Tuesday, November 30, 2010

The Reference Frame: U.N. climate boss: at least the weather will be better
Some people still don't understand the concept of numbers and subtraction. There is a different weather in CancĂșn and in Scotland - and this difference genuinely influences lives. However, the difference is +28-(-20) = 48 °C so. Nearly fifty degrees Celsius. Why is it so hard for so many people to see that 1-2 degrees that may hypothetically be added could be a "marginal positive" but would be irrelevant from any qualitative viewpoint?
Ceci n'est pas un homme de neige! – Telegraph Blogs
And while we’re on the subject of expert experts, a reader (pls remind me who you are so I can hat tip you) kindly draws my attention to a side project of Professor Kevin Anderson, director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change. Professor Anderson, you’ll recall, was the expert extensively quoted in the Telegraph yesterday arguing that the only way to save the world from the evils of man made global warming was by sharply reining in our decadent Western lifestyles and introducing 1940s style rationing.

Prof Anderson, I note, is a non-executive director of Greenstone Carbon Management
, which makes a pretty penny advising clients including Eversheds, Clifford Chance, Fujitsu, Henderson Global Investors, Ocado,and Virgin UK on how to reduce their carbon emissions. Since Greenstone’s function would be entirely redundant were it not for a regulatory climate whose existence owes itself the supposedly independent scientific expertise of research organisations like the Tyndall Centre, you can see why Professor Anderson got his job.

I hope Professor Anderson is properly remunerated for his expert expertise.
Prof Kevin Anderson - Greenstone Carbon Management
Prior to his academic work Kevin gained 12 years industrial experience working for Marathon Oil, Hamilton Oil/BHP and P&O shipping.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Stop Press! NASA employs leading aeronautical professor to advise space program.

No, wait, that wouldn't be news worthy would it? So why is a leading climate expert giving direction to a company advising on carbon reduction (not mention energy efficiency and cost saving) such a scandal?

It's hardly drumming up business pointing out what's been taken as fact by all but a small minority of the scientific community. From what seen in the media the business community is more than willing to start moving towards carbon reduction goals if only there were a clear framework provided. It's just a shame politicians bicker over the details while the general public are so slow to realise the implications.