AAGW = Apocalyptic Anthropogenic Global Warming. I've read that the TAR doesn't even make apocalyptic predictions anymore. I'll have to get it out of the library and see.
I too think that cutting air pollution is great thing. But carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is an essential chemical to all life on this planet. I also love energy efficiency. I just replaced my old CRT monitor with a new flat screen. I now adopt the practise of turning off my TV when I go out, rather than leave it on standby. I turn out lights I don't need. I drive a standard petrol car that does more than 45mpg (sure big sporty cars are fun, but I don't think they are as practical to own and use).
But the environmental movement as a whole has cried wolf too many times for my liking and no-one seems to have learnt scepticism in the face of their incessant bandwagon ravings. How many times have we faced imminent destruction at the hands of acid rain, ozone depletion, nuclear power, pesticides, preservatives, phalates, soot, overpopulation, alar, nitrates, GM foods? How many of these doomsdays have materialised? I just can't trust them anymore.
The attitude towards Bush on Kyoto is unfair. Sure there are many grievances to have with him but the Kyoto card is one giant ad hominem. As has been said, it wasn't his fault that America didn't sign up and he has sponsored a series of initiatives in nuclear and renewable energy, hydrogen, carbon sequestration and reforestation. Frankly, he's done more than European countries, who feel self-righteous satisfaction with having signed up and can sit back, raise a few taxes and think they are the god of environmentalism. America is also the only country with a carbon balance, since their massive emissions of carbon dioxide are matched by the rapid regrowths of forests that were formerly cut down for organic agriculture and "splitting wood, not atoms".