Newsbytes from Dr. Benny Peiser, The GWPF
Europe’s Durban Plan Kaput
Europe’s attempt to formulate a ‘coalition of the willing’ seems doomed. The BASIC countries – China, India, South Africa and Brazil — have already taken a position that any decision on climate change actions beyond 2020 must be based on the next report of UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change which will be submitted in 2014, and a review of the fulfilment of commitments under the UN climate convention to be done in 2015. –Nitin Sethi, The Times of India, 15 November 2011
In all likelihood we will see a big change in energy policy and a downgrading of the EU’s ‘20/20/20’ obsession. The targets won’t be changed; they will no longer be taken that seriously. For the first time, the Greens were voted down in the European Parliament, so the mood has changed. The reality is, climate policy isn’t a big agenda item and there are other economic concerns, which are taking higher precedence. This is the attitude and mood swing that I’m witnessing in the UK. –Benny Peiser, Natural Gas Europe, 15 November 2011
For the mechanism of global warming, the IPCC report emphasizes the impact of human activities and the correlation between the CO2 concentration and temperature increase. However, the Earth is a complex dynamic system with various factors affecting each other; great uncertainties exist regarding causes and effects of the climate changes. Therefore, the claims of the IPCC AR4 have been largely questioned. The IPCC report is no longer the most authoritative document on climate changes, as it is restricted by its political tendencies and some errors and flaws. –Fang et al., SCIENCE CHINA, Earth Sciences • October 2011 Vol.54 No.10: 1458–1468
An investigation by the Independent has caught the BBC red-handed selling airtime for millions of pounds. They are trying to spin it as “nominal fees”, but a look at the numbers and content involved is pretty shocking. Perhaps most damning is the fact that a BBC World documentary about climate change was sponsored by green crusaders Envirotrade. And of course “Envirotrade was featured in a positive light in the programme but viewers were unaware that there was a funding arrangement in place.” So remember that next time you swallow the Beeb’s “the debate is over” climate change line… –Guido Fawkes, Order-Order, 15 November 2011
Spain’s likely new centre-right government plans a major overhaul of the energy sector, possibly axing subsidies for wind and solar power as the euro zone debt crisis makes funding very costly. –Jonathan Gleave, Reuters, 15 November 2011
When the Confederation of British Industry and the big Trade Unions are in policy agreement, it amounts to reliable circumstantial evidence for taking the opposite view. Energy Minister Greg Barker’s decision to cut solar subsidies by 50% is one-nil to the public against the forces of corporatism, the conspiracy of big capital and big labour against the consumer. It was an outrage that the scheme was ever implemented in the first place – with the support of all three main political parties. –Dominic Lawson, The Independent, 15 November 2011
If the IPCC is “not the most authoritative document on climate changes” as your corespondent claims, then what is? Who else assembles data from around the world and then makes this available to the world’s governments? These are rhetorical questions, because the answers are obvious. No one else is performing this function.
Funny what happens when countries run out of money.
If they are DOA, the next step is zombies. Old zealots never die; they just get hoarse.
And then there’s the pitting of environmentalist against environmental in Africa over the issue of biofuel. European nations have been purchasing large amounts of land recently on the continent to meet (ostensibly) the 2020 requirement that 10% of the EU transportation fuel “budget” be supplied via biofuel. Unfortunately and once the land has been purchased, entities from the same European nations displace the native flora and fauna (including humans) in favor of the biofuel crop du jour. And African environmentalists disagree (and rightly so) with the lands’ use for carbon offsets, when humans are offset – http://www.voanews.com/english/news/africa/Biofuel-Investment-in-Africa-Under-Scrutiny-133955018.html .
I think the climate debate as a whole is dying. There’s only the hard core true believers left to carry the Malthusian Luddite banner. In my view, all of the talking points of the alarmists have been adequately addressed. CO2 and temps don’t correlate after all. Ice reduction in the arctic falsified the importance of the albedo effect of the arctic. Turns out, it doesn’t matter. So, there’s no runaway temp doom scenario. The sea-levels aren’t cooperating, and it turns out, tidal gauges and satellite measurements may have been externally manipulated. Hurricanes don’t increase with CO2 or temps, and neither do floods or droughts. Our snow coverage in the northern hemisphere is increasing, not decreasing as the loons originally insisted. Is there any doom and gloom scenario that hasn’t been falsified by reality? Its over.
The global economic downturn is assisting governments in realizing that green self loathing and self indulgence is destructively expensive . Unfortunately the greenies don’t realize it . If and when the world gets back on its feet – I fear it won’t be soon – they’ll be back in full force .
Spain’s likely new centre-right government plans a major overhaul of the energy sector, possibly axing subsidies for wind and solar power
Don’t hold your breath…
The solution is easy, stop spending money on climate change and instead divert it to environmental programs. That would have a real impact on our quality of life and create real sustainable jobs. Plus we all believe in improving our environment we don’t all believe in the scam that is AGW.
Of course it is. All this climate control crappola was run up the flagpole in the roaring 90’s when the build out of the global network greased the wheels of industry by revolutionizing end-to-end supply chain management. Few people realize how much more efficient business becomes when every widget or morsel of food that’s purchased off the shelf at Wal-Mart is almost instantly known, without any human intervention, all the way back to every company or farm that had anything to do with it.
Unfortunately that was a one-time gain in productivity and once everyone is doing it then it’s priced into everything and there’s no more huge monetary windfall to be had. In other words these technological advances are like a gold rush and when the gold is gone that’s the end of it until the next big opportunity comes along.
Dipthongs that have little concept of how the world really works, that productivity gains are what drive increases in living standards, thought the “green” revolution was going to be the next technological gold rush. Unfortunately and quite predictably it isn’t because it isn’t something that raises productivity. In fact it lowers productivity because it only makes perfectly serviceable machines and fuels more expensive to own and operate. Something like that can only impede gains in productivity.
Hugh Pepper said: “Who else assembles data from around the world and then makes this available to the world’s governments? ”
Climate science is the only area of science that has ever been treated in this manner. It’s wrong to have a politically-based panel survey and evaluate a science, as it opens the activity to political bias and agenda-promoting. When we need to know about the state of an aspect of our world, we should get together the experts, have them survey the knowledge, and have them present us with impartial evaluations; this would involve all the leading experts, such that all views would be heard.
Giving the “management” of a field of science to a bureaucracy which was set up from the start to push an agenda is just plain wrong—a huge mistake. We have paid billions for the mistake and now have to undo the damage. The perpetrators of this global crime, which has actually killed people, will probably never be prosecuted, but one can hope.
It seems they’ll be rounding up street beggars beforehand, who have a nasty habit of mugging tourists, thereby sullying Durban’s image. Of course, in the name of “equity”, the “least developed countries” (LDC’s) plan on mugging the developed countries, by claiming they’ve been hit hardest by climate change, with displaced people, which is “placing an inordinate strain on the overburdened infrastructures and service facilities, as well as causing tremendous social stresses.” All the while, still-developing countries like China will continue to claim an exemption, due to the fact that developed countries like the U.S. have had many decades ahead of them where they were spewing huge amounts of “dangerous GHG’s”.
With poor economies everywhere, I suspect the biggest, unspoken agenda will be the tight clutching of wallets, while paying the necessary lip service to the climate change gods.
P Walker says:
November 16, 2011 at 11:21 am
“The global economic downturn is assisting governments in realizing that green self loathing and self indulgence is destructively expensive . Unfortunately the greenies don’t realize it . If and when the world gets back on its feet – I fear it won’t be soon – they’ll be back in full force .”
Exactly. But it’ll be something else they’re on about instead of CO2. There’s a new and imaginary crisis du jour that is invented whenever there isn’t a real one. Right now there’s a real economic crisis and the imaginary crises take a back seat at these times. Of course that’s presuming that the economic crises ends before the next generation matures. The imaginary crises are pretty much just embraced by young people who haven’t yet learned the difference between real problems and imaginary problems.
James Sexton said: November 16, 2011 at 11:09 am
“I think the climate debate as a whole is dying.”
It will die slowly, as those rent-seekers (undeveloped countries claiming climate damages), get rich quick scammers (Al Gore & company), and grant-funded global warming “scientists” are not going to go quietly. Instead, they are going to be screaming the dangers of warming ever more shrilly. It is only the facts of the way the world is behaving and our efforts to keep pointing them out to the public that will cause the public to ignore and defund these immoral/dishonest people.
The Durban climate conference DOA defies all elitists’ logic. Who would have thought people and governments would prefer the energy and economics offered by the 21st century over the 4th century.
Hugh Pepper says:
“If the IPCC is ‘not the most authoritative document on climate changes’ as your corespondent claims, then what is? Who else assembles data from around the world and then makes this available to the world’s governments? These are rhetorical questions, because the answers are obvious. No one else is performing this function.”
Hugh, I am constantly amused by your comments, they’re so completely off the wall. To answer your comment above, top climate scientists like John Christy, Richard Lindzen, Tim Ball and many others collate global data and make it available to governments. And unlike the IPCC’s false propaganda, those scientists are credible. But you claim that no one except the IPCC performs those functions. More comments please, Hugh! They’re so fun ‘n’ easy to deconstruct.☺
I fully concur that Durban is dead and I would go further and suggest that it be cancelled so as to save money and for Greens to save unnecessarily incurring substancial CO2 emiisions (surely the Greens would not wish to ‘pollute’ the planet unnecessarily) . A couple of weeks ago, I keft the following comments/observations in response to the Willis Eschenbach
article OCCUPY COP 17–CMP 7 !
richard verney says:
November 3, 2011 at 8:12 am
Nothing will be achieved since the world has run out of capital, and those that have some money such as China are not really interested and have other economic concerns such that they will not lead the way.
This is just going to be an expensive party and spin will be given to the need to take strong and prompt action. They will remain on message but nothing more than that.
AND
richard verney says:
November 4, 2011 at 10:12 am
It appears that the G20 could not agree on anything despite the real and urgent need. Thus, what chance is there that an even bigger group of countries with different agendas will be in a position to agree on anything?
Governments should grow up and recognise that now is not the time to agree on anything of substance in the AGW field and should therefore cancel get togethers of this type which merely waste money which Governments do not have to waste.
In fact those arguing for a reduction in CO2 should be campaigning against holding this conference since it will simply result in a substantial amount of CO2 emissions all for no avail.
Hugh Pepper says:
November 16, 2011 at 10:14 am
“If the IPCC is “not the most authoritative document on climate changes” as your corespondent claims, then what is? Who else assembles data from around the world and then makes this available to the world’s governments? These are rhetorical questions, because the answers are obvious. No one else is performing this function.”
The IPCC is an extension of WWF and Greenpeace; insofar its reports are indeed the most authoritative document on the desires of environmental pressure groups.
One thing the commenter didn’t reference is the closing of the Rio Tinto Alcan smelter in Lynemouth due to rising energy costs. I guess subsidizing wind mills and forcing higher energy rates on everyone has had the inevitable result. The head of Alcan blamed the loss of over 500 jobs squarely on “Energy Policy”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynemouth
Jacynthe Côté, chief executive of Rio Tinto Alcan, said, “This decision follows a thorough strategic review which explored every possible option for continuing to operate the smelter and power station. However, it is clear the smelter is no longer a sustainable business because its energy costs are increasing significantly, due largely to emerging legislation. We are hopeful that the power station can remain in operation under new ownership.
How long before governments come to realize what they are doing? When the greens can no longer get food and clothing or soda cans?
Hugh Pepper
Isn’t it time you read “The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert” by Donna Laframboise?
@P Walker says:
November 16, 2011 at 11:21 am
The global economic downturn is assisting governments in realizing that green self loathing and self indulgence is destructively expensive . Unfortunately the greenies don’t realize it . If and when the world gets back on its feet – I fear it won’t be soon – they’ll be back in full force .
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
No doubt the Greens would wish to push it once more. However, if it takes 5 to 10 years to get over the present financial problems, there is quite some chance that 2017, 2020, 2023 temperatures will be no higher than today, and possibly even cooler. This may happen due to a change to negative ocean phases with more frequent La Ninas and/or a quiet sun. If that does happen it will mean that temperatures will have flat lined for more than 20 years and it will be very much more difficult to sell the cAGW mantra to the public in these circumstances especially if people have been struggling to pay for fuel due to the financial problems and increasing energy costs. Indeed, some people may well have experienced blackouts/brownouts brought about by over dependency on windfarms that have been unable to meet demand due to the intermitent nature of the wind.
Kicking things in to the rough for 5 to 10 years may therefore be enough to save the world from the cAGW madness. This is the only light at the end of the tunnel emerging from the financial crisis presently facing the West. This crisis has proved that the State cannot afford to pay for all its dreams/wish lists and the State needs in future to be rolled back and to play a smaller role.
I have high hopes that the Greens will be unable to regain their power and influence in a more streamlined world that will emerge from the present financial crisis.
This “news” is hardly a surprise. Cancun was a bust in 2009 and achieved nothing. The post-Kyoto commitment period that was supposed to be agreed upon died a very ugly, public death in Copenhagen in 2010. And now Europe is confronted with its largest economic crisis since the collapse of the South Seas Bubble, including the possibility of the collapse of the Euro and the outright bankruptcy of at least one EU nation.
As to Hugh Pepper’s claim of IPCC’s “authority”, what he and the rest of the Green Gang would have us overlook is that IPCC stands for Inter Govermental Panel on Climate Change. Government politics and all of the tortuousness of international relations is built into the very name of the organization, let alone its publications.
But fear not, IPCC and the COP conferences are UN organizations. That means they will never die regardless of how irrelevant they become. They will be sustained over the years by whomever feels they are getting the worst of changing global trade and economic development patterns. Mostly that’s the Euro’s, as both the Americas and Asia increase their economic dominance in the decades ahead, as trans-Pacific trade overshadows trans-Atlantic trade. Remember, aside from North-South transfers, the principal goal of Kyoto was always restraint of trade and production in the targeted nations.
James Sexton says: November 16, 2011 at 11:09 am
“I think the climate debate as a whole is dying.”
This will not go away quietly, as the rent-seekers (undeveloped countries claiming climate damages ), scammers (Al Gore & company), and grant-funded global warming biased research “scientists” will scream ever more shrilly about imminent disasters, accelerating warming, and death. It is only through the real facts of what the planet is doing and how it is behaving and our continued efforts to point these out to the public that the public will begin to totally ignore these dishonest/immoral people and, in time, they will be unfunded/defanged.
I predict we will always have a lunatic fringe out there, just as we have people who believe cell phones can cause brain cancer. We know enough about electromagnetic radiation, energy, and biology to know that cell phone radiation cannot do chemistry, but there will always be those who will still say we really do not know for sure. Do we know anything for sure? In this case we have a sample size of over 5 billion, years of exposure, and the results are essentially zero. Even so, last year Britain entertained the idea of banning cell phones for all children under 18 years of age—better safe than sorry. Then, we need to back track to the invention of fire and ban everything. [The Precautionary Principle brain dead will still say, “But, but, what if the effects do not show up for 20 years?” They will never be happy.]
Well if the “delegates” are out for a jolly holiday in Durban, then I wish them luck.
Durban is a hell-hole in December – hot.sticky and humid. Did I mention “overpopulated” (with holidaymakers)?
Apart from the fact that the beaches have been overrun and the place is filthy.
Enjoy – I have to be coerced to go anywhere near the place in December.
Good luck to them.
Dave Springer ,
You’re right , of course . I’ve seen it happen too many times . Back in high school (early 70’s ) I took an ecology class and got pretty scared . There were some real problems in those days which got resolved pretty quickly , although at great expense to some industries ; steel , for example . As things improved , the enviros moved on to other things , like baby seals . After that proved to be a hoax , I just passed on the whole thing . When problems are real , I can get behind doing something about them , but I have no time for tree hugging phonies and their imagined crises .
“The BASIC countries – China, India, South Africa and Brazil ”
That’s not an acronym, it’s a mynorca!