Dr. Richard North of the EU Referendum sends word of this new revelation. North and Christopher Booker were the first to point out the money trail with Pachauri. Now the have followed the money on IPCC’s “Amazongate” all the way to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Here’s an excerpt from both.
Appearing in the Booker column is an account of how the “conservation” group WWF hopes to turn Amazonian trees into billions of dollars, all in the name of saving the planet. The background briefing on which Booker relied is posted below, detailing how the rainforests are to become a monstrous cash-making machine.
The Amazon – a “green gold-rush”
The WWF and other green campaign groups talking up the destruction of the Amazon rainforests are among those who stand to make billions of dollars from the scare. This “green gold-rush” involves taking control of huge tracts of rainforest supposedly to stop them being chopped down, and selling carbon credits gained from carbon dioxide emissions they claim will be “saved”.
Backed by a $30 million grant from the World Bank, the WWF has already partnered in a pilot scheme to manage 20 million acres in Brazil. If their plans get the go-ahead in Mexico at the end of the year, the forests will be worth over $60 billion in “carbon credits”, paid for by consumers in “rich” countries through their electricity bills and in increased prices for goods and services.
The prospect of a billion-dollar windfall explains the sharp reaction to the “Amazongate” scandal, in which the IPCC falsely claimed that up to 40 percent of the rainforest could be at risk from even a slight drop in rainfall.
Here, the IPCC was caught out again making unsubstantiated claims based on a WWF report. But unlike the “Glaciergate” affair where its claim that Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 was conceded to be an “error”, the IPCC stood firm on its Amazon claim, stating that the assertion was “correct”. What makes the difference is that there is no serious money locked into melting glaciers. Amazonian trees, however, are potentially worth billions.
In standing its ground, the IPCC was strongly supported by the WWF, and by Daniel Nepstad, a senior scientist from the US Woods Hole Research Centre. Relying on an assiduously fostered reputation as a leading expert on the effects of climate change in the Amazon rainforests, Nepstad – who works closely with the WWF – posted on the Centre’s website a personal statement endorsing “the correctness of the IPCC’s statement”. Bizarrely, his own research failed in any way to substantiate the claim.
==================================
Read the rest of this entry at the EU Referendum here
Also see the Booker column in the Telegraph
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Interesting tidbit. A person named Mike Rowe started a software company called Mike Rowe Soft. Microsoft sued him, and lost.
Cassandra King (13:05:14) : We find ourselves in a sea of sharks it seems, an Alice in wonderland nightmare where bad is good and wrong becomes right and fantasy become reality.
You flow a nice word, Cassandra… pity it is not fantasy, but cold reality you point up. Kinda “thanks”; but I wish it were not true.
My understanding is that trees, intake CO2 until maturity and then are carbon dixodie neutral, sequestering the CO2 built up during the growth phase.
Upon death CO2 is released, through decomposition.
Now wouldn’t these massive forests, be carbon neutral and wouldn’t reforestation of the deforested areas at least make more sense in this fantasy shell game of sequestration.
Take the giant Sequoias, as a comparison if you were to take charge of these forests, you are investing in a CO2 already sequestered for hundreds and hundreds of years long before the Industrial age of man.
What a rort.
Kind of like the Wild Rivers scheme in Australia, they declared the area environmentally protected thus denying the indigenous and any joint parties that may have wished to build any industries in these areas vetoed off their own land.
These were the same people screaming land rights for indigenous, and then refusing them freehold or 100 year leashold to build homes or small business.
It’s everywhere.
OT – Don’t have food or drink in mouth.
Mining apparently causes earthquakes. Here is a petition to phase out ALL mining even if there is doubt about the claim.
I can see it now, bamboo skyscrapers, rubber planes, hemp satellites and wooden surgical equipment. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. :o),/b>
http://environment.change.org/actions/view/phasing_out_all_mining_activities_for_energy_and_metals_-earthquake
This is double counting! If the Amazon is a carbon sink, it has been so for millenia, and so is part of the ‘natural’ CO2 cycle. In the fantasy world of AGW they could only validly have carbon credits for any ADDITIONAL CO2 sequestered.
If they cut down some trees, turned them to charcoal and used the charcoal on the local soil, then I would broadly be in agreement. The charcoal improves the soil and any NEW trees growing in the cleared area would be valid for carbon credits.
Other than than that, it is, as suggested elsewhere, just a fraud and a scam. Also it would mean that almost all of the land, seas and oceans of the world would arguably qualify for carbon credits!
Darn tag typo1 meant to!
Daniel Napstad works for William Brown at Woods Hole.
William Brown is former Science Advisor to Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt during the Clinton Administration.
Bruce Babbit a.k.a chairman World Wildlife Foundation.
…and President of Raintree Ventures.
…and promo speaker for http://www.carbontradeex.com
Anything Daniel Napstad says is bought and paid for. Its one big circle of money.
@ur momisugly Geoff Sherrington (17:24:09) : But the fate of all grass and all wood (except for coal-like burial processes) is eventual oxidation to produce GHG (mainly CO2), be it by burning, eating, biological decay, termites or whatever. Decay might take decades, but it is inexorable.
I’m sure most everyone already knows this, but just to clarify, the above pertains to every other form of life on the planet also. Including people. People and other mammals contain about 18.5% carbon by mass. Carbon is the 15th most abundant element in the Earth’s crust, and the fourth most abundant element in the universe by mass after hydrogen, helium, and oxygen.
Which is why the carbon scheme/agenda to put some kind of phony value on it drives me absolutely screaming up the wall nuts. And the entire foolishness of trying to control minute proportions ( according to some morons idea of perfection ) that are mixed in with this or that allotrope or compound, etc. is the height of absurdity. It’s even more absurd than dictating what the “perfectly” proportioned woman ought to be!
Unless they’re getting big grant money to contemplate it, and come up with the desired results.
Chuckles (14:30:49) : Woods Hole Research Centre should not be confused with Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. They are not the same, or connected in any way.
Well worth noting, Chuckles. I had been so confused until I read your alert. Confused and dissapointed as the Oceanographic Institution has always had my admiration. Now that admiration, and respect, can continue.
Ron de Hahn,
Thanks for the link to the Vláclav Klaus speech. You can reach it directly through this link: http://www.klaus.cz/clanky/2538
Cheers,
John
I’ve always wondered about the net effect of trees to sequester CO2. Consider the driving factors behind the Urban Heat Island. They include (but are not limited to):
o buildings breaking up the local wind patterns
trees break up the wind….
o buildings presenting a vertical plane at right angles to a low hanging sun and so absorbing more shortwave in the winter than if they weren’t there
trees present a vertical plane…
o buildings breaking the snow cover that would otherwise reflect shortwave back to space
trees break the snow cover….
o concentration of activity in cities produces water vapour from exhaust and so on and water vapour is a GHG
trees suck water out of the earth and breath it into the air….
Just sayin… unintended consequences… right thing to do might be to cut them alll down. Could store them in those mines to help plug them up and stop the earthquackes.
Big mistake on RealClimate website :
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/03/saleska-responds-green-is-green/
Saleska is computing 10.8/33, but this has no meaning.
In Samanta’s paper, AreaGreen+AreaBrown+AreaUnchanged=AreaValid, so doing this fraction has no meaning !
Green area is 10.8% for the entire forest, not just for the valid area ! By doing the fraction, Saleska assumes the 10.8% is just for the valid area, so if you want to get it for the entire forest you do 10.8/33…. but this is incorret, as 10.8% is already for the entire forest !
WWF? I thought they were an environmental activist organization but after reading these two pieces, it sounds like it’s more of a financial powerhouse than anything else. More like big business than a charitible activity. Sounds like they ought to be falling under the watchful eyes of the SEC. Once upon a time that might have been a matter of grave concern for the wheeler-dealers, but since Madoff, I doubt they have even the foggiest idea of where to start, or if they can even start at all.
Way back in the day, someone started a company called Itsy Bitsy Machines. IBM sued and they backed down.
I had a couple of ideas for innovative company names myself back then:
Widgetal Equipment Corp.
Hack ‘n Hope Heuristics
But who, among our politicians, cares about these revelations other than US Senator James Inhofe?
Re, Marlene Anderson (20:29:05),
Taking your question further, why are democrats so hell bent on enriching other countries at the expense of the US?
World Wildlife Fund WWF’s Board of Trustees 2009
The President of the trust
His Majesty Carl XVI Gustaf King of Sweden
Confidence Council Vice Chairman
Rolf Wirtén
Organizations of elected representatives
Torleif Ingelög, ArtDatabanken
Ake Berg, Center for Biological Diversity
Sven Stenson, Djurskyddet
Gunnel Hedman, Ecotourism Society
Marie Wallenberg, Sweden Friluftsfrämjandet
Bengt Ek, Association of Forest
Ake Barklund, Royal Forestry o Lantbruksakademien
Per Hedenqvist, Royal Academy of Sciences
Bengt Persson, Lantbrukarnas Association
Jan-Olov Westerberg, Museum of Natural History
Maria Agren, Environmental Protection Agency
Sven Goethe, National Heritage Board
Karin Mattson, Riksidrottsförbundet
Kenneth Gunnar, Red Cross
Hakan Wirt, National Board of Forestry
Anna Amrén, SMHI
Margaret Edqvist, Swedish Botanical Society
Torsten Mörner, Swedish Hunters Association
Anders Akerlund, Swedish Church
Mikael Karlsson, Swedish Society for Nature Conservation
Mary Graner, Swedish Scout Council
Yvonne Arentoft, Swedish Tourist
Lars Lindell, Swedish Ornithological Society
Joakim Ollén, Sweden’s Sportfishing and fishing management Federal
Personal elected representatives
Crown Princess Victoria
Ingemar Ahlén
Rutger Barnekow
Knut Bengtsson
Lena Björk
Hans Christofferson
Kjell Engstrom
Peter Hanneberg
Margaretha Ihse
Bo Kjellén
Mattias Klum
Lars Kristoferson
Jan Larsen
Lars Gunnar Larsson
Carina Lundberg
Bertil Nordenstam
Maria Norrfalk
Carl Piper
Mildred von Platen
Lisa Sennerby-Forsse
Lena Sommestad
Bjorn Sprängare
Bengt Telland
Jens Wahlestedt
Marcus Wallenberg
Barbro Westerholm
Rolf Wirtén
Honorary Members
Lennart Ahlgren
Bengt Mark Heller
Alf G Johnels
Ingemar Öhrn
World Wildlife Fund WWF Board 2009
Bjorn Hagglund – Chairman
Marie Berglund
Deborah Corn Country
Urban Emanuelsson
Marie Klingspor
Odd Lindahl
Christer Malm
Ulrika Rasmuson
January Twetman
Christian Wegenius
World Wildlife Fund WWF’s management team
Lasse Gustavsson
General Secretary
Peter Westman
Environmental Protection Manager
Pamilla Andreasson
Finance Manager
Maria Bergstedt
HR Manager
Marianne Eriksson
Communications
Madeleine Hedenius
Collection Manager
Staffan Söderberg
Director of business partnerships
Contact
To contact staff at the World Wildlife Fund by e-mail, write the address of the following form:
• firstname.lastname @ur momisugly wwf.se
Re: The leader is (Mar 20 21:29),
I see. The vikings out for a WCF, World Casino Foundation. The bank always wins.
Interesting that it is Sweden, behind this, that is playing these stakes. Maybe they want to finance their exemplary social system that way?
20 03 2010
The leader is (21:29:59) :
World Wildlife Fund WWF’s Board of Trustees 2009
Pamilla Andreasson
Finance Manager
Ok, tell me I’m supposed to take this list seriously?
Just following the money leads you to the reason why nonsensical science is so passionately defended.
Preserving rain forests, reducing phosphorous and nitrogen in waters, and using less foreign oil are all worthy goals that should be encouraged.
Cap and trade or carbon taxes are based on the theory that human emissions of carbon dioxide gas have caused the warming observed over the last thirty or so years.
The AGW warmists have monkeyed with the temperature record to demonstrate that global temperatures now are a little over one degree Fahrenheit warmer than they were a century ago, and further claim that these temperatures are unprecedented in the history of the world since the last ice age, and maybe even before that.
Of course, the people who lived in Greenland a thousand years ago at temperatures warmer than those in Greenland today might disagree, but they didn’t write peer reviewed papers and lacked modern thermometers. They did pay taxes to the King of Norway for the grapes that they grew where grapes won’t grow today, but the warmists claim that it was just a local warm spell that lasted only a few hundred years in Greenland and the rest of the world was cold all over. Most adults no longer believe in Santa Claus and the tooth fairy, but a few PHDs with computer models can apparently fool lots of folks.
Same goes with melting ice at the North Pole. Anyone with a history book can read of the dreams of sailors to find a northwest passage. There are logs from sailors showing that ice has melted before, and there are pictures in National Geographic of submarines that surfaced in water near the North Pole, but those same PHDs have convinced millions of people that the history books (and photos) must have been mistaken because their computer models and statistics say so.
The NSIDC graphs show that the North Pole sea ice extent is only slightly below normal right now, and the South Pole has actually been above normal for years. See:
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/daily.html
When the ice was shrinking, it was frequently the subject of news articles and heartbreaking photos of drowning polar bears. Now that the north pole ice has recovered from lows and is nearly normal, sea ice will no longer be news because it doesn’t support cap and trade or carbon tax agendas.
As more researchers use sequoia tree rings at the University of Arizona, and Norwegian clam shell temperature history analysis replace the phony temperature historical proxies created by Drs. Mann, Jones, and Hansen, the foundations of the warmists will crumble like so much sand, and their peer reviewed papers (mostly reviewed by each other) will be relegated to the dustbins where eugenics, the ether, and the flat earth folks live.
If it wasn’t for the fact that the AGW folks have perpetrated and continue to perpetrate a huge money grab that will far exceed the amounts stolen by Bernie Maddox, no one would really care. Follow the grant money, and follow the insiders who will be creating carbon credits by ‘reducing the rate of deforestation’ to discover why this is happening. Nonsense scientific results based on data and procedures that they will not release to independent researchers are easily explained by anyone who has been around a while; there is a lot of money already made and to be made by the folks who are perpetrating the nonsense.
These same folks regularly accuse anyone who disagrees with them of being in the pay of the oil or coal or other moneyed interests. This has been their single most effective propaganda move and they continue to be astonished at how well it works. Notice that after fifteen years of these accusations, you don’t know the name of even one climate skeptic who has ever collected any money. Notice that the folks making the accusations have been collecting millions, and stand to collect billions from cap and trade, and yet they are the ones accusing someone else of being influenced by money. You can fool all of the people some of the time, but eventually you will be caught.
Jimbo (18:16:20) :
Mining and earthquakes ???????? Just looked at the link – and they want to focus on solar and windpower for energy – which requires copper wire etc to, er, deliver the electricity to the consumer.
Or by windpower do they mean what we Dutch used – Windmills to power grain grinding machines to produce flours etc.
I can’t laugh or cry – my eyes just glaze over……I wonder if these are the village idiots Lord Rees averred to in his interview http://www.smh.com.au/world/science/creation-and-destruction-20100319-qm5h.html
Benjamin
“Big mistake on RealClimate website”
What Saleska computes is not wrong but the Samanta’s paper conclusion is right:
“We found no big differences in the greenness level of these forests between drought and non-drought years, which suggests that these forests may be more tolerant of droughts than we previously thought,” said Arindam Samanta, the study’s lead author from Boston.
Just look at the rain deficit”s and the green, brown and unchanged area’s.
That the forest shows “some” reaction if the rain deficit is 84% should be no suprise but that”s not a slight reduction as the IPCC claims that “Up to 40% of the Amazonian forests could react drastically to even a slight reduction in precipitation; this means that the tropical vegetation, hydrology and climate system in South America could change very rapidly to another steady state, not necessarily producing gradual changes between the current and the future situation (Rowell and Moore, 2000).”
An astounding tale of deception and greed.