After Rio – what next?

It’s time to give all mankind a real chance to enjoy genuine development

Guest post by Dr. Kelvin Kemm

The Rio+20 World Environmental Conference has come and gone. The “Plus 20” comes from the fact that it took place twenty years after the first such conference, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992. Between these dates, I was a delegate at the 2002 world environment conference in Johannesburg, South Africa. Ever since 1992 I have watched the eco-evolution taking place.

There is a good side and a bad side. The good side is that general world environmental awareness has been enhanced. That is definitely good. But there is still so much to be done, especially in poor countries where many people are always on the edge of survival, people must eke out a living off the land, and many will do whatever it takes to earn a little cash, to just survive another day.

Here in South Africa we see the daily international poaching attacks on our elephants and rhinos. It’s disgraceful. For us in the south, on midwinter’s day in June (our winters are the opposite of those in the Northern Hemisphere), the total rhinos shot this year stands at 251, just to get their horns, which are still viewed as aphrodisiacs and medicine in many Asian countries. Last year’s total was 448, more than one a day – so it’s getting worse. Poachers are now using helicopters and machine guns, and often taking chainsaws to still living rhinos.

There is much to do to sustain and protect the world’s natural environment. That should be done – but done well, and honestly. The bad side of Rio+20 is the degree of scientific dishonesty and economic manipulation that has crept into the international debate. That is shocking.

In recent years we have heard a great deal about “climate change.” I am on record as saying I do not believe human activities that produce carbon dioxide (CO2) are making any significant contribution to climate change – certainly not anything dangerous or catastrophic.

Observed climate change appears to be in line with past historic meteorological cycles – and likely linked to natural cosmic rays interacting with the magnetic fields of the earth and the sun’s interactive magnetic screening system.

But there are organisations in the world that want mankind to be at fault, so that there is someone to blame and attack, someone to tax and control, and someone to encourage to be “traditional” and “sustainable” – and consequently in a state of perpetual primitive poverty and disease … on the edge of survival.

It was noticeable that Rio+20 moved away from the theme of “climate change.” It would appear that the disastrous climate change, which green extremists predicted with such great relish, has not been occurring. So climate change is dying as a “marketable concept.” They can’t use it to scare enough people anymore.

Thus the Rio+20 summit focused on the concepts of “biodiversity” and “sustainable development,” as the main themes, and therefore the main “worries.” If people can be made to worry, they can be made to fear, and then they can be controlled.

Rio+20 was all about international control. Certain green organisations clearly want to exert direct control over world governments, and want to impose their brand of world government on our planet, communities, businesses and families. The concepts of biodiversity and sustainable development give them the leverage.

The greens claim that our plant and animal species, our natural resources, our air and water, and our planet are in such desperate trouble that the extreme greens must take control. They will then defend “biodiversity,” and to do this they will decide what “sustainable development” actually means and how it must be implemented.

They will decide how, when and where any community will be permitted to “develop.” It is interesting to take another look at the Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development, which came out of the 2002 world environment conference in Johannesburg. It included language asking that the world pay attention to “the worldwide conditions that pose severe threats to the sustainable development of our people, which include: chronic hunger; malnutrition … and endemic, communicable and chronic diseases, in particular HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis.”

What happened to all these human issues at Rio+20? They were gone. For some reason, the Rio version of “biodiversity” and “sustainability” did not include humans.

In Rio the head of the WWF stated that the WWF wanted “transparent annual reporting and review on subsidy reforms, leading to the elimination by 2020 of all environmentally harmful subsidies, in particular fossil fuel subsidies.” Who do these people think they are? And why have they said nothing at all about the nearly $1 trillion that Bloomberg New Energy Finance reports has been spent worldwide just since 2004 on wind, solar, biofuel and other “renewable” energy schemes that any objective observer would understand are simply not “sustainable” on economic, environmental or any other grounds.

Moreover, this WWF statement is intended to give authenticity to some “world government,” to tell sovereign nations how to care for their own citizens.

In many African countries building a coal-fired power station will reduce CO2 emissions. How? Because there are millions of families who have no electricity, and so cook on wood or dung fires. These fires burn inefficiently and produce not just carbon dioxide, but many airborne pollutants that harm or even kill people. If thousands of these fires are replaced by a modern coal-fired power plant, the net effect would be to lead to improved air quality and less CO2 per unit of energy.

Such an action would be a significant advance, even if the CO2 actually were a problem, though much scientific evidence shows that it is not. This evidence of course is shouted down by those with vested interests in perpetuating “dangerous manmade climate change” as a thesis, and as a professional sinecure. Such an approach is not honest, and it is not science.

Meanwhile, however, European countries have introduced a carbon emissions tax on passenger aircraft flying over their airspace. The tax, per passenger, is calculated on total miles flown, so passengers flying to Europe from faraway places like South Africa and Australia pay much higher emissions taxes to the Europeans to clean up Euro air than do the EU’s own citizens, who collectively fly far more cumulative miles around Europe. Despite appeals from South Africa to spare us the tax, we were turned down. We are getting sick and tired of this high handed First World attitude.

Now from Rio+20 we are told that a goal for development is to move away from “outdated” concepts like measuring national growth using Gross Domestic Product (GDP) – and to rather use more “modern” and “equitable” measures like the “Happy Planet Index” (HPI), under which some world authority or bureaucrat is going to place an “environmental value” on keeping our environment “pristine” and “traditional.” Those values will be built into the HPI. Meantime, many people in Africa will continue to cut down habitats to burn wood and dung, and we will fight elephant and rhino poachers all by ourselves.

In Rio, eight of the world’s largest development banks announced the largest monetary commitment to come out of Rio+20, a US$175 billion initiative to shift investment away from roads to public transport. They want to use the money to promote the use of buses, trains and bicycles, instead of cars and aeroplanes.

In many parts of Africa they don’t even have a road yet. No electricity either, nor school nor clinic.

It is time for UN, EU, US and other green do-gooders to get off their anti-development high horse. It’s time to give all of mankind a real chance to enjoy genuine development. It’s time to stop using a “preserving biodiversity” ruse to keep the world’s most impoverished people forever in poverty.

___________

Dr Kelvin Kemm is a nuclear physicist and business strategy consultant in Pretoria, South Africa. He is a member of the International Board of Advisors of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), based in Washington, DC (www.CFACT.org). Dr. Kemm received the prestigious Lifetime Achievers Award of the National Science and Technology Forum of South Africa.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
61 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Keith Minto
June 28, 2012 10:33 pm

It is time for UN, EU, US and other green do-gooders to get off their anti-development high horse. It’s time to give all of mankind a real chance to enjoy genuine development. It’s time to stop using a “preserving biodiversity” ruse to keep the world’s most impoverished people forever in poverty.

Very well expressed and it shows how out of touch these people really are. Sort of reminds me of the Windows 7 function “Restore computer to an earlier time”. How far back in time should we go to achieve an ecological Nirvana, and, how do you stop evolution?
Such selfish nonsense.

MangoChutney
June 28, 2012 10:55 pm

it’s all about global governance by unelected elite rulers
pass the foil

Paul80
June 28, 2012 11:19 pm

This opiion piece deserves wide exposure, and to be sent to the various media groups around the world. Whether it would be published is another question.

davidmhoffer
June 28, 2012 11:24 pm

The “do gooders” of the world spent decades pouring aid into 3rd world countries. They finally figured out that pouring money into corruption ridden dictatorships did nothing but make wealthy and powerful dictators still more wealthy and powerful. The starving continued to starve.
Unfortunately, having taken their focus off of pulling the 3rd world up, they seem to have taken aim instead at pulling the 1st world down.

Urederra
June 28, 2012 11:29 pm

It’s time to give all mankind a real chance to enjoy genuine development
So, Did they remove already the green mask? Now the fuzz meaningless word is genuine, instead of sustainable.

Andrew30
June 28, 2012 11:44 pm

MangoChutney says: June 28, 2012 at 10:55 pm
“pass the foil”
You might want to consider a Sabre or perhaps a Épée instead, a foil bends with the wind and has no stopping power. If we are to be limited to cold steel then I would take a Katana or a perhaps a Bastard Sword, since is is kin to the believers.

ferd berple
June 28, 2012 11:47 pm

The noble savage had a life expectancy of 40 years. 1/2 of all children died before age 5. That was the pristine, traditional lifestyle not very long ago. 2 billion people still don’t have electricity or running water.
How sustainable is a jet plane ride to Rio? Why did the delegates not tele-conference?
Because they are hypocrites. They want a pristine earth, so long as every one else lives the traditional lifestyle to make it possible. They on the other hand could simply not think of living without their cell phones and double mocha coffee’s. They have already made the sacrifice, by demanding others live the traditional lifestyle. They should thus be exempt because the are (self) righteous, and anyhow they separate their garbage into the blue box, so it isn’t really garbage at all.

MartinGAtkins
June 29, 2012 12:01 am

After Rio – what next?
Dunno but they left a lasting impression.
http://i599.photobucket.com/albums/tt74/MartinGAtkins/Rio.jpg

UK Sceptic
June 29, 2012 12:13 am

The greenie agenda laid bare. How many more times must this be done, how much more misery must be endured until the message sinks in?

Grey Lensman
June 29, 2012 12:17 am

Sadly, a classic example of this is happening, right now in Assam India. This Sub-tropical rainforest area has been stripped by a poor and naturally growing population to provided warmth and cooking.
This results in loss of water retention, soil erosion and flooding. This alone is a major problem because this also then affects Bangladesh, by filling the rivers with sediment and increasing water flow. Result devastating floods downstream.
The solution is simple and very cheap. Provide low cost energy and encourage active replanting of the Forest.

June 29, 2012 12:31 am

Excellent post!
The lack of concrete results from the Rio+20 conference is rather good news: no global governance can emerge from such gathering since no sovereign country is ready to forfeit their power beyond the minimal requirements of UN membership. A vague, non-committing final declaration enables environmental pundits in governmental and intergovernmental bodies, and militia of non-governmental organizations to keep continuing their business. This is why they remain “disappointed but confident”.
The fact that climate change was no more explicitly on the agenda is not necessarily a positive sign.
It may mean that the paradigm is now well established: anthropogenic climate change is accepted as a true truth, with human caused carbon dioxide emissions being the most significant contributing factor.
Our kids are brain washed into this from kindergarten to college and the media are faithfully repeating this gospel with high frequency; even The Economist has fallen into the trap.
In Europe no one elected politician dares take issue with this new paradigm (one commendable exception being the President of the Czech Republic Vaclav Klaus): for such leader it’s easier to follow the crowd than to orient it into another direction.

Ally E.
June 29, 2012 12:33 am

An excellent piece. It’s time for the world to wake up. It’s also time for the world to ditch the UN.

Otter
June 29, 2012 12:51 am

First, Dr. Kemm, thank you very much for this report.
Second: I think it would be good if we could hear from a lot more people, who have had the chance to actually be part of some of these conferences- but whom are on the Common Sense side of the issue. I don’t know if that is even remotely possible (Yes, I am aware of Moncton, but Dr. Kemm was an ‘insider,’ so to speak), but they have to be out there.

wayne
June 29, 2012 12:54 am

Dr Kelvin Kemm, thank you for a very intelligent article. WWF and most other enviromental groups must be kept away from humanity and especially any control, they are poison, to humans and the environment they think, wrongly, that they are “protecting”. Just follow their tracks. The disasterous fire in Colorado has it origin tracing far back to the Sierra Club and their “protecting” the forest and it is they that are beginning to destroy the pristine arctic. Not humans, environMental groups and member enviroMental scientists.

Philip Bradley
June 29, 2012 12:58 am

A good summary, thanks.
They want to use the money to promote the use of buses, trains and bicycles
I recall a survey done by the Economist (not online unfortunately) which looked at what governments subsidized and who benefited. Public transport subsidies, widely viewed as benefiting the less well off, in fact benefit the middle class the most, particularly central business district office workers.
OTOH, bicycles in the developing world along with basic paved roads are an excellent idea and provide a strong economic benefit. I’m old enough to remember when bicycles pulling carts loaded with goods were quite a common sight. But I suspect the promotion of bicycles they have in mind is in the developed world, and more of the pointless symbolism they specialize in.

Nylo
June 29, 2012 1:03 am

Ask the green fascists this very simple question: which past time was better than the current one? Few will dare to answer, and those who do, can be so easily tackled down.

RobertvdL
June 29, 2012 1:06 am

Next ? World War III

Steve C
June 29, 2012 1:21 am

Thank you, Dr. Kemm, for a succinct statement of the view from Africa. Not, sadly, that different from the view from Europe. Or the USA. Or …
In a world which has shrunk over the last century, to the extent that we’re now all talking to one another on the radio, the internet and who-knows-what-next, of course we need international agreements about all sorts of things. If (f’rinstance) Anthony and I ever establish contact between our amateur radio stations (on different continents), it’ll be because the International Telecomms Union has defined agreed common frequencies for us, so that we know where to look on the dial. We’ll be keeping logs based on internationally agreed time scales, and so on.
What we categorically do not need is a band of arrogant “environmentalists” (quote marks to signify that the word is just a badge of convenience) and their political cronies, using half-baked pseudoscience to “justify” impoverishing and destroying the very societies whose enlightenment created the technologies that could vastly improve matters for everyone. (Including rhinos. We hear the occasional story here in the UK, but I’m guessing you get regular gory pictures in the newspapers. (shudder)). We urgently need to bring all intergovernmental activity under the control of the people it purports to want to “protect”, because until we do it is neither more nor less than fascism. Last time we fought that, people died in their millions. Next time?

June 29, 2012 1:40 am

No tin foil hat needed when these power-hungry scum state their desires clearly with no need to interpret…

johnbuk
June 29, 2012 1:48 am

The warning here is for us all. I can only speak from my experience living in the UK but for decades now we, the electorate have been apathetic to the democratic process. Sure, we get up and vote every 5 years or so but generally speaking we get on with the rest of our lives and only notice the democratic deficit when things become too bad.
So, in the UK we now have three main parties and frankly one can’t slip a cigarette paper between them. And one of the main reasons for this is that over this time the vast majority of our lawmaking function has been passed to the EU (an estimate of 75%) and at no time were the UK people asked to vote on this immense change to our democratic system!!
When the Climate Change Act 2008 was passing through parliament very little discussion took place and only THREE MPs voted against it out of 625!! In budget terms this was the largest Bill passed by the House of Parliament costing the taxpayer £18Bn per annum! If I’m honest I don’t really recall being aware of this at the time.
It is up to us to ensure that executive power remains in our own countries and that any attempt to change this is thoroughly debated and agreed to by the electorate. Relying on the MSM etc is not going to work any more.

Mark Sonter
June 29, 2012 1:52 am

Good on you Dr Kelvin, well said! I presume you are in contact with your compatriate Prof Will Alexander, who has been trying to say the very same things…

Tenuk
June 29, 2012 1:53 am

The whole context of the R20 statement is weird and for me this quote illustrates just how far these people are from reality, “Everyone has a right to safe, sufficient, nutritious food,,,”
This, and other equally bizarre statements, read like something from the tenets of a religious cult, with heaven on Earth and an endless supply of food provided by some magical being. Back in the real world, things are a bit different, as the only ‘right’ any human being has is to do whatever it takes to survive, providing these actions do not harm his/her neighbours.
Competition is a vital ingredient for the future development of the human species. The R10 ‘The Future We Want’ is a one-size-fits-all solution which if, by some miracle, could be delivered would lead to stagnation and the end of progress for mankind.

John Marshall
June 29, 2012 2:26 am

Sustainable Development is like making an omelet without breaking the eggs. If the WWF think that fossil fuels are, or have ever been, subsidized then they are as daft as ever. Fossil fuel development went ahead on its own merits, ie. it worked. Get rid of subsidies by all means as that will see the end of those dreadful wind turbines.
It is about World Government by the UN. The original idea of the UN was probably well meaning given that it was started on the back of a World War but it soon went beyond its usefulness and showed its lack of teeth in stopping local conflicts so should now be disbanded.

cui bono
June 29, 2012 3:01 am

Next time feed the 50,000 peripatetic eco-conference regulars with fifty loaves and twenty fishes. Without Wagyu Steak or Almas Caviar in their 5* hotels they’d soon be queuing for first-class seats back to their homelands.

George Lawson
June 29, 2012 3:17 am

An excellent post. How can we email it to the likes of Hanson, Mann, Gore, Prince of Wales, Obama, Greenpiece, WWF, etc. etc. and copy it to The Duke of Edinburgh for infomation.?

1 2 3