Thanks to the Copenhagen summit and the fall out from the CRU hack the subject of Climate Change here has been the subject of much discussion recently, not least here at LC.

A lot of this has centered on “climategate”, the battle between “deniers” and “believers”, or got bogged down in arguments about hockey sticks, computer models, the medieval warm period etc., but I think it is worth going back to the scientific arguments for AGW from first principles.

Much of this has been touched on before at LC and some of it may seem overly basic – but I believe it is worth going over again because it is important to keep sight of the basic scientific case for AGW and to point out that many of the disccussions I mentioned above have little or no impact on this basic science.

Human CO2 emissions

There has been an increase in the level of several GHGs in the atmosphere, the most significant being CO2 – which has increased from 280ppm to 385ppm. That this is due to human activity, largely the burning of fossil fuels, is not in doubt – CO2 from different sources contains different carbon isotopes and by analysing their relative presence it is possible to determine the source of the excess CO2 in the atmosphere. The notion that such an increase in CO2 levels as a result of the burning of fossil fuels would cause the earth’s climate to warm was first proposed in 1896 by Svante Arrhenius.
continue reading… »

While Labour continues to devise yet more illiberal policies and the Tories fail to convince that they will be an improvement, it is heartening to see that at least one of our major parties is making a firm and principled stand on the issue of civil liberties.

The Liberal Democrats have unveiled their “Freedom Bill” aimed at rolling back some of the restrictions on our freedoms imposed by Labour and the Tories in the last two decades.

It contains twenty proposals:

continue reading… »

All this week, Liberal Conspiracy will finish reviewing the Communities in Control White Paper launched by Hazel Blears recently.

The purpose of Chapter 5 is to outline “how people can hold officials to account through new powers of petitioning, and ways in which we will establish more visible and accountable local leaders by encouraging more powerful elected mayors”.

Their intention is to raise visibility of existing scrutiny functions, particularly Overview and Scrutiny Committees (OSCs), and encourage councils to consider new approaches to scrutiny. Ways this could be done include having large scale public forums or making committee meetings more accessible by moving them out of the town hall and into the community and having webcasts.
continue reading… »