Christiana’s nightmare – for the rest of us
By Craig Rucker
This week, as United Nations luminaries gather in Doha, Qatar, for the 18th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres, the self-described “daughter of a revolutionary,” has presented her goals. The most important is a massive transfer of wealth – $100 billion a year – from soon-to-be formerly rich Europeans and Americans to UN bureaucrats who claim to represent the world’s “developing” nations and Earth’s poorest citizens.
This astonishing concept is beyond surreal. It contends that the world already has enough wealth; that the developing world cannot or ought not generate any new wealth, certainly not from hydrocarbons, but rather should be content with receiving transfer payments monitored by the UN bureaucracy; and that the industrialized world should be put in an economic straitjacket, and yet charged $1 trillion per decade for climate change reparations and mitigation – on the premise that its carbon dioxide emissions have supplanted the many natural forces that caused extensive and repeated climate changes for eons.
Coupled with the underlying premise that wealth transfers are the only way to combat alleged planet-threatening, manmade global warming, is it any wonder that the entire Doha conference is like a bad dream (or horror movie)? Or that this ridiculous saga is taking place in the nation that boasts the world’s highest per capita carbon dioxide emissions?
Of course, the UN’s objective in Doha extends far beyond wealth transfers. It seeks a total restructuring of world political power, energy systems and economies – with the UN on top and nation states bowing before its ministers, just as a newly elected President Obama bowed before his eminence, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.
Just imagine: The gilded Lilliputians have gathered in Doha to strip the giants of their wealth, and oddly enough the giants (the EU and USA) are willing to be stripped naked, but only (apparently) if the emerging economic powers (including China and India) will follow suit and set their own economy-strangling carbon-cutting targets. We are witnessing Mutually Assured Destruction all over again! Except, of course, that China and very likely India will opt out of this charade, laughing all the way to the bank at this grand farce.
Despite 16 years of stable planetary temperatures, and growing evidence that prior projections of rapid warming were based on faulty modeling and outright disinformation, the mainstream media continue to hype the global warming cataclysm talking points.
Associated Press “reporter” Karl Ritter, for example, said the Doha battle “between the rich and the poor” is over “efforts to reach a deal to keep global temperatures from rising more than 2° C, compared to preindustrial times” – when Earth was emerging from the Little Ice Age. He cited a recent World Bank “projection” of an up to 4° C rise by 2100. Even worse, New York Times reporter James Atlas, in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, warned that the Big Apple will likely sink beneath the sea in the next 50 to 200 years.
Both predictions must have been buried somewhere in Nostradamus or the Mayan calendar.
Meanwhile, back in the real world, the Energy Information Administration in 2011 forecast a 53% jump in world energy demand from 2008 levels by 2035. And the International Energy Agency predicted that the U.S. will be the world leader in natural gas production by 2015 and oil production by 2020, with Canada not far behind.
More to the point, despite Figueres’ blathering about increased investments in and reduced costs of “clean” energy, the fact is that oil, natural gas and, yes, even coal, will furnish much (if not most) of this expanding demand for energy. Expensive, subsidized, land-hungry, wildlife-killing, food-price-hiking “renewable” energy will remain a small niche player for decades to come.
It is not surprising that the bureaucrats at Doha are focusing on rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, given their catastrophic worldview that somehow fails to incorporate real economic progress for developing world citizens. They apparently see nothing wrong with the fact that most of the fossil energy production in Africa, for example, has contributed virtually nothing to constructing functional power grids, truck-worthy highways, or even air traffic routing that bolster trade, build local economies, lift families out of poverty, and help eliminate the wood and dung burning that kills millions from lung infections.
Instead, the energy is shipped overseas, to countries that don’t have enough indigenous energy – or to the United States, which refuses to develop its own vast hydrocarbon deposits.
And no wonder. Fossil fuel fired power plants in Africa do not fit the “Clean Development Mechanism” model that the UN devised – and foisted on poor countries – to enable rich nations to dump “clean energy” projects on the poor, while maintaining their own comparatively extravagant lifestyles and purchasing indulgences (carbon credits) to assuage their guilt.
Aside from the fact that someone (Al Gore, international bankers and their kin) will make a killing off any carbon trading schemes – and that the UN bureaucracy is seeking to pad its own employment rolls and pocketbooks – the sad reality is that none of the shenanigans at Doha (or at any previous or future UNFCCC dog and pony show) is likely to improve the well-being of the billions of humans in so-called developing countries one whit.
These people need cheap, reliable, abundant energy and the infrastructure it can support, in order to climb out of abject poverty, lengthen life spans grossly shortened by disease and malnutrition, and terminate the tyranny of neo-colonialists who, in the name of “preventing climate change,” continue to rule over them with iron fists.
By now, everyone knows that “global warming” or “climate change” or “weird weather” is nothing but a smokescreen for those like Figueres and Obama, who view economic growth as either evil or environmentally intolerable – and thus think taking from the rich and giving to bureaucrats who claim to represent the poor will even things out, and is the highest and best thing we can do.
A far better agenda for Doha would be encouraging the emergence of genuine leadership in the world’s poor nations (and its rich nations), to foster energy generation and infrastructure building, and unleash entrepreneurial instincts and wealth creation that truly enrich the lives and fortunes of their people.
____________
Craig Rucker is executive director of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org)
This article originally appeared in the National Journal, in its Energy Experts Blog on climate change, December 4, 2012.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
[snip – over the top -mod]
Another lustrum, or maybe even two, with no perceptible warming will be needed to finally convince these alarmists and rent-seekers that their paradigm is so moribund as to be unsaleable.
Christiana should be encouraged to speak more often. These interesting people, to paraphrase Bugs Bunny,need more of the aerosol that encourages them to come out into the sunlight. Same with the Mann, we should flatter them more so they speak more in public.
As our economies crash and burn, our local pollies will need the UN to point to and say, it was them, look what they made us do.
Keep your ammo dry and weapons clean, the UN may need helped.
Mean time campaign your govt do defund the UN, or be defunded.
On 2nd thought, the UN is headquartered in New York, CAGW seems to have gotten its start up money from the US govt, (DOE) and USA is broke beyond belief.
Who better to broker the fictitious flow of funds?
Beat that for a conspiracy theory.
as with Copenhagen, so with Doha – Mother Nature is on the side of CAGW sceptics. pics are stunning:
5 Dec: Daily Mail: More traffic chaos on its way as forecasters predict up to six inches of snow and freezing conditions overnight
Forecasters admitted snow across the South had taken them a little by surprise
British Gas has 10,000 engineers and 60 4×4 vehicles on standby in anticipation of extra heating and gas problems
It comes after forecasters admitted they were taken by surprise when unexpected heavy snow blanketed the South of England overnight.
Experts wrongly said yesterday that London and the South East would be ‘cold and dry’ with ‘scattered showers – some wintry’ in the South West…
They only predicted that snow would settle in the North, with four inches on high ground and just two inches remaining lower down by morning.
Instead, a band of snow wreaked havoc as it moved down across the south of England, with the unprepared home counties awaking to wintry scenes and travel chaos…
Met Office spokesman Mark Wilson admitted today that forecasters had not expected the extreme weather.
He said: ‘The snow has been heavier than we first thought and it has brought the snow to lower levels. It was in the forecast, but the actual snow that fell was to lower levels than we had earlier forecast.
***’This is in the nature of forecasting. It is difficult. The issue of snow was mentioned in the forecast, but on higher ground.’…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2243251/UK-weather-More-traffic-chaos-way-forecasters-predict-inches-snow-freezing-conditions-overnight.html
——————————————————————————–
We have to realize the Malthus or “Limits to Growth” paradigm begins with a hockey stick showing human population growth since the start of the industrial revolution. In this view the Earth and all our resources are finite, and the particular resource of biospheric protoplasm has been stolen from extinct or vastly reduced populations of whales, bison, passenger pigeons and dodo birds to be squandered on useless humanity. We hear this often among those who argue that “even if” the science regarding carbon dioxide and catastrophic climate change might be incorrect, the handover of governance over human economic decisions to select few is justified because of the damage already done.
Those mourning the deaths of other species are of course actively hoping for vast numbers of human beings to die and release the unfair share of bio-resources back into the wild. Human death is not a bug in this worldview — nor even a feature. it is the whole point.
“Sustainable” does not, therefore, refer to technology that sustains human beings or culture or society. It refers to systems that re-allocate biological resources to sustain and restore ecosystems apart from and without human beings in the mix.
The partisans of this goal may fairly be called “counter-revolutionary” or reactionary, in that they reflexively oppose the revolution in production methods introduced in the so-called Enlightenment.
UN heads farther and farther into La La land…..
Could have done without the gratuitous political sideswipes. Distracting, and detracts from the article’s persuasiveness, regardless of the reader’s political orientation.
The UN Oil-for-Food program casts a useful light on the true intentions of the UN hierarchy and a paradigm for what would happen to $100bn passing through their hands every year by force of treaty.
They intend to, and would proceed to, make themselves rich. From pious fraud to pernicious larceny.
Maybe the rich countries can donate solar plants to the poor nations.
There is a story in the Australian press today (December 6) that several countries including the US, Canada, China, India, and Japan are to set up an entity separate from the UN to evaluate and develop appropriate strategies for Climate Change. If this eventuates the UN and Ms Figueres may well be largely irrelevant on Climate Change
Oh well thanks for your personal views Craig Rucker.
The Green Eye says:
UN heads farther and farther into La La land…..
_____________________________________
Regretably they seek to take the rest of us with them – for our own good of course.
Jesse G. says:
December 5, 2012 at 5:26 pm
Maybe the rich countries can donate solar plants to the poor nations.
==========
Most green plants are solar powered.
Midsummer snow in Australia:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/8213932/Wintry-weather-brings-snow-to-Australia-in-midsummer.html
I’m just a little afraid the children will not know what snow looks like because they’ll all be frozen to death.
@ferd berple,
“Most green plants are solar powered.”
I was going to say something similar, but changed my mind. It’s nice to know that there is someone with a similar sense of humor out there somewhere 🙂
These people’s fraud has developed a secondary communications structure where they reflect their ultimate fear of law enforcement by limiting the amount of newly ginned up, additional fraud they announce they just “developed using grants obtained while working at ________.GOV; and that “AS USUAL, THIS RESEARCH is TOO IMPORTANT for us to ANSWER LEGAL FOIA LAW about it. Screw You *CLICK*. ”
That’s what each of these “news” events is: flaunting that in America, government employees set policy, screw what you want, if you REALLY care, why don’t you work for government like WE do?
It’s crime.
It was when Al Gore revealed they were ginning up the “CO2 might have magic properties whereby the Tropopause explodes” fraud to get research dollars. They were ‘starved of the resources they really need, but thank HEAVENs, I lawst thuh UhLeCKSHun so I can save you awl frum puttin in those policies that would have led to YaW’z duHSTRUCKshun.”
When the Vice President of the United States says he approves of government employees telling you that if you talk about him he’ll sue you and have a restraining order and punitive damages assigned
when HE has been making statements to PRESS
you have what is called
C
R
I
M
E
and the nerve to make press announcements regularly so you can remember that if you don’t keep paying for it they have already collected enough resources from everyone else, they’ll just use that, to wipe you out.
It’s CRIME I said.
And not one law enforcement officer in this country or the world has been able to stop it.
“These people need cheap, reliable, abundant energy and the infrastructure it can support, in order to climb out of abject poverty, lengthen life spans grossly shortened by disease and malnutrition, and terminate the tyranny of neo-colonialists who, in the name of “preventing climate change,” continue to rule over them with iron fists.”
It is the worst form of colonialism the world has ever seen: the colonials in this case are not even necessarily enriching themselves. The object is only to impoverish others, through enforcing sustainable development on poor countries. For example, look at the activities of the despicable REDD, which introduces “sustainable” agricultural practices to reduce productivity.
A second example is provided by China’s push to get sustainable agriculture agreements from the European Union to revert back to Medieval farming practices – no pest control, no fertilizers, no high yield crops. In fact, China’s own Sha Zukang, Under Sercretary General UNDESA, presided over the Rio +20 Sustainable Development summit. It seems to me that Beijing is very concerned with helping Western nations adopt sustainable practices. And China is also very keen on getting increased control of the internet in Dubai right now in a treaty-writing conference. I think the COP18 is not where the action is, but Dubai is where to look.
refs: http://www.seeddaily.com/reports/EU_China_agree_on_ag_sustainability_999.html
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/13836-un-using-propaganda-to-defend-proposed-internet-regime
Wow, how can I get on this $100B gravy train? I know! Just stop getting out of bed in the morning, stop going to work…
In concept, there have been times in recent history when most countries have been on a fairly equal footing, ready to make good. Why have some achieved more than others, so that the UN divides the world into rich countries to pay poor countries?
The answer is not all in land resources. Look at how tiny Singapore has prospered after the leveling effect of WWII.
The answer is not in a vague concept of “interent country level of intelligence” because the is precious little evidence for this concept except on a minor scale, like Indians who migrated to Fiji becoming better, wealthier merchants than the natives.
No, the answer lies in quality of Government, which is a shame, because it is so hard to create.You can see the border between California and Mexico on satellite images, indicating different degrees of organisation and success. Remember the Iron Curtain and how quickly those on one side prospered, those on the other did not?
It’s like a foot race. There will emerge a first place and a last place. The reasons why are amenable to analysis, though the variables are many. Why are Ethiopians such good long distance runners?
The solution does not lie in the massive transfer of goods or money from rich countries to poor countries. It depends on the WITHDRAWAL of bodies intent on doing this, like the UN, religious groups, many NGOs. The poorer have to learn to close the gap and they do not do that by sitting by the roadside pleading for alms.
Baroness Thatcher said some wise words. ‘“No one would remember the Good Samaritan if he’d only had good intentions – he had money too”. Rich countries that give away their wealth become forgotten and unthanked. She also said “It is not the creation of wealth that is wrong, but the love of money for its own sake.”
It is not heartless to suggest that the UN/IPCC/NGO have fixated on love of money and have exhibited an obscene desire to control it into their personal pockets.
“pat says:
December 5, 2012 at 4:52 pm”
Pretty amazing pictures there, especially Purley, Croydon. Reminds me of the may 1970’s winters.
My apologies, but this was the first thing that came to mind upon reading this …….
Kinda reminds me of the voting trend in the recent election in the U.S. of A.
This crap doesn’t even hold the plot of a good fairy tail. Maybe a class C movie? The Revenge of the Killer Tomatoes or The Blob comes to mind.
Hey dennis now you are knocking classic movies, be they bad ones but classics none the less. 😉
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres, the self-described “daughter of a revolutionary,” ….
Well, more like “daughter of darkness”!!!!!!
These people like Figueres are blind. They refuse to acknowledge the real world observational data that reflects 16 years of no discernible warming despite rising Co2 levels in the atmosphere. They ignore this because it busts their mantra about CO2 emissions from human activity being the cause of catastrophic global warming and being the key driver of climate change all underpinned by their greenhouse effect supposition.
People like her are dabbling in the “climate change occult” … they’re dizzy in the cyber space of climate models and mythical flawed future scenarios riding on the crest of a CO2 wave …
They’re mad! The frightening thing is that it is people like her who are calling the shots on climate policy.
Less corruption is what the poor countries need