QUOTE
Kyoto kills growth, says Putin chief economist By Philip Hopkins December 9, 2004
Addressing the Institute of Public Affairs in Melbourne, Andrei Illarionov claimed the overwhelming opinion among Russian scientists was that global warming was nonsense. Photo: James Davies
Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol will dramatically cut economic growth, Andrei Illarionov, the chief economic adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin, said in Melbourne yesterday.
Dr Illarionov said the overwhelming opinion among Russian scientists was that global warming was nonsense, but political considerations had impelled Russia to sign Kyoto.
Under Kyoto, Russia would become a buyer, not a seller, of carbon credits by 2010, and would have to reduce greenhouse emissions by 3.5 per cent a year.
Dr Illarionov's remarks came in an address to the Institute of Public Affairs that was a calculated assault on the economics and science of global warming and the Kyoto treaty.
Dr Illarionov said Kyoto would harm economic growth because growth required the use of energy. This energy came overwhelmingly from hydrocarbons, which produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2).
Dr Illarionov said that in 1971, hydrocarbons supplied 86.1 per cent of energy needs. By 2001, this had declined by 6 percentage points to 79.1 per cent.
However, hydrocarbons would remain the world's main source of energy supply. "The lion's share of energy will still come from hydrocarbons," he said. "Mandatory restrictions in CO2 are incompatible with economic growth."
Advertisement AdvertisementDr Illarionov said nuclear power, which is greenhouse-free, was the biggest competitor. Over the same 30-year period, the proportion of nuclear power-supplied energy had risen from 0.5 per cent to 6.7 per cent.
But with the nuclear accidents at Three Mile Island in the US and at Chernobyl, no new nuclear power stations had been built in Europe since 1986, although many in the nuclear industry now backed Kyoto for commercial reasons, he said.
Restrictions in CO2 emissions would particularly discriminate against low and middle-income economies. Based on trends of the past 50 years, world gross domestic product per capita would rise from $US8000 ($A10,330) in 2004 to $US36,000 ($A46,500) in 2050. But with Kyoto, this figure would be no more than $US11,000, he said.
It was a lie that most countries backed Kyoto, 85 per cent had not adopted the protocol. ANDREI ILLARIONOVDr Illarionov said it was a lie that most countries backed Kyoto. In fact, 85 per cent of countries - 178 out of 210 - had not adopted the protocol.
These countries represented 70 per cent of global CO2 emissions, 66 per cent of world gross domestic product and 87 per cent of world population.
Dr Illarionov's address also contained a detailed rebuttal of the science of global warming and associated accusations that greenhouse gases were damaging biodiversity and causing more natural disasters.
Addressing the Institute of Public Affairs in Melbourne, Andrei Illarionov claimed the overwhelming opinion among Russian scientists was that global warming was nonsense. Photo: James Davies
Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol will dramatically cut economic growth, Andrei Illarionov, the chief economic adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin, said in Melbourne yesterday.
Dr Illarionov said the overwhelming opinion among Russian scientists was that global warming was nonsense, but political considerations had impelled Russia to sign Kyoto.
Under Kyoto, Russia would become a buyer, not a seller, of carbon credits by 2010, and would have to reduce greenhouse emissions by 3.5 per cent a year.
Dr Illarionov's remarks came in an address to the Institute of Public Affairs that was a calculated assault on the economics and science of global warming and the Kyoto treaty.
Dr Illarionov said Kyoto would harm economic growth because growth required the use of energy. This energy came overwhelmingly from hydrocarbons, which produced greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2).
Dr Illarionov said that in 1971, hydrocarbons supplied 86.1 per cent of energy needs. By 2001, this had declined by 6 percentage points to 79.1 per cent.
However, hydrocarbons would remain the world's main source of energy supply. "The lion's share of energy will still come from hydrocarbons," he said. "Mandatory restrictions in CO2 are incompatible with economic growth."
Advertisement AdvertisementDr Illarionov said nuclear power, which is greenhouse-free, was the biggest competitor. Over the same 30-year period, the proportion of nuclear power-supplied energy had risen from 0.5 per cent to 6.7 per cent.
But with the nuclear accidents at Three Mile Island in the US and at Chernobyl, no new nuclear power stations had been built in Europe since 1986, although many in the nuclear industry now backed Kyoto for commercial reasons, he said.
Restrictions in CO2 emissions would particularly discriminate against low and middle-income economies. Based on trends of the past 50 years, world gross domestic product per capita would rise from $US8000 ($A10,330) in 2004 to $US36,000 ($A46,500) in 2050. But with Kyoto, this figure would be no more than $US11,000, he said.
It was a lie that most countries backed Kyoto, 85 per cent had not adopted the protocol. ANDREI ILLARIONOVDr Illarionov said it was a lie that most countries backed Kyoto. In fact, 85 per cent of countries - 178 out of 210 - had not adopted the protocol.
These countries represented 70 per cent of global CO2 emissions, 66 per cent of world gross domestic product and 87 per cent of world population.
Dr Illarionov's address also contained a detailed rebuttal of the science of global warming and associated accusations that greenhouse gases were damaging biodiversity and causing more natural disasters.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/Business/Kyo...2182359957.html
