Temperature data collected at the surface exhibits an upward trend from 1900 to 1940, and again from 1979 to the present. Trends in the Southern Hemisphere are small compared to those in the Northern Hemisphere.

• There is no compelling evidence that dangerous or unprecedented changes are underway. Perceptions of increased extreme weather events are potentially due to increased reporting. There is too little data to reliably confirm these perceptions.

• There is no globally-consistent pattern in long-term precipitation trends, snow-covered area, or snow depth. Arctic sea ice thickness showed an abrupt loss prior to the 1990s, and the loss stopped shortly thereafter. There is insufficient data to conclude that there are any trends in Antarctic sea ice thickness.

• Current data suggest a global mean sea level rise of between two and three millimeters per year. Models project an increase of roughly 20 centimeters over the next 100 years, if accompanied by a warming of 2.0 to 4.5 degrees Celsius.

• Natural climatic variability is now believed to be substantially larger than previously estimated, as is the uncertainty associated with historical temperature reconstructions.

• Attributing an observed climate change to a specific cause like greenhouse gas emissions is not formally possible, and therefore relies on computer model simulations. These attribution studies do not take into account the basic uncertainty about climate models, or all potentially important influences like aerosols, solar activity, and land use changes.

• Computer models project a range of future forecasts, which are inherently uncertain for the coming century, especially at the regional level. It is not possible to say which, if any, of today’s climate models are reliable for climate prediction and forecasting.

&&&&&&

ADDENDUM

• Miembros de la coalición:

  • Alternate Solutions Institute Pakistan
  • Alabama Policy Institute USA
  • Bluegrass Institute for Public Policy, Kentucky USA
  • CEPOS Denmark
  • China Sustainable Development Research Centre, Capital University of Business & Economics China
  • Fraser Institute Canada Instituto de Libre Empresa Perú
  • Free Market Foundation South Africa
  • Frontier Centre for Public Policy Canada
  • Fundación Atlas 1853 Argentina
  • Instituto Ecuatoriano de Economía Política (IEEP) Ecuador
  • Imani Ghana
  • Initiative of Public Policy Analysis (IPPA) Nigeria
  • Institute for Liberty and Analysis of Policy in Government (INLAP)Costa Rica
  • Institute for Free EnterpriseGermany
  • Institute of Economic Analysis Russia
  • Instituto Liberdade Brazil
  • Institute for Market Economics Bulgaria
  • International Policy Network UK
  • Istituto Bruno Leoni Italy
  • Jerusalem Institute for Market StudiesIsrael
  • John Locke Foundation, North Carolina USA
  • Liberalni InstituteCzech Republic
  • Liberty Institute India
  • Lion Rock Institute Hong Kong
  • Tennessee Center for Policy Research USA

• Un reporte del Tennesse Center for Policy Research:

“Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy. Gore’s mansion, located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES). In his documentary, the former Vice President calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home. The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average. Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. As a result of his energy consumption, Gore’s average monthly electric bill topped $1,359. Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore’s energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006. Gore’s extravagant energy use does not stop at his electric bill. Natural gas bills for Gore’s mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year. “As the spokesman of choice for the global warming movement, Al Gore has to be willing to walk the walk, not just talk the talk, when it comes to home energy use,” said Tennessee Center for Policy Research President Drew Johnson. In total, Gore paid nearly $30,000 in combined electricity and natural gas bills for his Nashville estate in 2006″.


ContraPeso.info es un servicio con antecedentes desde 1995, que funciona como proveedor de ideas e información adicional a los medios dominantes.





esp
Búsqueda
Tema
Fecha
Newsletter
RSS Facebook
Extras