The Durban COPx ‘til we meet again, historically

By Christopher Horner

The annual “historic agreement” to meet again later — wait, sorry, that’s “to save the planet” — has been agreed, to the also-annual teary-eyed hugging and standing ovations by EU delegates, at “COP-17”, the negotiations to replace the expiring (after 2012) Kyoto Protocol.

On its face, the summary is that the rest of the world agreed to let Europe continue binding itself until some later date. Yesterday, ClimateWire reported that a fund was established to administer the fund agreed in Copenhagen two years ago. Oh.

AP tells us that “a separate document obliges major developing nations like China and India, excluded under Kyoto, to accept legally binding emissions targets in the future”, meaning in a separate document China et al bound themselves to bind themselves later. [So....uh, they bound themselves for later? No. They bound themselves to bind themselves later. THIRD BASE!]

Oddly, no one seems too proud of this latest “breakthrough”, described as countries binding themselves to bind themselves later. The UN isn’t providing what the Telegraph tells us is a whopping two-page text. Takes awhile, you see.

The State Department doesn’t seem too keen on trumpeting their latest “historic agreement”, either, but the home page’s Daily Press Briefing does offer “New Photovoltaic Project Inaugurated At U.S. Embassy in Athens” and “Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves Receives South-South Cooperation Award for Partnership”.

So whatever it was it was less historic than these advances. Or no one wants to draw too much attention.

About these ads

51 thoughts on “The Durban COPx ‘til we meet again, historically

  1. When not even the self-loathing flagellants of the EU commit themselves to another decade of growth-destroying measures you know it’s OVER.

  2. “… no one wants to draw too much attention.”
    That’s what it is. Very small steps, still pretending it’s about climate, but establishing a legally binding framework, even sucking out the money to enforce it out of the potential payers: the former wealthy industrialized world. Means the US, the EU, Australia, Japan …
    And some of them are happily empowering the system that will kill their well-being.
    And when their people wake up under, it will be too late.
    Why is nobody taking Edenhofer’s NZZ interview serious? It’s all about redistribution of wealth under UN bodies.

  3. From Cal65 on earlier thread: The UN plan will shift wealth from first world’s poor to third world’s rich without making any difference in climate control.

  4. The UN is very good at agreeing to do things later.
    Non-polluting cook stoves seems like a winner, though. I’m all in favor of something that let’s you do a bbq brisket indoors in the winter.

  5. Nothing historic came out of Durban, but it is encouraging to see a multitude of nations trying to work together on what is becoming the most important issue of our time. Cooperative efforts on the scale necessary to take significant action on an issue of this complexity will not come easily. Those whom pessimistically work against this effort are working for economic collapse.

  6. Open Letter to UK: This is an ever-shrinking window for you to get out of this EU nightmare – the only country of the group that ever understood economics surely doesn’t want the EU Lilliputians running (ruining) its affairs for them. You’ve tried to be nice. You’ve tried to indulge and even engage in their silliness by letting them tie you down. Very kind but you have a whole English-speaking world that you created to do business with. Get out now. Ask your citizens if they agree. Germany’s also welcome if they are interested in doing business.

  7. I’m surprised the media are allowing the word ‘binding’ to be used in connection with China. Might recall a Chinese habit of times past, which Western feminists used to abhor until they became loyal Maoists themselves. Now everything China does is the perfect model of “gender equity.”

    Of course binding feet isn’t nearly as bad as the CURRENT Chinese habit of killing girl babies before they’re born. But we aren’t supposed to mention that either.

  8. its time the US did three things….

    One: remove itself from the UN…
    Two: Evict them from our soil..
    Three: remove the laws that are choking us to death…

    We need some serious cleanup after the crap these liars keep spewing..

  9. It seems Durbin will be the point at which bad science is no longer used as a stealth mechanism for the far left to ride behind. No longer is this about the science of warming, but all about the revenge of the naive.

    BTW, in case anyone is interested in more occurrences of hiding of contrary data, I found an email where Ray Bradly and Keith Briffa decide to pull a study in the 2002 IPCC report drafting because it showed to much MWP.

  10. The idea of getting a real job producing enough to merely “sustain” even themselves alone would seem to be anathema to each and every one of these parasitic “Occupiers”. Ecological Overshoot strikes again!

  11. If the Durban bash had any validity it would have agreed to
    – Cut emissions, not jobs.
    – Support societies in the third world, not get rich quick schemes.
    – Donate ploughs and tools, not guns, bullets and airports.
    – Focus on the real needs that people have, the here and now, and not the maybe and later if models are correct.
    As it is, the party season rolls on and the grand hijacking of the environmentalist movement in a classic capitalist scam remains secure and our money continues to be diverted from good causes to those who have no need of it , and those who have already ruined or economies.

  12. And so, as we leave Durban, it’s on to Qatar where, by the end of two weeks (26 November to 7 December 2012) the delegates will be wandering around bleary-eyed and exhausted. From hard work? Don’t be silly kiddies; it’s the Conference of the Parties.

  13. Bill H says:
    December 11, 2011 at 8:11 am

    its time the US did three things….

    One: remove itself from the UN…
    Two: Evict them from our soil..
    Three: remove the laws that are choking us to death…

    We need some serious cleanup after the crap these liars keep spewing..

    Any chance of a hand over here in the Uk Bill?
    Lots and lots of crap over here to get cleared. ;)

    On another note: How can you lower carbon dioxide emissions by MORE than 100%???? (scratches head).

  14. The Washington Post runs a real puff-piece this morning (Sunday) on page 8. It’s one of the few articles they’ve run about Durban over the last 2 weeks.

    It’s basically a press release and mimics the “last minute talks salvage the deal” theme of AP, Reuters, ABC, and all other mainstream leftist press. The only quoted “critics” of Durban – I guess to support the cynical illusion of press objectivity – laughably include the National Resources Defense Council, Friends of the Earth, and the Union of Concerned [non] Scientists.

    There is not one single word of criticism about global warming generally, the UNFCCC, the hypocritically luxuriant COP meetings, or even about the U.S. participation in these sham proceedings. Presumably the WashPost cannot locate a single critic in the whole of Durban or Washington DC.

    They are as bad as BBC and the ABC (which I notice quotes the criticisms of the Greens for “balance”).

  15. “… U.N. climate chief Christiana Figueres acknowledged the final wording on the legal form a future deal was ambiguous: “What that means has yet to be decided.”

    That’s a sentence from the Reuters team, including a quote for the ages. The meaning of the wording is undecided. You don’t say?

  16. sceptical says:
    December 11, 2011 at 7:57 am
    “Nothing historic came out of Durban, but it is encouraging to see a multitude of nations trying to work together on what is becoming the most important issue of our time.”

    I, probably unlike you, actually saw the end of it on a live stream and there was NOTHING encouraging about this chaotic mess. “Dear excellences… some delegations say that they don’t have a copy of the document… We have distributed enough copies of the document…” (10 minutes before they wanted to perform their silly consensus dance which is not a vote about this document.)
    EXCELLENCES, that’s how they address each other, well, I guess cockroaches talk to each other like that as well.

  17. sceptical says:
    December 11, 2011 at 7:57 am

    Nothing historic came out of Durban, but it is encouraging to see a multitude of nations trying to work together on what is becoming the most important issue of our time.
    Oh really? Which “issue” is that now? Which nations to rob from and how much, and which nations get a pass for now, and which ones get the spoils? That issue?

    Cooperative efforts on the scale necessary to take significant action on an issue of this complexity will not come easily.
    Yes, I suppose that’s true. It’s complicated, trying to agree on who pays what, when, and who benefits from what amounts to a global fleecing of “rich” countries, all based on weak or non-existent science.
    Those whom pessimistically work against this effort are working for economic collapse.
    You seem to have it backwards, but nice try.

  18. kMC2,

    Boy did you nail it. Shifting money from the 1st world’s poor the 3rd world’s rich. That is what is has always been about. Science? The tipped their hand when they linked climate to military funding levels. Seems they have all been pushed out of leftist closet now that the science is failing them.

  19. Here’s what is being reported in Canada:

    Climate change deal struck, criticized as too weak

    Climate negotiators agreed [to] a pact on Sunday that would for the first time force all the biggest polluters to take action on greenhouse gas emissions, but critics said the action plan was not aggressive enough to slow the pace of global warming.

    The package of accords extended the Kyoto Protocol, the only global pact that enforces carbon cuts, agreed the format of a fund to help poor countries tackle climate change and mapped out a path to a legally binding agreement on emissions reductions.

    “It’s certainly not the deal the planet needs — such a deal would have delivered much greater ambition on both emissions reductions and finance,” said Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

    “Producing a new treaty by 2015 that is both ambitious and fair will take a mix tough bargaining and a more collaborative spirit than we saw in the Durban conference centre these past two weeks.”
    – National Post

  20. I’m afraid that even though the science is becoming clearer and clearer every day that catastrophic human-caused global warming is a false-premise, the money gravy train is too hard to stop. The poor nations want an open checkbook from the rich nations to use as a slush fund. The rich nations want the public to continue to shell out more and more for “research” and politically-connected “green” business subsidies.

  21. An acceptable outcome from Durban would be to agree to the donation (no second thoughts sale) to the third world of some or all of our reject windmills for them to tinker about with. Perhaps they could get them to work properly; particularly the ones that catch fire when the wind blows.

  22. Thank YOU China and India for saving OUR butts. Without YOU TWO great nations EVERY SINGLE ONE of our western nations would have sold the entire west into third world slavery for decades yet to come. THANK YOU for looking after us – WE, the west, have NO ONE to look after OUR interests anymore. THANK YOU China and India from saving the west from the UN and their taxation with out representation power grab EVER SINGLE ONE of our western nations were more than willing to sell all of us out FOR! We own you guys big time!

  23. My modest proposal for Durban would have been to mince all the attendees, can them, and distribute the result to the Third World poor as food aid. There’s a lot of protein in those NGOs.

    (apologies to Jonathan Swift.)

    In the US, at least, we’ve got a little protection; even though our present executive would probably like nothing better than to sign us on, as a ‘treaty’ none of this would get through even our present Senate, and I’d like to think that none of it could get funded through our House.

    The UN is playing the EU game…you’ve got a wholly undemocratic and unelected permanent bureaucracy, pushing around the edges to get what they want, looking for opportune changes of government here, policy weakness there, a little bribery here, a little arm-twisting there.

  24. @ sceptical says:
    December 11, 2011 at 7:57 am

    “what is becoming the most important issue of our time”

    This sounds like a couple of steps backward for you, assuming you are referring to AGW. I thought it had been the most serious threat facing humanity for quite some time.

    http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/nov2006/2006-11-06-04.asp

    http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/climate-change-mans-most-serious-issue-flannery/2005/09/26/1127586787536.html

    http://ebook30.com/study/law/36962/hell-and-high-water-global-warming-the-solution-and-the-politics-and-what-we-should-do.html

  25. We don’t have to fund this nonsense! Thirty years ago some people said global warming is bad, CO2 is to blame, the climate is unstable and away we went with our imaginations and fear of the unknown. Just stop it.

  26. It’s time the US citizens stood up and said “NO” loud and clear. Our weak-kneed politicians need to understand there is something scarier in the closet than shrieking greenies. It’s called disgusted Americans with guns. I live in rural PA and the politicians have no idea how close we are to ugliness.

  27. As the French philosopher, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, may (or may not have) said, “The world belongs to those who offer it hope”. All the AGW lot and other sundry watermelons offer is doom, it is only those who can see through the charade that are offering hope. Any result that would ever come out of COPxx will never offer hope no matter how they try and spin it. (Unless you are third world despot and you ‘hope’ it ends in your Swiss bank account). Keep on being positive.

  28. “Transparent impenetrability” has to rank up there with some of the great oxymorons, such as “Absolutely unsure,” “government worker,” “authentic replica,” “Senate intelligence,” “jumbo shrimp,” and “boneless ribs.”

  29. Feeling bored on a cold, wet, windy day I decided to idle away the time by posting “Anthony Watts” in a comment on Richard Black’s BBC report on the Durban result. The fun is to see how long it stays there. After 2 hours it was rated +3, closed to comments but still there. If you are a BBC censor, please delete reply #372. You zapped #380 for mentioning him, play the game!

  30. JEM says:

    ‘In the US, at least, we’ve got a little protection; even though our present executive would probably like nothing better than to sign us on, as a ‘treaty’ none of this would get through even our present Senate, and I’d like to think that none of it could get funded through our House’.

    You’re lucky, our stupid government has signed up to giving the third world £6 billion pa. I’m not sure who is going to lend us the money to give away.

  31. Charles.U.Farley says:
    December 11, 2011 at 8:34 am

    On another note: How can you lower carbon dioxide emissions by MORE than 100%???? (scratches head).

    No prob, bro. Done, and done. Check out the JAXA IBUKI sat pix. The industrialized West already absorbs more CO2 than it emits. And a study measuring CO2 blowing onshore from the West and offshore from the East of the US concluded the same.

  32. JEM says:
    December 11, 2011 at 9:39 am
    My modest proposal for Durban would have been to mince all the attendees, can them, and distribute the result to the Third World poor as food aid…

    Hey watch it Jem, one of Britain’s biggest unions has demanded that the BBC sack popular “Top Gear” host Jeremy Clarkson for saying public sector workers on strike should be executed in front of their families:

    He was also censored for describing people that commit suicide by jumping under trains as selfish for causing the immense disruption to commuters.

    As a result of these remarks Jeremy’s appearance on Stephen Fry’s show QI has been canned by the BBC. Clarkson, an atypical BBC star performer and long time critic of political correctness and environmentalism may not be everybody’s cup of tea but what has happened to him does herald a warning to you if you start criticising the Left Holy Mantra.

    So perhaps JEM you should change your “mincing” line and change it to “shot into space with emergency rations” or “sent to the Maldives to help build the new airports” or something else less drastic before you start getting custard pies thrown in your face or there are calls for WUWT to be banned from the internet.

  33. So, the next party is at Qatar, eh? I’m going. I’ll book that week as a holiday.

    I’ll take some face paint and get some body piercing – deep cover – and pretend to be a greenshirt. With any luck these scoundrels will let slip some juicy confessions of how the gravy train operates. I’ll try to persuade WWF, Oxfam, FoE or Greenpeace to pay my costs. First class air travel, please, and five-star accommodation!

  34. Lot of things could happen in the next 8 years. The AGW is basically an EU initiative and with the current euro accord, the poorer EU members could be much more poorer as they cap their budgetary deficit while forced to maintain a currency that is overvalued with respect to their economy while the richer EU countries like Germany enjoys an undervalued currency with respect to its economy without the hassle of a being branded a currency manipulator. When the funds under the Durban agreement starts to flow outside the EU while some of its member countries are undergoing serious cuts in social and essential services that would be a recipe for a internal re-examination of its policies including the AGW.

  35. Can’t wait for Qatar and the usual alarmist quotes -“This is the last chance to save mother earth”.

  36. “It’s certainly not the deal the planet needs — such a deal would have delivered much greater ambition on both emissions reductions and finance,” said Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists.”
    ————————- ———————————————–
    Sorry, I am not going to give this comment any credibility until K. Watts of the UCS has shared his views with us.

    Hopefully, someone gave Alden Myer a biscuit after he did his spiel. Woof! Woof!

  37. @ sceptical on December 11, 2011 at 7:57 am:

    Why didn’t you sign that comment “Hugh Pepper”? I can see the style, with the wording, opposite-of-reality quality, and grouping of somewhat-related statements, matches “Hugh’s” comments just fine. Or is “Hugh” reserved for when the heretics speak out against the High Priests of the Climate Change Cult?
    ;-)

  38. COP18 should be in the Maldives who will be able to handle it with all these airports and hotels being built

  39. They just kicked any real decisions about “global warming” down the road . . . but they are running out of road.

    Too bad, so sad.

  40. THE TRUTH ABOUT DURBAN

    The real story out of Durban is that there is now little prospect of a global agreement coming into force before 2020. Both developing and emerging nations cannot afford to slow, let alone reduce their dependence on cheap energy and economic development, as any significant curtailment would undermine their social contract and risk political stability. In any case, the West would have to extract $100bn per year from its taxpayers and hand it over to the leaders of poorer countries before anyone would sign up to anything. Unless a manifest and continuous warming trend reappears by 2020, the so-called “green agenda” will remain firmly on ice for the rest of this decade, so as far as I am concerned, the whole “global warming” scam is melting away drip, drip, drip

    With the enduring standoff in international climate diplomacy almost certain to continue, even environmentalists agree that the Kyoto Protocol will continue only as an empty shell. Europe’s political isolation on CO2 emissions has deepened, with Canada dropping out of the Kyoto Protocol and Japan and Russia considering abandoning the sinking ship.

    Even before the start of the Durban talks, the Basic countries – China, India, South Africa and Brazil – had announced that any future agreement must be based on the next report by the IPCC, which won’t be published until 2014, and a review of the UN climate convention – not due to happen before 2015.

    In truth, a global agreement on binding emissions caps is unlikely to ever materialise.

    By demanding an annual climate fund of $100bn (£64.2bn), and billions worth of technology transfers, the Basic nations and their allies have kicked the ball into the West’s court, knowing full well that their key condition is never going to be met.

    Behind closed doors, similar delaying tactics were surreptitiously entertained by other major nations such as Canada, Russia and the US. In any case, the Obama administration – struggling with an astronomical debt burden and economic sluggishness – is refusing to sign up to any significant wealth transfer to its up-and-coming competitors in the emerging and developing world.

  41. Caroline;
    Agreed, though I think the posturing might continue for a bit longer.

    BTW, is “Basic” your modification of BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China)?

  42. Brian H says:
    December 15, 2011 at 11:03 am
    Caroline;
    “…is “Basic” your modification of BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China)?

    Yep, you got me! Well spotted.

Comments are closed.