Undoubtedly there are benefits for some over others. Sea level rise for the ‘megadeltas’ of Asia being an obvious expense, or the loss or farm land in Africa because of desertification.

A guy called Gareth Renowden wrote a book called ‘Hot Topic’ about the costs and benefits for NZ based on the IPCC’s fourth assessment report - basically the hot and dry bits get hotter and dryer, while the wet bits get wetter, with more ‘extreme’ events for both.

“What part of “20% of world carbon emissionsâ€? don’t you understand?”

That was not my concern. My question and concerns remains

“Who audits all this “avoided deforestationâ€? stuff? Do little gnomes sit in front of computers and study Google Earth?”

“Sea level is not uniform the world over”

My observation is sea level at one very specific location hasn’t changed in forty years. A 30cm rise would have been very noticeable.

Tide still rises (depending on the moon) to the same spot year in year out.

Floating ice wont lift sea levels, so if we have a know volume of land based ice that has already melted (that is the real question) and we have to my observance no rise in sea level, does that mean the land rises at the same speed as the sea level?

Even those exalted scientist at ASPSL&CM acknowledge that measuring sea level rises is not an exact science. Even with GPS it is not possible to record land mass movement (upwards or downwards) meaning sea level changes can have more than one cause and that the recorded levels should be taken with an open mind.

Those island about to sink beneath the waves could, just maybe could actually be sinking back under the waves.

One good thing about Global Warming. Bovines have replaced Reindeer for farmers in the now warmer Greenland. Because they are organically bred and fattened they fetch high prices. Progress for some people at the expense of others?

I don’t know anything about 10% of non-floating ice, but it certainly isnt hard to find an organisation that says sea level has risen over the last century (seems to be 20-30 cms. An organsation would be the Australian South Pacific Sea Level and Climate Monitoring project).

Sea level is not uniform the world over, and can be subject to many influences like: wind and ocean currents that can “pile up” the ocean water locally, temperature anomalies like El Niño, local ‘gravity wells’ of ice sheets and land masses, and regional salinity levels that alter the water’s density.

Can get a lot more complicated than that though

Who audits all this “avoided deforestation” stuff? Do little gnomes sit in front of computers and study Google Earth?

Carbon credits and now “avoided deforestation” credits.

Still of the opinion that it is not going to make diddly squat difference to carbon emmissions and prevent climate change.

Here is a question for you.

Is there a calculation out there that measures total non-floating ice flow loss caused by global warming todate?

The reason for asking is that living on the shore of the Manukau Harbour I have yet to see any difference in the high water mark. Tide still comes in and reaches the same level on the boat ramp. It has not changed in the last 40 years (god i’m getting old).

So if say 10% of the non-floating ice has melted what measure of sea level rise should I have noticed by now?

Guess old age brings out the cynic, but all I see is a scam to rip people off with carbon and now “avoided deforestation” credits.

Credits which will have no effect on carbon emmissions and thus preventing global warming.

So not only do AD credits provide alternate income to felling, it clearly has habitat/biodiversity, watershed management, and of course emisisons mitigation benefits.

I think that this *type* of agreement would be a good way to reduce the ‘20% of carbon emissions’ figure that is attributed to deforestation, definitely.

Just making the analogy that many greens are anti capitalist but support carbon trading as a means of controlling/preventing climate change, when carbon trading is hugely capitalistic in operation.

Do you think that this agreement will make a even a slight bit of difference to world climate changes as caused by carbon emmisions?