In a move sure to set off a tirade from Joe Romm, we have this story from the BBC:
French government backs down on carbon tax plan
The French government has signalled that it is dropping a plan for a tax on domestic carbon dioxide emissions.
Jean-Francois Cope, parliamentary leader of the governing UMP party, was quoted as saying the tax “would be Europe-wide or not (exist) at all”.
Prime Minister Francois Fillon told parliament that the government should focus on policies that increased France’s economic competitiveness.
France had been rethinking the tax after a court rejected it last year.
The Constitutional Council said there were too many exemptions for polluters in the tax plan, and that a minority of consumers would bear the burden.
But President Nicolas Sarkozy’s government had still been planning to push through a revised version of the measure later this year.
more at the BBC here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
cbullitt (12:21:12) :
“I never thought I’d be praising the work of French courts.”
It has far more to do with the governing party losing heavily in regional elections last Sunday: 50% of voters did not turn out, 20% of those who did voted for the far right FN in regions were it could present itself after the first round (more people actually voted for the FN in the second round than the first round there).
Pete H : “Methinks Chantal Jouanno can see his/her (not sure which!) job and government department going out of the window. ”
Chantal is always feminine.
She is a judo black-belt and not bad to look at:
http://www.gala.fr/var/gal/storage/images/media/images/actu/photos_on_ne_parle_que_de_ca/photos_862/chantal_jouanno_1/1294224-1-fre-FR/chantal_jouanno_1_reference.jpg
Henry chance (14:12:27) :
(…)
So they lied about how the carbon/energy tax money was to be spent. A rational person is opposed to fake arguments for taxation.
(…)
Surely we have learned by now how government works. At the US federal level, Social Security got IOU’s so they could shuffle the “excess” to the regular budget. At the state level, the grand sums of the tobacco settlement often did not go to targeted programs of smoking cessation and education of the dangers, and anything else they were specifically to be spent on, but instead were diverted to general fund expenses like road repair.
It’s all one big pot to government, they grab out their funding for whatever they want from wherever they can get it. And anytime we allow more to be tossed in, no matter how noble the reason, the beast sees it can get even more out of the pot and it grows even more fatter.
Remember cash for clunkers? What did the current administration learn from it? There were far more people than it thought who either had cash or could quickly get credit, as they snapped up nearly any new vehicle they could. This meant, to their way of thinking, that Americans weren’t that bad off despite the recession, there was money available. Thus the money was out there, among the “rich Americans,” to pay for health care “reform,” cap and trade…
kwik (15:31:13) :
David A (12:28:48) :
“BTW, can anyone comment on this, as I have not seen it discussed…. According to this…
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2009/12/sea-level-decrease-over-last-6-years.html
The argos system not only shows no warming, but no sea level rise for the past six years. if this is true how do the AGW proponents insist sea level rise is accelerating?”
That is very simple to answer.
The AGW crowd believe in the IPCC. The IPCC cherry-pick from models, and refuse to look at data from the real world.
http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/NilsAxelMornerinterview.pdf
Why this isnt the biggest Gate of them all beats me. SeaGate.
—————————-
Data from the real world:
The Argo float armada shows that the oceans have indeed been warming in the six years from 2003 to 2008, if you look at the full 2000m layer dataset (the warming is stalled for much of that time if you only look at the subset of the upper 700m):
http://www.mercator.eu.org/documents/lettre/lettre_33_en.pdf#page=3
Look at Figure 2a: Jan 2003 to Dec 2008 clearly shows global oceans, upper 2000m, to be warming. The Atlantic Ocean is warming the most in this short time period, followed by the Indian, then Pacific Oceans.
Note Figure 2b: Horizontal map of heat storage changes from 2003 to 2008 in Wm-2. Heating and cooling of ocean areas are distributed over the planet. Ocean currents, oscillations and topography are complex.
And sea level is certainly rising:
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/current/sl_ib_ns_global.jpg
http://sealevel.colorado.edu/results.php
France, and everyone else, will have to deal with these things sooner or later as the 21st century progresses.
Nobody wants to go first, or tackle the problems alone.
Enjoy your optimistic, wishful thinking now, before its too late.
The French chose the Nuclear route not because of their carbon guilt but because they had no offshore oil and gas production like the UK. The left in the UK were critical of this choice but now are reinventing their acceptance to nuclear. French labor can easily see their advantage over the UK in low carbon manufacturing so why should they be punished. Sarkozy is a dilettante conservative like Gov Christ of Florida and Gov Schwarzenegger of California. They have no future.
Anu (23:11:01) :
(…)
The Argo float armada shows that the oceans have indeed been warming in the six years from 2003 to 2008…
From the Argo website: (emphasis added)
AusieDan (17:51:57) :
“Vuk etc
I meant to add that there is a 65 year zigzag cycle running through the NCDC global monthly land and ocean temperature record fro 1880. You can see that easily if you calculate the linear trend and then deduct that from the temperature. What is left is the trendless 65 year zigzag cycle, plus short term noise from El Nino La Nina, volcanoes etc. The zigzag cycle is very pronounced.”
I have done similar exercise as you can see here:
http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/CETt.htm
Green oscillating function can be linked to the solar up/down longer term output as in here: http://www.vukcevic.talktalk.net/LFC4.htm
richcar 1225 (23:11:25) :
The French chose the Nuclear route not because of their carbon guilt but because they had no offshore oil and gas production like the UK.
The point is that the French made a rational decision and reaped considerable benefit from doing so. The English oil resource is declining, and they are decades away from replicating the French infrastructure. One could surmise that a major reason why the French can continue to afford their very nice social support systems, their support for the arts down to subsidizing performances in the smallest villages, their excellent health care systems, etc. is that they have not been sending their national treasure to oil producing countries. It is the surplus from the whole economy that funds whatever is purchased above subsistence expenditures.
The French have money to spend to the benefit of their citizens because they don’t waste so much on oil. One can argue whether they would be better off with different spending choices, but at least they have the choice.
In the US, we continue to drain the economy of its life by funding our friends in Venezuela, Russia, and the desert dwellers of the Middle East. The decision to cripple our economy so we can join northern Europe and England in carbon tax insanity is next up after health care.
Those carbon taxes are like a manufactured opiate, only there is no requirement for actual poppies. Once it starts dripping into the veins of the government bureaucrats, NGOs, and academics, only something akin to a revolution will be able to stop the flow of pure ecstasy.
Signs of rationality are being detected in the US only by wishful thinking and unrealistic optimism. Those in power regard skeptics as nut cases. Who could possibly challenge or distrust NASA, NOA, MIT, et al unless they were part of a crazy lunatic fringe. As the links to GRL suppression of dissent indicate, the chance that any of these institutions will forgo their flow of grant money to question AGW is non-existent.
Unless rational allocation of grant money to fund skeptics can be re-established, I fear that only something like glaciers advancing on Oslo or Toronto will turn the tide.
France with its previous huge investment in Nuclear Power would have been well placed to continue with the carbon credit hurdle.
This would have given it a competitive advantage against Britain with no such headstart.
If Britain continues to play out this stupid policy it will become increasingly uncompedative.
I wonder if methane hydrates have anything to do with it?
http://www.physorg.com/news187622107.html
Although moderated a bit by the later posts, I thought that the early ones were generally a bit too euphoric. There’s a long way to go before sanity prevails. I’m 2/3rds through “The Hockey Stick Illusion” and am already quite depressed at the forces ranged against the sceptic lobby, and it continues. Check out Steve McIntyre’s latest post:
http://climateaudit.org/2010/03/23/another-tainted-inquiry/#more-10559
agw_skeptic99 (15:52:59) :
C’est la vérité, cela. Je préfère d’être la que la-bas. Food is better, climat better, people better, political system better (not more honest, though) and the police? They just caught 3 groups of anglais drug runners scattered around the Dordogne. Not bad?
Nobody wants to go first, or tackle the problems alone.
Enjoy your optimistic, wishful thinking now, before its too late.
The Chinese have volunteered to go first – in being the worlds premier CO2 producer. They claim to have a 90 year supply of methane hydrates. They plan to use it to power their society before it escapes and destroys the world.
We need to be doing the same in Alaska or else we are doomed.
The sea levels are rising. Some think at a rate of 4 or 5 inches a century. Others think 6 or 8 inches a Century. The trend line for he last 100 years or so has been running 10 inches a century. The most alarming prediction by the IPCC (probably from a WWF article) comes in at about .36 inches a year.
We are truly doomed. But we will have some compensation. Al Gore’s new house near the sea will be subject to flooding.
Phlogiston,
“If Labour had courage and intelligence they would sieze the opportunity thus presented, adopt a reserved position on climate change, promote an open scientific debate etc.”
How can they after Gordon Brown has nailed his colours to the AGW mast, taken upon himself to pontificate to the world to cut their carbon emissions and decried critics as “flat earthers”? He would look a complete idiot.
Somewhat O/T but the “Tips & Notes to WUWT” thread looks awfully full.
Some of you may know that the UK Prime Ministers Office has an online petition site. I’ve just had an automated reply to one I signed recently:
“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to suspend the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia from preparation of any Government Climate Statistics until the various allegations have been fully investigated by an independent body.”
Details of Petition:
“The Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia is a “leading centre” for the investigation of “manmade global warming” and government policy relies on the integrity of these statistics. Several claims have been made: that data was “cherry picked” to make the 20th century temperature rise look exceptional in historical terms; emails suggest the unit has colluded in “tricks” to “hide the decline” in a high profile scientific journal, and this unit has colluded in active, secret and highly political campaigning through the website “realclimate”. The preparation of climate statistics require many judgements: stations move & sites become surrounded by urban sprawl (urban heating) & a judgement must be made of the size of the offset to apply to the global temperature record. The University accepts most emails are genuine so it appears the Unit has been acting in a highly partisan way incompatible with that of a neutral body preparing and interpreting government data. We call on the PM to suspend all further use of the climate research unit until all pertinent allegations have been investigated and any action (if any) has been taken.”
The Government’s response:
“The Government believes that all these allegations should be investigated transparently.
An independent review is currently examining the scientific conduct of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and is due to report its findings later in the spring. More information on the review can be found at: http://www.cce-review.org/. The University of East Anglia also recently announced that there will be a separate review to examine the CRU’s key scientific publications. The findings of both these reviews will be made public.
The House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology is also investigating the matter. On 1 March the Select Committee heard evidence from a wide range of contributors, including Professor Jones, who has temporarily stepped down from his post as Director of CRU.
CRU’s analysis of temperature records is not funded by, prepared for, or published by the Government. The resulting outputs are not Government statistics.
Our confidence that the Earth is warming is taken from multiple sources of evidence and not only the HadCRUT temperature record, which CRU scientists contribute to. The same warming trend is seen in two independent analyses carried out in the United States, by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Goddard Institute of Space Studies at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). These analyses draw on the same pool of temperature data as HadCRUT, but use different methodologies to produce analyses of temperature change through time. Further evidence of this warming is found in data from instruments on satellites, and in trends of declining arctic sea ice and rising sea levels.
Science is giving us an increasingly clear picture of the risks we face from climate change. With more research, we can better understand those risks, and how to manage them. That is why the Government funds a number of institutions, including the University of East Anglia, to carry out research into climate change science.”
Anu,
“And sea level is certainly rising:”
Rising, yes, but at a deccelarating rate.
http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2009/01/07/sea-level-budget-over-2003%e2%80%932008-a-
The above is a paper by Cazanave that looks at sea level rise through the datasets of Argo, Grace and satellite altimetry, and made the following conclusion:
“From the results presented in this study, we see that confronting independent estimates of ocean and land contributions to sea level with altimetry results leads to a rather coherent picture for recent years variations. This can be summarized as follows: since 2003, sea level has continued to rise but with a rate (of 2.5 +/-0.4 mm/yr) somewhat reduced compared to the 1993-2003 decade (3.1+/-0.4 mm/yr). Over 2003-2008, the GRACE-based ocean mass has increased at an average rate of ~1.9 mm/yr ”
IE, somewhat reduced. Furthermore, the “steric” component is even more sharply reduced:
“The steric sea level estimated from the difference between altimetric (total) sea level and ocean mass displays increase over 2003-2006 and decrease since 2006. On average over the 5 year period (2003-2008), the steric contribution has been small (on the order of 0.3+/-0.15 mm/yr), confirming recent Argo results (this study and Willis et al., 2008).”
This sharp fall in steric component is consistent with a slowing down in ocean warming.
agw_skeptic99 (15:52:59) :
“Spoken like an Englishman. French medical care is superb and readily available at reasonable cost; your country’s heath care is an unfolding disaster. French citizens pay reasonable fees for ordinary doctor’s visits and the Government pays for catastrophic expenses like cancer, kidney failure, major trauma accidents, etc. The garlic makes the food taste good, and it is considerably better on average than that served across the channel. Same goes for the wine.”
Ah, you’re wrong my friend – and you haven’t been keeping up with your own country’s news! Our FREE medical care is one of the best in the world despite its troubles. Garlic doesn’t make food taste good – unless you have severe sinus problems. Our wine is now better than yours (an admission from your own wine tasters – and Australia’s is better too).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/6175313/Forget-French-food-simple-British-pub-grub-is-the-new-haute-cuisine.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/7501766/British-home-cooks-beating-French-in-the-kitchen.html
France’s problems lay in sticking with old ways. Australia has taught them about wine-making, but it’s taking the French a long time for it to sink in. France has some huge problems coming up – you’ll see.
Stephan (14:44:12) :
That is some depostion by Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, it doesn’t pull any punches and lays the blame exactly where it belongs.
Everybody should go and read it.
Meanwhile, here in the U.S. last years’ Cap and Trade bill looks to be DOA: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE62142T20100303
However, we can be sure some sort of compromise version is coming. In an election year this is sure to be a political hot potato. Things could get ugly.
A bit more meat on the bone from the UK Telegraph.
The government said its energy tax was being postponed indefinitely in order not to “damage the competitiveness of French companies”, fearing that it would be too risky for France to go it alone without the rest of the EU. Brussels has announced plans for an EU-wide tax, but the initiative already looks doomed.
Chantal Jouanno, the environment secretary, said she was “devastated that eco-scepticism had prevailed”. France’s leading green groups wrote a joint letter to Mr Sarkozy saying they were “scandalised” by his decision, accusing him of tearing up a pledge to put climate change at the centre of his presidency.
Medef, France’s business lobby, said the demise of the carbon levy was a “relief”. The tax would have been €17 a tonne compared to around €100 in Sweden, but business feared that this would creep up over time.
I always like to read what people from other countries think of mine
Chantal Jouanno is essentially ridiculous in France, she ought to resign!
She is a kata karateka (not udo).
In France, the press is just starting to deal with climate sceptics, most of the times, papers do as if the science was settled; so did environment minister on the last days.
One of the big dangers we have is a leftist party called ecologists, they tend to have a great power for the years coming.
HI to you all!
Don
“The MSM like to confuse the public about CO2 versus pollution.
”
That is for sure. Just the other night there was a scary show on Natgeo or discovery about the scary global warming. Every few minutes they made sure to crow about factories belching out CO2 ( called “carbon pollution”), but every time this was re-emphasized, the accompanying picture was of a Nuclear power plant’s cooling towers, which I am pretty sure belch steam.
What are they going to do about Pepsi ? ( with actual belching CO2)
Anu
“And sea level is certainly rising:”
And just how long has THAT been going on ?
“You’re getting older. We are all going to die !”
Harumph.
The ghost of Big Jim Cooley (04:58:03) :
and agw_skeptic99 (15:52:59) :
The UK Health Service is a national disgrace – it is rated 18th in the world (equal with the USA for heaven’s sake!!). The hospitals are germ-infested death traps. Stafford hospital alone killed 100’s of patients in the past five years through incompetence and chasing targets.
The French healthcare system is in the top 4.
Also French engineering is among the best in the world – especially civil, aerospace, nuclear, and rail.
However yes, the French are garlic+cheese eating surrender monkeys, and can only be trusted to look after their own interests.