Congress shuts down foreign climate funding

From Physorg.com

Full story at Physorg

US panel votes to bar climate funding.

h/t to Leif Svalgaard

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
huishi

I love it when you post some good news!

Finally, Congress is going to put a stop to wasting money on something that does not exist. The sun heats and cools the earth, not trace elements. Clean energy should be slashed from all Federal budgets.

Mcw

Small step in the right direction. Let’s hope the Senate Donkeys don’t mess up a good thing!

How much better would we be if we had more CO2.
Do these scientists pay attention. Or do they want the next check.

I know I’ll be among the few to object to this, but I object to this. I think we should be helping poor countries leapfrog energy technologies the way we helped them leapfrog communications technologies.
It doesn’t necessarily mean spending our tax dollars to build wasteful windmills (although there would probably be some of that, sadly). But guaranteeing loans for natural gas plants or clean coal plants to bring electricity to people who have never had access? I’m very much in favor of it.
But then, I’m a librul Democrat…

Latitude

dayum………..
There goes the Maldives new international airport………………………..

sagi

Excellent.
WE are the real vulnerable population; feeling the effects of giving away borrowed money. Lots more funding of this kind needs to be stopped as well.

Ross

Why not simply stop funding the IPCC in any form ? I would think this would be a prudent position for the US given the budget problems.
The US has carried the UN for long enough – let some of the climate change cheer squad countries carry the load for a while.

Iggy Slanter

“If you are big tree, we are small axe.”

Oh, I thought it was a ban on grants to UEA and other foreign scientists.
How much foreign aid have we doled out? I know there were some substantial amounts promised at Copenhagen, but I’m not sure how much, if any, made it out.

Carolina Skeptic

Exactly what vulnerable populations are “feeling the effects of climate change”. Example, please.

BillyV

Wow, They want to send offshore a portion of the 1.3 Billion dollars that will be heavily borrowed from China to “small island nations that will feel the brunt of climate change”. Look, I will be far more underwater than some of the so-called islands if we do not get congressional spending under control. In the words of the Florida Representative: “we have to prioritize US tax dollars.” What a novel thought. How about getting China to just send money directly to the islands and bypass the whole mess- as according to the Warmists, it’s going to be their coal burned that is causing the whole sea level rise anyway. /sarc

Sean Peake

@Thomas Fuller,
I’m sorry natural gas plants and clean coal are not in the plans. It is economic colonialism pure and simple and I challenge you to find a single NGO or IPCC plan for the developing world to the contrary.

Garacka

I think it would be nice to help poor countries leapfrog energy technologies and encourage natural gas plants or clean coal plants, but nice things for other countries should drop off our priority list in a heart beat when we don’t have the luxury funds for such indulgences.

pat

heh,heh.
Now stop all the rest of the Junk Science money we send overseas to placate America haters.

tokyoboy

In Japan, from fiscal year 2006, annual expenditure (aka squander) for tacklin global warming amounts to $16 billion by the government, $20 billion by local authorities, and probably more than $15 billion by industries. More than $300 billion has thus been spent so far (and will be spent into the future unless politicians/AGW researchers change their minds), with no noticeable effect on the national CO2 emissions, let alone on the global temperature. Foolish.

kramer

Congress finally shows some cajones. It’s about time…
Now if they could significantly defund the EPA… 🙂

kadaka (KD Knoebel)

Let me know when those “poor countries” complain about all that foreign aid we sent them, that we could only afford to send them because we were polluting the planet and disrupting the climate with our carbon emissions. Jeez, it’s like finding out at relative was able to keep sending you money for years because they worked as a paid drug cartel assassin.
In fact, it would be a proper protest, proving their sincere concern for the planet, if they would immediately send all that Blood Money right back to the US. Why, when you think of how badly America mutilated Mother Gaia to earn all that filthy lucre that was sent to them, you can easily see how the only proper moral course of action is to send all of that foreign aid promptly back to the US. What sort of country would voluntarily want to be corrupted by such dirty funds? They should immediately send it all back and demand we never again send them any more of such funds!
Yeah, that’ll show those Earth-molesting Americans who really has the moral high ground!

John Whitman

It is time to cut back on government aid such as discussed in the lead post.
Those of you who are concerned about possible cuts in foreign aid can still contribute to those poorer countries directly with your own capital. And you all can use your contacts in the blogs and with media to orgainize rock concerts and charity drives.
John
PS. Leif – Thanks for the H/T to WUWT

Thomas Fuller says on July 21, 2011 at 5:13 pm
I know I’ll be among the few to object to this, but I object to this. I think we should be helping poor countries leapfrog energy technologies the way we helped them leapfrog communications technologies. …

By distributing ‘gimmies’?
Thomas, I am of the mind that people must work for the things they want. And, it’s not that I don’t think “the people” themselves will not work, it is their overlords and dictators (yes, dictators in the year 2011) that see to it that ‘the people’ would not and do not benefit (by a variety of political and economis ‘strongarm’ mechanisms too lengthy to go into).
Something separates many other countries from our ours and our developmental history, things like: The Declaration of Independence; The Magna Carta; The Mayflower Compact; Virginia Declaration of Rights. These and their associated history/learning experiences set us on our current path and has defined our modus operandi. I think it may take another several generations before ‘people’ in “poor countries” (your term!) discover freedom and throw off their chains of enslavbement; this will take time and education (and NOT just formal classroom education/book learning!)
In the meamtime we do (the US) provide them/other peoples with assistance … but it will be not specifically geared to faux ‘green’ ends with these cuts in effect.
I think one of the better things that we can do is to support “missions”, as classically defined in the religeous sense (spreading the gospel, et al), but then that is me.
.

Interstellar Bill

While the space program is starved to death the shameless Libs keep piling on more and more waste.
“We can’t have a space program, you see, because arrogant Amerika doesn’t deserve one. Amerika only got rich by stealing from those poor nations, so we noble Libs are going to impoverish the U.S. by giving away borrowed money to the corrupt kleptocrats who keep those foreign countries poor.”
We’re doomed to Death by Liberal Rule. The next election will decide if the Doom is irreversible.

Chuck Dolci

Hey, what about funding for vulnerable populations that are already feeling the effects of two generations of government mis-management? Aren’t we, here in the US, a vulnerable population?

Michael Klein

This is a real shame. Let’s hope Obama can restore funding. Developing nations deserve help with climate change, and as the richest country in the world, we have a responsibility to help.

Curiousgeorge

One panel vote does not a ban make. I understand it’s the principle of the thing, but 1.x billion is chump change in today’s world. That said I’d love to see the Democrats and Mr. Tax and Spend himself cut off at the knees. But it seems likely that he’ll bury us under another 1 or 2 Trillion in debt before he’s voted out. There are some other comments I’d make, but the net has eyes and ears. Luv ‘ya BO.

Rosy's dad

Excellent!

pat

After one theory went to hell, they double down.
Mass Extinction Caused by Deadly ‘Earth Burp’
“A small release of carbon dioxide from volcanism initiated global warming of the atmosphere, increasing temperatures in the oceans,” Ruhl told FoxNews.com. “Methane is stored in the sea floor — it’s a molecule which is caught in some kind of ice structure. As soon as the temperatures got above a certain threshold, the ice melted and that methane was released.”
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/07/21/mass-extinction-caused-by-earths-burp/#ixzz1SnHpwHwC
Again we have a miniscule amount of CO2 warming DEEP oceans enough to boil off methane. And the magical tipping point is back. Sorry. I am a skeptic This is alarmism at its best..

Tom T

This says Congress but it is just a committee .

BravoZulu

That would be so great if true. Usually republicans are really idiots when it comes to science so I am highly skeptical when they have the sense to know what to oppose. The climate crowd is so obviously Marxist that it doesn’t take much to figure out what is the right course of action. Some of the more seasoned republicans seem to have lost their minds as they are exposed to the propaganda. Washington seems to make them all lose their minds if they are there for more than a couple of years.

Tom T

Mcw: I don’t think the Senate Donkeys can fouls it up. All spending bills have to start in the house. Sure the Senate could put it back in, but if the house hold together on this the Senate can’t do anything.

The headline is inaccurate. The AP’s own headline was “US panel votes to bar climate funding”. And the second para in your report says:
“But the measure’s future is uncertain as other committees also have jurisdiction over climate funding including in the Senate, where Obama’s Democratic Party is in control.”

Richard deSousa

If the European Socialists feel so strongly about assisting the Third World countries let them foot the bill for this phony climate scaremongering.

H.R.

Isn’t it easier to not give away money we don’t have rather than to give away money we don’t have?
C’mon, Senate-critters! Take the path of least resistance. Do it for the children. Save the old folks from Alpo dinners. Stop giving away Other People’s Money.
Signed,
One of the Other People

BRIAN M FLYNN

Since Pachauri appears to recognize no “controlling legal authority” for the IPCC other than “the nations that govern”, I would urge US lawmakers to defund the IPCC and any “mitigation” policy advocates before cutting funding for the adaption oriented poorer countries.

I’m skeptical.

Luther Wu

Thomas Fuller says:
July 21, 2011 at 5:13 pm
I know I’ll be among the few to object to this, but I object to this. I think we should be helping poor countries leapfrog energy technologies the way we helped them leapfrog communications technologies.
It doesn’t necessarily mean spending our tax dollars to build wasteful windmills (although there would probably be some of that, sadly). But guaranteeing loans for natural gas plants or clean coal plants to bring electricity to people who have never had access? I’m very much in favor of it.
But then, I’m a librul Democrat…
__________________________________________________________________
“Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries” -Ronald Reagan (1986).

Another of those Draconian cuts I’ve heard so much whining about.

rbateman

I predict that many foreign climate change afficiandos won’t be so hot on the idea when they have to foot the bill. It’s time for the subsidized hatchlings to fly away.
Let the foreign countries do thier own stuff, or pay us to do it for them.
Hmmm…..sounds like a business opportunity to me.

kadaka (KD Knoebel)

From Nick Stokes on July 21, 2011 at 6:54 pm:

The headline is inaccurate. The AP’s own headline was “US panel votes to bar climate funding”.

Which would have happened when the AP copied the AFP article.☺

Warren

Michael Klein says:
July 21, 2011 at 6:22 pm
This is a real shame. Let’s hope Obama can restore funding. Developing nations deserve help with climate change, and as the richest country in the world, we have a responsibility to help.

America is $14 trillion in debt, richest country indeed
I’ve not long returned from the Solomon Islands, and seen where the aid money goes. It is 90% wasted on buying votes from wantok, in giving voters tinned tuna and rice, and near the next election, a solar panel to provide a light bulb in one of the bush houses.
There is no “climate change” happening, all that is happening is a continual outflow of developed countries wealth to a group of undeveloped countries that have no intention of actually lifting them selves by any means above the undeveloped status they are given, because to do so stops the input of other countries largesse
another anology to this is the refugee camps in the Sudan, that I had the opportunity to work in,
We were providing food to a nation that were at best nomadic tribes, that followed the seasons, and survived. I’m not saying they lived well, but they survived. We set up camps that flew in supplies, fed whoever arrived, flew in more supplies, ran convoys through at times rather interesting gun battles, and still the people kept arriving.
All that happened was that the camps grew larger, more people kept arriving, one camp I worked at was 20 years old, we had adults who had been born there, and knew nothing of their parents way of life, and were now conditioned to waiting for supplies from us to survive, despite several years of rainfall, good pasture etc.
Peter Bauer emphasised this years ago, that we were, and are creating a world of nations that have become dependent on developed countries wealth and generosity, without actually being responsible for the outcomes of what the receive.
I am so over the feelings I used to have about helping undeveloped nations lift themselves, when all I have seen is the total waste and continual hand out mentality espoused by the people that I was supposedly trying to lift into the 19th/20th century

RACookPE1978

On the other hand, the (very liberal/socialist) democrat Obama-Clinton-Pelosi administration – who controls the “official” words being debated at the UN by the US – is PROMOTING the idea of spending many billion MORE through the (oh so innocent and trustworthy UN and IPCC) ….
See this story (original link now up at CNS News, via http://www.freerepublic.com
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2752144/posts
U.S. Urges U.N. Security Council to Make ‘Climate Change’ A Priority
CNS News.com ^ | July 21, 2011

(CNSNews.com) – For the first time in four years, the U.N. Security Council debated Wednesday whether climate change should be considered a priority worthy of the council’s attention, but it failed to reach agreement on the politically charged issue.
The council settled for a watered-down statement referring to the “possible security implications” of climate change after Russia, China and others opposed a strong text promoted by Germany, which holds the rotating presidency this month. Germany had pushed for a first-ever council statement linking climate change to global peace and security – despite critics’ arguments that the source, magnitude and consequences of climate change remain in dispute.
Russian delegate Alexander Pankin said many countries were leery of putting climate change on the council’s agenda.
“We believe that involving the Security Council in a regular review of the issue of climate change will not bring any added value whatsoever and will merely lead to further increased politicization of this issue and increased disagreements between countries,” he said.
U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice lashed out at countries – unnamed – that were blocking progress.
She told the meeting that “dozens of countries … whose very existence is threatened” by climate change had asked the council to show its understanding of their plight.
“Instead, because of the refusal of a few to accept our responsibility, this council is saying, by its silence, in effect, ‘Tough luck.’ This is more than disappointing. It’s pathetic. It’s shortsighted, and frankly, it’s a dereliction of duty.”
The last time the Security Council discussed this issue, in 2007, was also the first time. Then it was Britain holding the presidency and initiating the debate, and China driving the opposition.
Joining China were some developing nations suspicious that the council was trying to broaden its power and encroach on areas traditionally falling under other U.N. entities, including the General Assembly, U.N. Environment Program (UNEP), and U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change secretariat.
Similar arguments were aired during Wednesday’s debate, with non-permanent members India and Brazil among those voicing concern.
Under the U.N. Charter, the Security Council has “primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.” In order for the council to take on the issue of climate change, it is therefore necessary for it to determine that the phenomenon poses a risk to “international peace and security.”
Unlike other U.N. bodies currently responsible for climate change-related issues, the Security Council’s decisions and resolutions are legally binding.
Addressing Wednesday’s meeting, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon also pushed for recognition of the “threat.”
“The facts are clear,” he told the meeting. “Climate change is real; it is accelerating in a dangerous manner; and it not only exacerbates threats to international peace and security, it is a threat to international peace and security.”
Also addressing the council, UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner conceded that “the world does not have perfect knowledge on current or future climate change” and said it was a challenge to determine what contributions greenhouse gas emissions were making to events like the severe drought now affecting the Horn of Africa.
“But human beings have never planned strategies or responses based on 100 per cent certainty,” he continued. “Rather we make decisions based on risk assessments …”
Steiner then pointed to data featuring in reports of the U.N.-backed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), such as the finding that storms and cyclones had become more intense over the past 30 years and droughts more frequent, as well as projections of a three-foot sea level rise this century – a development that could threaten low-lying islands and other coastal areas.
“Irrespective of the specific causes and drivers, there is clear evidence that our climate is changing and that the pace and scale of that change is accelerating in many areas.”
Turning to the security implications, Steiner cited natural disasters, food insecurity and conflicts over resources.
He said countries where natural resources had played a key role in the conflict have accounted for 10 peacekeeping operations mandated by the Security Council. Their combined cost, $35 billion, “represents half of the total peacekeeping budget ever spent.”

Again, the climate exaggerations and supposed “threat” being promoted by the IPCC and the “climate scientists” is being directly used by the politicians for their power, money, and population control worldwide.

Luther Wu

Michael Klein says:
July 21, 2011 at 6:22 pm
This is a real shame. Let’s hope Obama can restore funding. Developing nations deserve help with climate change, and as the richest country in the world, we have a responsibility to help.
_________________________________________________________________________
So… send your favorite thugocracy ‘developing nation’ a check. You do have a checkbook, don’t you?
By my ‘responsibility to help’, you mean that ultimately you would send armed men against me to collect my share, if I were to refuse payment, isn’t that so?

Frank K.

Yes! We should kill ALL foreign climate funding in favor of enriching our own true red-blooded AMERICAN climate heroes, you know like Gavin Schmidt and Kevin Trenberth…

Marian

_”Jim says:
July 21, 2011 at 6:15 pm
Thomas, I am of the mind that people must work for the things they want. And, it’s not that I don’t think “the people” themselves will not work, it is their overlords and dictators (yes, dictators in the year 2011) that see to it that ‘the people’ would not and do not benefit (by a variety of political and economis ‘strongarm’ mechanisms too lengthy to go into).”
Yeah. Its unfortunately the dictators, despots and warlords, etc who when it boils down to it. Don’t give a ‘stuff’ about their own people and misappropriate the aid funding meant for them straight into their own pockets. Even stealing food aid and given it to their own band of rabble armies while their citizens still starve as in the case in parts of Africa! Of course those despots are very quick to jump on the ‘scam’ for reparations Aid $$$ from Western nations for the alleged climate change caused to their countries.

Mac the Knife

“Representative Howard Berman, the top Democrat on the committee, said it would cut off funding for vulnerable populations that are already feeling the effects of climate change.”
Howard Lawrence Berman (born April 15, 1941) is the U.S. Representative for California’s 28th congressional district, serving since 2003. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Berman
You can contact Howard at http://www.house.gov/berman/contact/index.shtml
if you would like to ask him to provide empirical evidence to support his conclusion that “populations are already feeling the effects of climate change.”

Mac the Knife

Michael Klein says:
July 21, 2011 at 6:22 pm
“This is a real shame. Let’s hope Obama can restore funding. Developing nations deserve help with climate change, and as the richest country in the world, we have a responsibility to help.”
No, Michael. There is no shame in cutting wasteful and fruitless federal spending, when our country is approaching bankruptcy. This fiscal stupidity must stop, now.
If you feel responsible, please assuage your shame by writing large personal checks from your own personal funds to any developing nation you feel deserves your money. As for me, I’ll continue to write checks to deserving people and organizations that I know will use it wisely.

Julian Braggins

In our Alice in Wonderland of the southern hemisphere the flow of climate aid is revealed in this extract from the front page of The Australian newspaper of 20th July, 2011.
“Indians call for end of coal aid.
Indian environmentalists have challenged Canberra to prove its commitment to climate change by lobbying to end millions of dollars in subsidies for so-called efficient coal-fired power stations in developing nations.
Under the Kyoto Protocol, developers of clean-energy projects in poorer nations are rewarded by allowing them to offset the costs by selling carbon credits to emitters in developed countries.
Climate Action Network India board members Srinivas Krishnaswamy said the policy acted as an “indirect deterrent” to renewable energy projects by subsidising business-as-usual energy options”
So it seems we Australians are subsidising new coal fired plants in India by taxing our old coal fired plants here, (and banning new coal fired plants here), and borrowing 100 million dollars a week from China to balance the budget. Looks like cheap energy for the poorer masses is not on the environmentalist’s agenda.

pat

Does anyone here. And I am assuming all of you have some relation to science, believe that Obama has even taken a science course? He seems barely literate.

Blade

Thomas Fuller [July 21, 2011 at 5:13 pm] says:
I know I’ll be among the few to object to this, but I object to this. I think we should be helping poor countries leapfrog energy technologies the way we helped them leapfrog communications technologies”

Michael Klein [July 21, 2011 at 6:22 pm] says:
This is a real shame. Let’s hope Obama can restore funding. Developing nations deserve help with climate change, and as the richest country in the world, we have a responsibility to help.”

The crux of the problem illustrated. Even as the USA is double-digit trillions in debt, which is assigned only to us taxpayers (our children and grandchildren), money which is effectively borrowed from China and some others, even as annual deficits are over a trillion each year, even as we are cognitively staring at a precipice that the 1929 generation could not see, even with all this and more, still the liberals open their yaps and ask for even more to be spent (and thrown away).
Liberals are the ultimate enablers, like the bad parent whose son gets in trouble for drinking at school, gets busted for pot, gets arrested for coke, gets a DUI, gets arrested for stealing, gets arrested for meth, kills someone in a drunk car crash, gets arrested for (…). The parent cannot say no, keeps giving them money, the car keys, bailing them out, making excuses.
There is apparently no situation so dire that will wake up liberals, even a catastrophic 1930’s depression would find them sending our money overseas to freeloaders. I have long said that liberals (democratic socialists) are intent on seeing the system detonate, and everything that President Dumbo has done only verifies this. See this graph and imagine when it is updated for 2010-2011.
No-one should ever, under any circumstance allow Socialists to be voted into any position of power or where taxpayer funds are at stake. The only people that would logically vote for these criminals are those that are welfare suckers themselves and without any skin in the game.
Wake up everybody! These people, these Socialists are parasites. We can exist without them, but they cannot exist without us. Shake them off for God’s sake! There is nothing stopping the Michael Kleins and Al Gores from voluntarily associating and using all their existing leftist foundations to spread *their* wealth around to third world hellholes. But they will never do that, not as long as you let them reach into your wallet and spend your money on their causes. This is the root of our problem, they BELIEVE that they are entitled to spending your money.
Socialism (‘involuntary servitude’) must be eradicated.

gnomish

fuller- how’s about you ‘we we we’ all the way home and give up your blithely rapacious lust to sacrifice those individuals who are responsible for themselves to those who are not? you are pachauri’s choirboy, is it? you are a cheerleader for human sacrifice. i, personally, need much much less of you and your ilk. my survival may just depend on it. you have to go.

DirkH

Blade says:
July 21, 2011 at 11:05 pm
“There is nothing stopping the Michael Kleins and Al Gores from voluntarily associating and using all their existing leftist foundations to spread *their* wealth around to third world hellholes. ”
Indeed. I always wondered what would happen if Greenpeace used all the money it collects from its followers to actually help people in need instead of using it for executive fees, abseiling stunts and marketing campaigns. I guess that would make them a right wing think tank.