New at Reason

December 12, 2007

Ron Bailey files his second dispatch from the UN global warming conference in Bali.

Comments

Marcvs|12.12.07 @ 12:13PM|#

I assume that John Kerry is hoping that getting involved in the climate change issue will somehow endow him with a personality like it did for Gore.

bailey\'s wife|12.12.07 @ 12:25PM|#

I want a teddy bear!!!

|12.12.07 @ 12:36PM|#

I would like to thank John Kerry, and all the other participants at this event, for doing their bit to stop global warming by flying to the other side of the globe in a gas-guzzling jet.

Oh, kudos to the organizers for locating the event at a place close to where all those predominantly Indonesian climate-change activists live.

/snark

Neu Mejican|12.12.07 @ 12:46PM|#

How about this for a modest US proposal that libertarians could get behind: All federal buildings should be LEED platinum certified.

Could this be expanded to an international agreement: all government building projects will meet LEED certification standards.

This should not increase costs in most cases.

or doing their bit to stop global warming by flying to the other side of the globe in a gas-guzzling jet

Way more energy efficient than taking a boat (unless they sailed, I suppose).

Neu Mejican|12.12.07 @ 12:51PM|#

To expand,

This should not increase initial costs in most cases...in the long run, it saves tax payers a lot of money...

|12.12.07 @ 12:52PM|#

Way more energy efficient than taking a boat (unless they sailed, I suppose).

That's why almost all the goods shipped from Asia to America are sent by airplane, because the energy cost is so, so much lower.

|12.12.07 @ 12:53PM|#

Way more energy efficient than taking a boat (unless they sailed, I suppose).

Huh? Link please.
I'm NOT calling bullshit, but why does all of the transoceanic cargo go by sea and not by air?

Guy Montag|12.12.07 @ 12:54PM|#

Mrs. Bailey,

I named my teddy bear Muhammad.

|12.12.07 @ 12:55PM|#

Neu Mejican, I agree that government, just like homeowners and businesses should factor factor in lifetime energy costs when constructing/buying buildings.

Neu Mejican|12.12.07 @ 12:56PM|#

An interesting video:
Amory Lovins- The Oil End Game

http://reason.com/blog/show/123878.html#comments

I'm NOT calling bullshit, but why does all of the transoceanic cargo go by sea and not by air?

Well, I was comparing cruise ships to airliners. I guess we could put everyone in a shipping container...hmmmm...

Neu Mejican|12.12.07 @ 1:14PM|#

Oops,

Wrong link:
Armory Lovins is here

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/51

|12.12.07 @ 1:16PM|#

Way more energy efficient than taking a boat (unless they sailed, I suppose).

Huh? Link please.
I'm NOT calling bullshit, but why does all of the transoceanic cargo go by sea and not by air?

Well, I am calling bullshit. It takes way more energy to suspend an object in the air than to have the sea support the weight. That is why all but the most time-critical objects go by boat, not by air -- air uses way more energy, and thus costs much more.

|12.12.07 @ 1:27PM|#

I find that Neu Mejican appears to be correct on his impression of air versus ship passenger travel.

It's hard to find data: The best I could find was a Guardian article asking experts to compare traveling by cruise ship versus traveling by airplane. One opinion is that the cruise ship emits 1.7 times as much carbon per passenger-mile as the airplane and another offers that it is 7.6 times.

The key word here is cruise ship: as many crew on board as passengers, lots of fuel used to generate electricity rather than propel the vehicle. If it were rigged as a passenger steamer with no amenities, it would likely be significantly more efficient. It would also be a lot less pleasant for a several thousand mile trip.

Neu Mejican|12.12.07 @ 1:31PM|#

An estimate on cruise ships: 6 miles per gallon per person.

Anyone got a mile per gallon per passenger estimate for a jet?

Paul|12.12.07 @ 1:39PM|#

(Incidentally Kerry flew in on the same flight that I did from Singapore, although he was seated in a different section of the aircraft.)

Which section might that be, Mr. Bailey?

Paul|12.12.07 @ 1:42PM|#

An estimate on cruise ships: 6 miles per gallon per person

Why are we comparing cruise ships to air travel for the Bali attendees? Why don't we compare, oh, teleconfrence or satellite link to air travel?

|12.12.07 @ 1:49PM|#

Did the UN inform the participants that the models serving as the basis for the "scientific consensus" appear to be flawed?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071211101623.htm

The 22 climate models used in this study are the same models used by the UN Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC), which recently shared a Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice President Al Gore... "The last 25 years constitute a period of more complete and accurate observations, and more realistic modeling efforts," said Dr. Fred Singer from the University of Virginia. "Nonetheless, the models are seen to disagree with the observations. We suggest, therefore, that projections of future climate based on these models should be viewed with much caution."

|12.12.07 @ 1:50PM|#

Anyone got a mile per gallon per passenger estimate for a jet?

22.2 kmpl or 3.46 mpg

Paul|12.12.07 @ 1:52PM|#

However, [Kerry] reminded the audience that the Senate had voted 95 to 0 in 1997 against submitting the Kyoto Protocol for a vote of ratification

Wow, I do have to give mad props to Kerry for giving the rest of the world a very short primer on how treaties are ratified in the U.S. It's refreshing to hear that Kyoto did not fail because "George Bush rejected it."

|12.12.07 @ 1:52PM|#

Why are we comparing cruise ships to air travel for the Bali attendees? Why don't we compare, oh, teleconfrence or satellite link to air travel?

Why are conferences for government officials, teachers, businessmen, etc. held in Hawaii or Vegas, but not Gary IN, or Gallup NM?

|12.12.07 @ 1:54PM|#

Nonetheless, the models are seen to disagree with the observations.

Well, they can't both be right. It must be observations that are wrong.

If the test for whether you are a serious climate scientist is whether you support the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis, why shouldn't the test for data be the same?

|12.12.07 @ 1:55PM|#

Anyone got a mile per gallon per passenger estimate for a jet?

What about charter jets?

Paul|12.12.07 @ 2:01PM|#

or Gallup NM

I've been to Gallump, NM. I wanna go to Bali. BTW, I'm thinking of starting a new climate sub-group (NGO) for The Center for Good Things that People Want. Anyone wishing to donate is welcome, so that a "delegate" can be sent to Bali.

|12.12.07 @ 2:03PM|#

Come on guys... they probably had to go to Bali so they could see the water rising on the shoreline, at an alarming rate. By the time the conference is over, the ocean will probably be over the hotel's roof.

|12.12.07 @ 2:23PM|#

Anyone got a mile per gallon per passenger estimate for a jet?

22.2 kmpl or 3.46 mpg

From your link:

If the plane is 75% full, one passenger is carried 22.2 km for each
liter of fuel burned (52.2 miles for each US gallon of fuel burned).

I thought your conversion looked a little off.

Russell Seitz|12.12.07 @ 2:24PM|#

Meanwhile, back in Scandinavia :

http://adamant.typepad.com/seitz/2007/12/absolut-gore.html

|12.12.07 @ 2:33PM|#

I thought your conversion looked a little off.

I'm so embarrassed. Divided when I should have multiplied. What a dumb fuck. ;-(

Neu Mejican|12.12.07 @ 2:56PM|#

MikeP, JsubD, Isaac,

Thanks for the follow up.

I had remembered, without the details, that cruise ships were the least efficient travel option...but lacked the details.

Paul,
Teleconferencing makes sense to me, but there is something to be said for face-to-face communication...

JsubD-

Why have the conference in the US when more people live in EurAsia/Africa? Putting it closest to the most attendees makes more sense to me.

RC Dean,

From the Science Daily link on climate models

The findings of this study contrast strongly with those of a recent study that used 19 of the same climate models and similar climate datasets. That study concluded that any difference between model forecasts and atmospheric climate data is probably due to errors in the data.

The authors of this study, of course, feel their results are more robust.

Neu Mejican|12.12.07 @ 3:05PM|#

How stuff works comes up with 100 miles per gallon per person...

As usual, however, combined solutions are the best: A journey from Europe to Japan by train and boat instead of flying results in about one third of the CO2 emissions and one eighth of the total greenhouse warming effect created by an equivalent journey by air (these calculations will be explained later). Therefore a group of thirty-six environmental scientists and campaigners from fourteen countries made this long journey together by train, boat and bicycle to Kyoto, and we called ourselves the "Climate Train".

Here's a way to figure it out for a particular journey...

http://www.chooseclimate.org/flying/

Neu Mejican|12.12.07 @ 3:06PM|#

How stuff works: plane fuel economy
http://www.howstuffworks.com/question192.htm

|12.12.07 @ 3:10PM|#

Why have the conference in the US when more people live in EurAsia/Africa? Putting it closest to the most attendees makes more sense to me.

My point wasn't about Indonesia. My point was about FREE TOURISM for the attendees. It's one proven way to pumpp up attendance at a conference. Where is the center of the words population anyway? Katmandu?

Guy Montag|12.12.07 @ 3:32PM|#

Then it is settled. I am no longer converting the 1972 hybrid Charger to steam. I am converting to jet power and using solyent kerosene.

|12.12.07 @ 3:45PM|#

Divided when I should have multiplied.

I don't suppose you went to law school, too?

That study concluded that any difference between model forecasts and atmospheric climate data is probably due to errors in the data.

I stand vindicated on my prediction that data on AGW will be evaluated based on whether it conforms to the model, and not vice versa. Thanks, NM.

By the time the conference is over, the ocean will probably be over the hotel's roof.

In my dreams.

Chuck|12.12.07 @ 3:48PM|#

Where is the center of the words population anyway? Katmandu?

The center of the world's population is deep within the mantle, 1200 miles directly below Istanbul. Good place for a conference.

|12.12.07 @ 4:11PM|#

The center of the world's population is deep within the mantle, 1200 miles directly below Istanbul.

Thank you. A piece of party trivia if there ever was one.

Bubba|12.12.07 @ 4:29PM|#

"the UN global warming conference in Bali"???

Given that Bali is an island, I suspect to save the earth, these folks all traveled to Bali by canoe.

al Said|12.12.07 @ 4:32PM|#

"I named my teddy bear Muhammad."

I named my anus Muhammad and now the only thing it produces is bloody diarrhea.

Neu Mejican|12.12.07 @ 6:09PM|#

RC Dean,

I stand vindicated on my prediction that data on AGW will be evaluated based on whether it conforms to the model, and not vice versa. Thanks, NM.

Worth watching on this very point. (Murray Gell-Mann, nobel prize in physics, discovered the quark).

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/194

You only need to watch the first 1 minute and 40 seconds or so...but the whole talk is nice.

Name dropping: I had dinner with Murry Gell-Mann once. Nice guy. Big brain. Bigger ego.

Neu Mejican|12.12.07 @ 6:14PM|#

JsubD,

Of course that was your point, I was just being dense...

Sorry...

=/;^)
There's plenty of tourism draw in New Mexico, but it would send the conference to Ghost Ranch or some such place, not Gallup.

|12.12.07 @ 7:11PM|#

By the time the conference is over, the ocean will probably be over the hotel's roof.

I think, by definition, anytime the ocean flows over the hosting hotel's rooftop, the conference automatically adjourns, whether that was on the agenda or not.

Guy Montag|12.12.07 @ 8:11PM|#

Ron,

Can you pick up some full-flow toilets and Cuban cigars while you are out there?

Thanks,
Montag

|12.12.07 @ 9:22PM|#

Paul: I was in steerage and Senator was not.