December 09, 2005
Nickels For Mayor Of Beijing
With post-Kyoto approaches to global warming concerns on the agenda lately at a major meeting in Montreal, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels - Rolling Stone's "pied piper" on the issue - says it's time for the United States to "join the community of nations" in commiting to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Seattle will do all it can, Nickels promises, and the Seattle P-I today notes that's got to include getting more regional drivers "out of their cars." Yeah, that'd be the "Seattle Way" alright: don't drive, you're destroying the planet. The interesting thing is that China and India won't commit to greenhouse goals, and anyone who really believes global warming is a problem - like Nickels - ought to get that their huge populations and growing industrial sectors will more than offset any gains we make in Puget Sound in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Seattle Greens care about feeling virtuous, not solving the problem they claim to believe exists. And the double-standards? A core value.
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at December 09, 2005
03:02 PM | Email This
1. It may seem silly and politically driven, but I'm glad our Mayor is what he is doing. Not because having fewer Seattlelites driving will make much of a difference, but he is setting an example for regional governments. If India and China won't step up, perhaps regional governments there will. Probably wishful thinking, but at least he is trying.
2. Well put, Matt. All Nickels is doing is posturing for political advantage. Taking that stance won't change anything, and he'd be a idiot not to know that. I've met him -- he's pompous and ambitious, but not an idiot.
For what it is worth, here is what a founding member of Greenpeace has to say
on the Kyoto protocols.
P.S. Hey reporterward! You're an expert. Is it possible to be a former co-founder of something?
4. Most greenhouse gas emissions from cars come from older vehicles with poorly tuned engines, outdated pollution equipment and worn gaskets. Convincing the drivers of twenty year old Volvos and thirty year old Volkswagons to upgrade to Priuses would do more to fix the "problem" than putting people on busses. I'm just saying...
5. Nickels' only goal is to see his picture on the cover of The Rolling Stone. Rock and Roll ruined his generation.
"Most greenhouse gas emissions..."
Now Andy, that's just not right.
Older cars cause more _pollution_. They emit more NOx, more SOx, more carbon _mon_oxide. Older car emissions are substantially more toxic than current car emissions. That's also a more smog-forming exhaust.
But the reduction of their emission of H2O and CO2 is caused solely by the increase in fuel efficiency. (A doubling of fuel efficiency would - at best - cause a halving of H2O and CO2 emissions) But both the H2O and CO2 production are actually higher _per_gallon_ now than in the past. More efficient combustion -> more H2O. More efficient catalytic converters + more efficient combustion means more of the CO ends up as CO2. (Which is actually an excellent thing - CO is a chemical that haemoglobin can't distinguish from oxygen - so it kills brain cells on nearly a 1-to-1 basis.)
7. That's right, all you libs stop driving. Then the roads will be clear for the rest of us!
...many times and this is what Beijing is like on a bad day. And there are many bad days.
So, the honorable mayor wants us to sign an agreement and then compete against at least one county that doesn't give a damn?
Let me see if I got this straight, Al
. Twenty years ago, we drove high pollution, low fuel economy cars, and the greens demanded a change to low pollution, high efficiency cars. And now those cars produce more greenhouse gases than the older ones, and the greens complain about that?
Well no wonder they want to force us out of our cars!
Ha Ha this is really funny.
Gregoire raises taxes on all Smokes, then hands out raises based on these new taxes, then she outlaws smoking in all public areas.
So where are your new raises and taxes going to come from Gregoire?
Then Greg Nickels, who wants to build a Tunnel for what he claims is cars that are on the viaduct,wants to take all but the cars off the road. Who will pay all the new gas taxes to pay for his new tunnel? Was that tunnel really just a Sound Transit conversion planned for later?
These Liberals really are showing their new intelligance every single day.
It is amazing to watch!
11. Does the mayor live in a green house or what? I've been to a few receptions with the guy but I think he's full of more than CO2.Seattle's got some serious problems locally and I wish he'd address them.Street repair,sidewalks,water(no new reservoirs in the rain forest). Take a good look at all the bums at every highway exit or the vagrants picking up cigarette buts for a smoke; Seattle's really turning into a dump. Let's work locally to solve our problems here at home!
Just because the problem is more significant in a jurisdiction over which Nickels has no control, he should do nothing about it there? Should Nickels stop funding law enforcement because there are larger law enforcement problems elsewhere? That's nonsensical.
Kyoto may be flawed in its exclusions, but Nickels has no power over that; he only has power over his own city, and he's using that to an end you've conceded may be worthwhile. Why ridicule that?
13. Nickels is majoy of Seattle. He can't control China and India. Might be a small start but its something.
14. Seattle Greens care about feeling virtuous, not solving the problem they claim to believe exists
And you propose what solution?
The fact is we all need to do a little to make a difference, and we need to have policies that encourage those than can do a lot to do their part as well.
Nickels has taken a leadership role amongst mayors on this and should be commended for it.
15. Can he control Seattle?
That's exactly right! Seattle environmentalists care more about feeling virtuous.
If they cared about reduce carbon emmissions, they would want to build more roads. The best way to reduce carbon is to reduce average trip time to get from point A to point B.
But, alas, that is not what they care about.
As for Nickels - he is a bozo. Saying that the industrialization of China and India will "more than offset any gains in Seattle" is the understatement of the decade. The growth in polution in one day in one of those nations outstrips any gains Seattle could have in the next 500 years.
Nickels is doing it all for show. He likes to call himself a "leader" on these stupid causes.
He could do more to reduce global warming if he'd eat less, loose some weight, and stop emitting so much methane out of his butt.
I, for one, am driving a V8 and I might get a Hummer just to get even for having to put up with Nickels' nonsense.
Well said Matt.
Everyone check out http://www.junkscience.com
Man's effect on the planet's temperature is mouse nuts compared to the Sun and other Geologic forces. And as Matt notes, anything we do here in the US in our relatively fixed growth cities as compared with that of India and China also pales in comparison.
Kyoto is a wealth redistribution scheme. Don't forget, Clinton couldn't get Kyoto passed in 1998. Back then the US Senate voted 95-0 against Kyoto. Americans, aside from the few dumb one's in Seattle, are not going to fall for a progressive plan to extort our wealth that punishes us the more prductive we become.
Not sure what the reference to the former co-founder is...let me read more into this post so I can fully grok your querry.
19. RW: No big deal, really. It just sounded peculiar to call Mr. Moore guy a former co-founder of Greenpeace just because he had a falling out with them. You don't stop being a founder because you resign. I was curious if a professional journalist such as yourself would agree. But you guys don't write the headlines anyway, do you? As I said, a piddling detail...
Grammatically you're right. Good proof-reading. If this were a real newspaper, I'd just blame the headline writing on the copy editors/page layout folks. However, since this is an online piece, I think...I have no freaking idea who's in charge of what. Online "journalism" ain't my thang.
Bit of an educational note for the future. Newspaper reporters don't write headlines. Generally we're told to "cover a story". Sometimes we're told to fill a news hole that's, say, 10, 15, 30 column inches. Then the editors get a hold of it and do their thing. Then the copy editors get a hold of it and do theirs. Then the page designers get a hold of it and lop off the last five inches to make it fit into the space.
So if a headline and sub-head is needed for a space five columns wide, you might have something like...
"Giant outer space meteor heading to planet earth- Women and minorities likely to be hardest hit"
Or if you need 4 columns...
"Meteor will strike earth soon- Stock Market closes early"
Or if you need 2 columns...
"Big rock in sky- Bush, FEMA do nothing"
You don't have to wait up all night watching for my reply. Plus you knew what I was going to say while writing it...very skerry:-)
Mr. Kirkdoerffer, you asinine moron,
The best way to get rid of greenhouse gasses is to KILL ALL COWS! That's right, Bovine emissions do a lot more damage than the car does. So, what do we do? We kill more cows, eat more meat...problem solved.
No one, and I mean no one, is getting my out of my 1980 Toyota Corolla that gets 27+ miles to the gallon and can climb Snoqualmie Pass, while only 1/2 full of oil, without damaging my engine.
Besides, if Rainier blows like I think it will...Seattle won't have to worry about transportation. It'll be under mud, ash, and more crap. You won't be going anywhere.
Hot days, freezing days, a new ice age can all be blamed on global warming. The eco-facists have got you coming and going.
The Seattle Greens couldn't care less about virtue but they do lust after naked power. Their lives would be meaningless unless they can force millions to do their will.
Using your line of reasoning, it makes no sense to fight crime in Seattle because it's not going to change New York, so why bother. Stefan might as well be blogging for Long Island Sound!
That's Stefan: the Long Island Sound Blogger!!! You guys are such weak idiots...
25. Harry Poon (aka Apache Fog, Headlice lucy et al):
You sure go thru a whole lot of trouble pretending to be different people so you can agree with yourself.
You are a one-man CIRCLEJERK you CLOWN!!
26. Didn't I just read about how the City of Seattle was charged with destroying a wetland and now has to pay a fine for doing so? Now Mayor Nickels wants *us* to do what regarding greenhouse gases?
"Can he control Seattle?"
Saying "Nickels has no control over China or India" does not mean "Nickels can control Seattle." It means "Nickels has control over Seattle," which necessarily implies imperfection in that control, which is an accurate description of Nickels' power relation to Seattle: highly imperfect control.
Conservatives have never been particularly good with language, but I do have to give you points for trying.
28. Interesting, TT. I thought the whole point of democracy was that it puts the people in control. Our elected officials execute the will of the people -- correct? Not the other way around. Despots control their people. Ergo . . . it appears as if Nickels is a despot in your view.
30. If the mayor would just shut up and stop eating beans, Seattle could pass Koyoto.
31. This is getting way too complicated. Just ban all volcanic eruptions, thereby eliminating enough greenhouse emmissions to end global warming. Much simpler to enact and enforce than Kyoto, and much more fair...
Representative democracy (ie. electing someone (Nickels) instead of direct policy control) doesn't ever purport to put "the people" in control of the political structure. It puts "the people" in control of the few who control the political structure.
I am using the word "control" loosely; perhaps I should be more careful there, but "highly imperfect control" can only by a fantastic stretch be called despotism. Where I said "control" in previous posts, I meant "control of the executive power systems." The word "Seattle" is meaningless outside of a political context, so that implication is not unreasonable.
33. Righties feel that if a politician doesn't do and say exactly what THEY want, then they are living under a despot. If people object to what a righty politician wants, then all is anarchy and military control is necessary ----- preferably by SS type forces that resemble Blackwater.
The Kyoto Protocol would cost billions to implement and would have almost negligible impact on "global warming". Quite frankly, there is no hard evidence showing what the Kyoto Protocol would accomplish other than give us one more thing to argue about and make a bunch of greens happy.
It all comes down to who you choose to believe on the highly contentious subject of "global warming". Personally, I disagree with the irresponsible doomsday propaganda put forth by folks like Al Gore.
Wow TT, you know how to twist up something simple.
"Seattle will do all it can, Nickels promises."
From that, a couple of you trolls claimed that was an appropriate thing for him to promise, and that he could somehow deliver on that promise through his 'control' over the population of Seattle. And that's just plain hogwash.
I say it's all about appearances. He knows it's a superficial position, but so what? It costs him nothing and ingratiates him with the people who are most likely to vote for him. He doesn't even have to deliver on the promise in the unlikely event he's called to -- Seattle does.
And it's not a concrete promise with a measurable outcome. There's no danger of failure, because there's no definition of success. How can we know if Seattle does "all it can" to reduce global-warming in response to his promise?
Spin it all you want, but I can see that all he's doing is brown-nosing his constituents. He's a weasley politian doing a weasley political thing. And if he 'controls' your opinion of him by doing it, then that's all the control he needs.