Dutch court orders carbon emissions cut to protect citizens

[thaibeachlovers]

Some posters still talk about warming, when the science is about change.....but never mind...this thread could rapidly go downhill in the ongoing climate change argument, and ignore the pertinent point of the court decision. Put climate change aside...we know the arguments for and against.

This is a laudable decision because it is ordering the government to look after the citizens, to help alleviate the pollution that they are breathing and that their food is growing in.

Who wants to wear face masks to go outside like they do in Shanghai and Beijing?

Cut the emissions for the sake of the air we breathe!

Since when was it the job of a court to force governments to do anything? I thought courts could only administer justice on existing law, not make stuff up.

Anyway, the government only has to make a law to prevent lawyers running the country, if they have the guts, which I doubt the Dutch do.

[Seastallion]

The court made it clear it was speaking "globally".

Therefore, the State should not hide behind the argument that the solution to the global climate problem does not depend solely on Dutch efforts.

Any reduction of emissions contributes to the prevention of dangerous climate change and as a developed country the Netherlands should take the lead in this.

That's not clear in the OP at all....do you have a copy of the judge's decision, or are you misconstruing again?

Why do deniers have to resort to such underhanded tactics of diversion, misconstruction, and obfuscation? Is it because they don't have a leg to stand on but the big-money agenda presses them on anyway?

On the contrary, " the government has a duty of care to protect its people " is part of what was brought to the court, and the court's decision including this," ....in view of its duty of care to protect and improve the living environment," (emphasis mine) both from the OP, suggest nothing whatsoever about globally and everything about domestic environment.

[RickBradford]

I have a copy of the court's decision, which I found after at least 90 seconds' worth of research, and which I provided a link to above. Really, it's not that hard ....

This case is all about global warming/climate change, as all the participants and the documentation make abundantly clear. Any other reading of the facts is absurd.

Edited June 26, 2015 by RickBradford

[eliotness]

So folks it was about global and not local. In that case what difference is an extra 8% reduction from an already low base that such an technologically advanced country as The Netherlands has going to make to the world's temperature - I suggest "sweet fanny adams" or "not even a midges dick". The Dutch government could make a huge difference if they helped their former colony Indonesia clean up its act. Now that would be money well spent.

[RickBradford]

In that case what difference is an extra 8% reduction from an already low base that such an technologically advanced country as The Netherlands has going to make to the world's temperature.

Absolutely none whatever.

If, theoretically, you could shut down all the world's emissions of CO2 by 2050 (both natural & man-made), it would take a further 100 years to bring global temperature down by 0.2C, according to research carried out by Dr Tom Wigley of the Climate and Global Dynamics Division of the US National Center for Atmospheric Research.

The court decision is just a sop to the Green activists.

[Seastallion]

I have a copy of the court's decision, which I found after at least 90 seconds' worth of research, and which I provided a link to above. Really, it's not that hard ....

This case is all about global warming/climate change, as all the participants and the documentation make abundantly clear. Any other reading of the facts is absurd.

You added the link later, thus I did not see it.

Did you note that all parties agreed to the dangers? That climate change is accepted by the Dutch government?

[eliotness]

Just found an interesting web site - wikipedia list of countries by ghg emissions.

Apparently the Netherlands emits 0.5% of the worlds ghgs, the UK 1.4%, the USA 15.6%, Thailand 0.8% and Indonesia 1.9%.

Thus an extra 8% reduction on their emissions is tiny. Indonesia could sure use their help though.

Check out the site, puts things in a better perspective I think.

[stevenl]

Sorry if I do not have the knowledge of the Dutch justice system that you obviously do. Please could you therefore explain what is was the judge actually ruled on, as I guess I'm not the only one "barking up the wrong tree" cheers

So first you judge the system, and then you admit you know nothing about it. Thanks for highlighting one of the problems of a forum like this.

Obviously English is not your first language, please read again what I wrote. I said I do not have the knowledge you hint that you have. If you now saying having no knowledge at all is less than you obviously you have very little or no knowledge either. Thank you for again highlighting one of the problems of a forum like this.

You're judging a system you know nothing about. Sugar coating and smart a.. remarks don't change that

[stevenl]

In that case what difference is an extra 8% reduction from an already low base that such an technologically advanced country as The Netherlands has going to make to the world's temperature.

Absolutely none whatever.

If, theoretically, you could shut down all the world's emissions of CO2 by 2050 (both natural & man-made), it would take a further 100 years to bring global temperature down by 0.2C, according to research carried out by Dr Tom Wigley of the Climate and Global Dynamics Division of the US National Center for Atmospheric Research.

The court decision is just a sop to the Green activists.

No, the decision is about taking responsibilty for your environment and the duty of care a national government has.

[stevenl]

So folks it was about global and not local. In that case what difference is an extra 8% reduction from an already low base that such an technologically advanced country as The Netherlands has going to make to the world's temperature - I suggest "sweet fanny adams" or "not even a midges dick". The Dutch government could make a huge difference if they helped their former colony Indonesia clean up its act. Now that would be money well spent.

You're ignoring what this court decision is about. See my previous comment.

[RickBradford]

In that case what difference is an extra 8% reduction from an already low base that such an technologically advanced country as The Netherlands has going to make to the world's temperature.

Absolutely none whatever.

If, theoretically, you could shut down all the world's emissions of CO2 by 2050 (both natural & man-made), it would take a further 100 years to bring global temperature down by 0.2C, according to research carried out by Dr Tom Wigley of the Climate and Global Dynamics Division of the US National Center for Atmospheric Research.

The court decision is just a sop to the Green activists.

No, the decision is about taking responsibilty for your environment and the duty of care a national government has.

Can you then explain for us how this decision is going to materially benefit any Dutch citizen, given that you regard it as fulfilling a "duty of care"?

[stevenl]

In that case what difference is an extra 8% reduction from an already low base that such an technologically advanced country as The Netherlands has going to make to the world's temperature.

Absolutely none whatever.

If, theoretically, you could shut down all the world's emissions of CO2 by 2050 (both natural & man-made), it would take a further 100 years to bring global temperature down by 0.2C, according to research carried out by Dr Tom Wigley of the Climate and Global Dynamics Division of the US National Center for Atmospheric Research.

The court decision is just a sop to the Green activists.

No, the decision is about taking responsibilty for your environment and the duty of care a national government has.

Can you then explain for us how this decision is going to materially benefit any Dutch citizen, given that you regard it as fulfilling a "duty of care"?

That is not how I regard it, that is the reasoning of the court.

This is not about material benefits BTW.

[eliotness]

Sorry if I do not have the knowledge of the Dutch justice system that you obviously do. Please could you therefore explain what is was the judge actually ruled on, as I guess I'm not the only one "barking up the wrong tree" cheers

So first you judge the system, and then you admit you know nothing about it. Thanks for highlighting one of the problems of a forum like this.

Obviously English is not your first language, please read again what I wrote. I said I do not have the knowledge you hint that you have. If you now saying having no knowledge at all is less than you obviously you have very little or no knowledge either. Thank you for again highlighting one of the problems of a forum like this.

You're judging a system you know nothing about. Sugar coating and smart a.. remarks don't change that

I've read the court press release so your last comment shows ignorance on your part, and your final comment shows you are offensive as well. Not a nice combination in LoS.

[eliotness]

Sorry if I do not have the knowledge of the Dutch justice system that you obviously do. Please could you therefore explain what is was the judge actually ruled on, as I guess I'm not the only one "barking up the wrong tree" cheers

So first you judge the system, and then you admit you know nothing about it. Thanks for highlighting one of the problems of a forum like this.

Obviously English is not your first language, please read again what I wrote. I said I do not have the knowledge you hint that you have. If you now saying having no knowledge at all is less than you obviously you have very little or no knowledge either. Thank you for again highlighting one of the problems of a forum like this.

You're judging a system you know nothing about. Sugar coating and smart a.. remarks don't change that

555

I've read the court press release so your last comment shows ignorance on your part, and your final comment shows you are offensive as well. Not a nice combination in LoS.

[stevenl]

Sorry if I do not have the knowledge of the Dutch justice system that you obviously do. Please could you therefore explain what is was the judge actually ruled on, as I guess I'm not the only one "barking up the wrong tree" cheers

So first you judge the system, and then you admit you know nothing about it. Thanks for highlighting one of the problems of a forum like this.

Obviously English is not your first language, please read again what I wrote. I said I do not have the knowledge you hint that you have. If you now saying having no knowledge at all is less than you obviously you have very little or no knowledge either. Thank you for again highlighting one of the problems of a forum like this.

You're judging a system you know nothing about. Sugar coating and smart a.. remarks don't change that

555

I've read the court press release so your last comment shows ignorance on your part, and your final comment shows you are offensive as well. Not a nice combination in LoS.

I'm out of here, no point in a discussion with somebody who had read the press release and therefore understands and knows it all.

[RickBradford]

That is not how I regard it, that is the reasoning of the court.

This is not about material benefits BTW.

Then what is it about? What does a "duty of care" mean in the Netherlands if it doesn't involve material benefits for the citizens, given that a "material benefit" can mean anything from cheaper electricity to cleaner drinking water or more schools to be educated in?

Feeling good about themselves as noble global citizens?

[thaibeachlovers]

I have a copy of the court's decision, which I found after at least 90 seconds' worth of research, and which I provided a link to above. Really, it's not that hard ....

This case is all about global warming/climate change, as all the participants and the documentation make abundantly clear. Any other reading of the facts is absurd.

You added the link later, thus I did not see it.

Did you note that all parties agreed to the dangers? That climate change is accepted by the Dutch government?

That climate change is accepted by the Dutch government?

Do you actually believe that because they are the "government" they actually know anything? Do you not know that politicians are derided world over?

[RickBradford]

^^^

To clarify, this agreement was not accepted by the Dutch Government -- the case was brought against the Government by a group of Green/Left activists.

It was a court's decision that the Dutch Government should be doing more to address climate change; there is a possibility the Government will appeal against this pointless and silly decision.

As I mentioned before, I thought the Dutch were smarter than this. After all, these are the people that tamed the North Sea and build a prosperous and fertile country largely out of sea-bed.

[thaibeachlovers]

^^^

To clarify, this agreement was not accepted by the Dutch Government -- the case was brought against the Government by a group of Green/Left activists.

It was a court's decision that the Dutch Government should be doing more to address climate change; there is a possibility the Government will appeal against this pointless and silly decision.

As I mentioned before, I thought the Dutch were smarter than this. After all, these are the people that tamed the North Sea and build a prosperous and fertile country largely out of sea-bed.

After all, these are the people that tamed the North Sea and build a prosperous and fertile country largely out of sea-bed.

I doubt any of the people that did that would equate to a present day politician.

I believe politicians rank somewhere below used car salesmen on the respect ratings nowadays.

[RickBradford]

^^^

Absolutely.

Just as it was the ordinary Dutch people who employed windmills to drain the land, and then got rid of most of them when better forms of energy became available.

It took the present-day politicians to force people to rely on the modern version of windmills again....

Edited June 29, 2015 by RickBradford