Das politische Scheitern der Klimaforscher VII
James Hansen über Waxman-Markey:
>>…Some leaders of big environmental organizations have said I’m naïve to posit an alternative to cap-and-trade, and have suggested I stick to climate modeling. Let’s pass a bill, any bill, now and improve it later, they say. The real naïveté is their belief that they, and not the fossil-fuel interests, are driving the legislative process.
The fact is that the climate course set by Waxman-Markey is a disaster course. Their bill is an astoundingly inefficient way to get a tiny reduction of emissions. It’s less than worthless, because it will delay by at least a decade starting on a path that is fundamentally sound from the standpoints of both economics and climate preservation…<<
Wenn Hansen Recht mit seiner Aussage hat, dass die Interessen der Öl- und Kohleindustrie den legislativen Prozess in den USA dominieren, dann macht es allerdings auch keinen Sinn, einen alternativen Vorschlag in diesen legislativen Prozess einzubringen. Nicht auf eine Alternative zu Waxman-Markey zu setzen ist Hansens Naivität, sondern sein Festhalten am legislativen Prozess wider besseres Wissen.
