Unintended Consequences part deux

Here is another example of what happens when you try to make policy off of feelings rather than fact.



"The biggest emissions-cutting projects under the Kyoto Protocol on global warming have directly contributed to an increase in the production of gases that destroy the ozone layer, a senior U.N. official says.
In addition, evidence suggests that the same projects, in developing countries, have deliberately raised their emissions of greenhouse gases only to destroy these and therefore claim more carbon credits, said Stanford University's Michael Wara."



Curbing emissions is not the flaw....the flaw is allowing "carbon credits"...



"At the heart of the clash is a carbon trading scheme under Kyoto, worth $5 billion last year, whereby rich countries pay poorer ones to cut greenhouse gas emissions on their behalf, called the clean development mechanism (CDM)." (emphasis mine)



Carbon offsets is nothing but a scheme....a scheme designed to line the pockets of people like Al Gore who are invested in carbon offset trading companies. It really does nothing for the environment.



"CDM projects which destroy HFC 23 are especially lucrative because the gas is 12,000 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide (CO2), although its overall contribution to climate change is far less because CO2 is much more common.
As a result, destroying HFC 23 spawns far more money-spinning carbon credits than any other way of curbing greenhouse gas emissions."



All of this is being done in the name of curbing something that may or may not be factual. Rather than do more harm to the environment, we really need to find out first if global warming is man made and the what (if anything) can be done to curb it.