People send me stuff. This one had an IP address originating in Durban today, but it lists as a proxy server, so the person may/may not be there. From WUWT Tips and Notes:
I am writing from the COP17 negotiations in Durban, anonymously because I can’t be identified due to working for a government here. Your readers might like to know that Oxfam is writing the negotiating strategy for Bolivia on financing. They are proposing a massive tax on shipping (bizarre for a land-locked country!). Oxfam have even got their consultant actually speaking on behalf of Bolivia in the negotiating sessions.
His name is Antonio Hill and he is listed under the Bolivian delegation in the official list of participants. Their proposal could have a bad impact on the shipping industry and global trade, ironically hitting shipments to least developed countries the most – try and expose this!!
There seems to be support for this elsewhere, though the Boliva issue may be rumors, from Green Times – COP17: Financing Climate Justice:
Oxfam, WWF and the International Chamber of Shipping, on the other hand, have proposed a global shipping tax in order to ensure that there isn’t “carbon leakages” from sectors not regulated under a less than global taxation mechanism. The Climate Action Network consisting of over 700 NGOs is demanding that the GCF is funded by such public sources of finances, as well as other possible sources of funding, such as special drawing rights, but, discussions on sources may be shot down before they get out of the blocks.
…
However, with discussion on the Green Climate Fund and long-term financing set to reopen today, that disagreement may come back to haunt the global community. If Saudi Arabia and America decide to reopen discussion on the report, this might stall decisions on climate finance for quite some time to come, and delay meaningful action on it. Furthermore, with rumors circulating that the Bolivian Alliance for the America’s and a few other countries might want to reopen the document as well, the threat of a can of worms opening up that will take forever to close, is quite real.
Here’s Antonio Hill from COP16:
Here’s how the tax would work, it would raise bunker fuel prices by 10% – follow the money, it looks like a seafaring gravy train:
Here’s the briefing prepared by Oxfam in PDF form: WWFBinaryitem24585
Tim Gore and Mark Lutes are listed in the properties of the document as the authors.
Tim Gore is from Oxfam Great Britain and Mark Lutes is from WWF. Here’s video of Tim Gore from COP16:
And here’s Lutes saying “A deal on greenhouse gas emissions from the shipping and aviation sectors could form the basis of a deal at Durban, says Mark Lutes of WWF”, which is unfortunately behind a paywall.
I find it very very troubling that NGO’s get to write tax laws to foist on private enterprise. Nobody elected the WWF nor Oxfam. Theses NGO’s are circumventing the democratic process.
These people have no business writing tax law proposals, especially when it appears part of the larder goes back to them. This is so wrong on so many levels.
It would act as a sort of tariff raising costs of imports. I can see how some would see it as a means of slowing down “carbon leakage”, but I don’t think the Chinese would like it. After all, it would make their exports more expensive.
I’m slowly coming to the conclusion that most people only care about an influx of cash into their pockets – no matter how many others are impoverished in the process. And “non governmental charities” are the perfect sheep’s clothing for these parasites.
“Agreement to apply a carbon price to shipping can reduce both emissions and…..”
How exactly will this reduce emissions? Will there be fewer ships hauling cargo or making fewer runs?
Hmmm, no mention of compensation to developing countries for loss of exports. People will still buy imported oil at a premium, but what about all of the other products that the developed world imports – produce, toys, electronics, textiles?
“…This is so wrong on so many levels…”
But very profitable. I see they have been learning from the banks, who over here have just been caught selling investment bonds which tie up your capital for years – to 83-year-olds in care homes…
Nice work if you can get it.
Is that more photoshopped smoke?
All these unelected NGO’s accepting the corrupt science and trying to lay down “ethical” changes that rob from the poor and stuff the pockets of … proliferating greenie activists and greenie bureaucrats … noooooooooooo …
What a sea of corruption the whole COP process is… perhaps not surprising with a name suggestive of coprophagia … an acronym that is not even connected to the climate…
this whole thing has always been about the money…. money /funding for scientist to come up with theories (firstly) then the rest follows. Withdraw the funding and the entire pack of cards crumbles. It never was about saving the planet it has always been money and politics – power and ego. NOT having a ‘go’ at you COKE……. but sure wish sheeple could recognise this for what it is….. and get rid of the power mongers please
I can see a massive inflation spiral beig triggered if these fools get their way. Since the bulk of Britain’s food comes in by sea, I am sure the average Brit is goig to be really thrilled by the increase in the cost of feeding himself – but will they realise why? I doubt it, because no one will tell them – or they will blame “Europe.”
It will hit every economy in the world raising costs across the board. I wonder if Oxfam have realised that the reduction in disposable incomes will hit their funding? That’s about the only way you’ll get the attention of Oxfam, WWF, Greenpeace et al – stop donating to their ’causes.’ I did, years ago, after watching them descend on a famine zone, check into five star hotels, unload new gas guzzling 4x4s from a ship and then start holding press conferences and “media events.” Two years later a large part of the “aid” was still lying in a warehouse near the capital of the country concerned, undistributed and rotting …
Cut their funding, and cut it now.
Is that first screenshot of the ship with a lot of black smoke coming out the funnel photoshopped by any chance?
Until they remain tax free, they will push for raising taxes.
It’ as simple as that.
He is listed as a delegate for Bolivia. Do a Google for Antonio Hill COP17, theres a delegate pdf link.
I’m not in favor of backdoor dealings like this but let’s not pretend that the multinationals haven’t been doing exactly this for decades.
These people are all about the money. They cry alarm in every way and the cure is always money. We all know that, it there was a bunker fuel tax, a lot of the money would be lost in translation, processing, and movement before it got anywhere near the countries which are supposed to have “climate change” damages.
I would love to see a requirement that these countries have to prove damages before they receive any funds. As we are cooling, global warming damage is patently impossible.
I recently found a paper that points out that nitrogen and oxygen gas are essentially white gases in that they cannot absorb or emit radiation in the visible or IR ranges. They pick up warmth from the warmed planet surface and a tiny bit from the water vapor and CO2. N2 and O2 have a large problem—they cannot release energy as radiation. Energy transfer into and out of CO2 and water vapor works both ways. N2 and O2 can feed energy to CO2 and H2O which can readily release this energy as IR. Thus, CO2 and H2O can serve was energy leaks for the atmosphere, releasing IR energy that can be easily lost to space. Net effect is that CO2 and H2O cool the atmosphere, not warm it.
So, not only is CO2 plant food and is a trace gas that cannot warm the atmosphere, but CO2 serves more readily as a heat to IR converter than an IR to heat converter. Thus, it makes sense that when climate has a temperature peak and CO2 starts to cook out of the oceans, the heat peak usually reverses a bit before CO2 reaches a peak as CO2 is serving to drain off the energy from the atmosphere.
Now, the panic artists will quickly decide that CO2 is going to cause the next ice age and thus we need to control it anyhow, BUT, CO2 is plant food that also makes plants more temperature tolerant, both to cold and warm, and higher CO2 would accelerate and maximize our crops with improved growth during the growing season.
Bottom-line, controlling CO2 is just plain stupid. A COP16 representative stated that people have to get used to the fact that these meetings have nothing to do with climate and are all about wealth redistribution from those who earn it to those who did not—how in heck is that fair?—and control and power.
These actions almost leave me speechless. Undemocratic on soooo many levels. If they want to change the tax laws, why don’t they run for office and do the deed legitimately? What this appears to me is that no longer are these groups running just as NGO’s. They are getting their fingers into actually governing third world countries. This has “disaster” written all over it, but would make a good James Bond movie plot in the meantime.
Is Tim Gore talking about women needing climate money most. I really don’t have a clue why he is targeting women. Is this just a ploy to apeal to women.
Fenton Communications believes they can do anything. For example, the circle between Center for American Progress ( people who produce the Think Progress site), a Fenton Communications client, and the current administration in the White House is now complete.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/69784.html
So what we have is Fenton orchestrating this push for legislation and now have an operative in the White House.
I am telling you people this has nothing to do whatsoever with science. As much as I admire McIntyre and Condon, if they attempt to fight this using science they are sadly about to be disarmed. The “greenies” have already won that debate. The really no longer need science at all to back them up. It is now “established fact” to millions of new voters reaching the age of franchise in countries around the world. Now they are focused on the implementation of their policies that the scientific debate (now practically over, as far as they are concerned) allowed.
This is not about science, this is about taking your money, establishing global policy, and setting up other “progressives” in lucrative investments that these policies provide. And the sickest thing of all is that it is going to do huge HARM to billions of people AND the environment! They are doing exactly the opposite of what they would have people believe. It is absolutely Orwellian.
Fenton has positioned things so that he can do pretty much whatever he wants. He controls the message of the NGOs, he controls the message of the UN, he now controls the message out of the White House of the United States.
This is now about PR and marketing, it is not at all about science. As far as future generations of voters are concerned, the science issue is “settled”.
Confused, is taxing shipping supposed to reduce the amount of bunker fuel used? No credits for scrubbers? Wouldn’t increasing shipping costs lead to less development in the 3rd world, sustaining poverty and consumption of resources?
CAGW or SCAGW (hmm, supercatastrophicexpialidocious?) is invented out of whole cloth. It does not exist. It is not happening. There is no evidence whatsoever that anything out of the ordinary is going on except the diversion of billions in tax money.
Antonio Hill is listed on the Official Bolivian delegation and his affiliation is listed as Oxfam (page 17, section 1)
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/cop17/eng/misc02p01.pdf
The involvement of the International Council of Shipping as a oartner is also rather puzzling:
Echoes from Durban: Shipping industry to submit to a carbon tax?
http://blog.carbontalks.ca/archives/549
http://www.marisec.org/
JustMEinT Musings says:
December 6, 2011 at 12:31 pm
this whole thing has always been about the money. money /funding for scientist to come up with theories (firstly) then the rest follows. Withdraw the funding and the entire pack of cards crumbles. It never was about saving the planet it has always been money and politics power and ego. NOT having a go at you
COKE. but sure wish sheeple could recognise this for what it is.. and get rid of the power mongers please
—
SPOT ON! It has ALWAYS been about the Climate Ca$h – from the climate $cience re$earch to the advocacy group$.
For example, let’s see how many climate modelers would be willing to give up their power-hungry supercomputing centers where they run their models, so as to reduce THEIR carbon footprint. Just turn them off. Completely. Yeah – like that will ever happen…just ask Gavin and Kevin…
NGOs have wormed their way into writing all kinds of environmental laws. Just think back to the Waxman-Markey days where Mr. Waxman managed to pull that 1000+ page bill out of his drawer in just a few days. And if they can’t influence laws and regulations when they are drafted, they then sue EPA to get what they want. The NGOs then negotiate settlements with EPA. BTW, part of the settlement is usually payment of their legal fees, so they can turn around and sue again.
And Oxfam’s message is managed by whom? I will give you a hint:
You guys a fighting a very large machine. But it can all come crashing down quite quickly if enough sunlight is shown onto it.
The above quote was from one of the bios of the leadership of “Groundswell”, another one of those astroturf organizations that just trades people around as they all rotate among the various other astroturf organizations. They could easily all be one organization but that is the point … the one thing tying them all together is Fenton which is really the one organization.
I’m delighted with this turn of events and I am even more excited waiting for the first nations to sign on the dotted line to enact this shipping tax. Then come home to their respective nations and sell this tax to their respective legislatures and their already overtaxed citizens. That should be fun – a 10% tax on everything under the sun for every human being on planet earth.
Brought to YOU by the “green” lobby and their NGOs. Oh, yeah, that aught to sell –
Oxfam was originally founded in Oxford, UK, in 1942 as the Oxford Committee for Famine Relief by a group of Quakers, social activists, and Oxford academics.
What is that expression about sticking to what you are good at? Or maybe there is not enough Famine to go around all the NGO’s…