Guest opinion by Fred F. Mueller
In large-scale wars, there are sometimes prolonged periods of fierce clashes with neither side being able to place the decisive blow that will ultimately tilt the balance in its favor. Then all of a sudden, certain events occur that mark the decisive turning point where one side definitely loses the strength to continue posing a threat to its opponents. From that decisive moment on, it will lose the initiative, being largely confined to defensive actions and hoping to be able to force its opponents to accept a peace agreement instead of having to face the enormous costs of a prolonged war. One of the most famous turning points in World War II was the battle for Stalingrad, where the seemingly unstoppable German onslaught could finally be brought to a standstill. The outcome is well known: Hitlers annihilation a few years later.
Switching to our times, one might well get the impression that in the decades-long war of Greenpeace, WWF and their countless NGO brethren for control of the public opinion about the so-called global warming threat allegedly caused by human CO2 emissions, such a turning point has been reached. The UN meeting in Warsaw (Poland), where further measures to curb these emissions should have been laid on keel, has seen a number of leading countries bluntly refusing to continue supporting the scam while many others stayed on the sidelines, paying lip-service to the noble cause of saving the climate and the planet while abstaining from any sizeable commitments. Maybe historians wanting to highlight the real dimensions of the blow dealt to the CO2 alarmists might coin the word Warsawgrad later on. Having failed to reach any substantial accord on the main question, the focus of the event has instead shifted to financial aspects, with third world countries trying to extort as many billions as possible from developed nations under the pretense that they should be held liable for each and any natural disaster happening on their territory. Upon seeing the related list, one wonders why they haven’t come up with claims to include asteroid impacts, earthquakes, tsunamis and volcano eruptions as well. But there might still be room for improvement…
The CO2 alarm finally seems to run out of steam
The clear impression one can draw from the course of events and the echo it finds in the media is that the CO2 scam advanced by Greenpeace and their numerous allies in state agencies, scientific institutions and the media is finally losing traction. The greed of too many profiteers has generated costs and technical consequences in key industry sectors to such an extent that the tide in public opinion seems to be finally turning, at least in some more lucid countries such as Autralia. Of course, just as in many other historic examples, the final shot has not yet been fired, but from now on, it seems likely that the faithful of the Anthropogenous Global Warming (AGW) belief will have to fight an uphill battle. While some country leaders such as Germany’s Merkel still seem staunchly committed to continue their course, it is becoming increasingly obvious that a number of decisive nations such as Canada, Australia and Japan are already manning the lifeboats. And as in the case of a dam break, once the first cracks have appeared, the subsequent sequence of events will probably follow the usual scheme. We might eventually see a stampede of highly qualified story-tellers and academic charlatans flooding out of all sorts of state agencies und NGO-related consulting services in a frantic search for new fields of activity.
In quest for new business models
One signal hinting that this threat has already been clearly perceived in the leading ranks of Greenpeace are new or newly revived ideas for alternative business models being floated by prominent members of the organization. If the public gets tired of sinking money into the CO2 black hole, fresh ideas have to be brought forward in order to save the planet from humanity while keeping the flow of donations at current high levels. Among the ideas currently thrown into the discussion are plastic garbage in the oceans, with subtle modifications such as micro-plastic particles coming back into the human food chain or causing fish liver damages. Other topics that might well be rediscovered after having been left dormant for some years are fine dust particles in the air, pharmaceutical active substances in the water or the noise levels inextricably linked to business and traffic activities. The bets are open which ideas will replace the CO2 hypothesis once the wheels are definitely coming off the current model.
Chinese cleverness
Upon reviewing the evolution of the CO2-related blame game that has been going on at such UN events over the past two decades, one cannot but pay respect to the clever strategy of one country that had been put on the pillory for excessive emission of CO2 not too long ago: China. In pace with its remarkable economic rise, the country has in the meantime overtaken all other countries to become the biggest CO2 emitter in the world. Nevertheless, this time it has been successfully avoiding to be blamed, forging an alliance of poor and developing nations instead that is aggressively claiming billions of money in compensation from developed Western nations while shielding the CO2 gorilla in their ranks. According to some reports, even renewed political efforts by the US administration have ultimately failed to drive a wedge into this coalition.
Is the smart money shifting focus?
Another development that can be observed in parallel to the Warsaw events is a shift in financial streams that seems to take place in the wake of the debacle the AGW proponents have suffered in Warsaw. While we might still be years away from a decisive collapse of the “climate-saving” energy policies still upheld by a number of politicians such as EU Commissioner Conny Hedegaard or President Obama, who have gone way too far in their ignorance of the laws of physics, markets and common sense to be able to back down without losing face, the smart money seems to have immediately gotten the message. Uranium shares, which had been on a constant decline since the Fukushima events, are currently experiencing a sudden rise that might well signal the sector has bottomed out. With news from Spain indicating that people operating solar cells for their private consumption while maintaining their connection to the power grid will now become liable to pay a special levy, chances are that more and more banks and trusts will start to rate investments into such projects as “higher risk”. On the other hand, investments in uranium and coal mines as well as in conventional power equipment producers and operators might become attractive again after a prolonged period on the dark and cold side of the markets.
Rtj1211
Says
“The only purposes any coalition operating is interested in is money and power.”
Then what about Greenpeace and WWF and other NGO’s idea and effort with UNFCCC, IPCC, Agenda 21 and etc etc…?
climatologist says:
November 23, 2013 at 4:24 pm
It ain’t over till it’s over.
OR the fat lady sings. Michelle or Merkel ?
My belief is that they will turn to water sustainability as their next target
JACK, they have been trying to switch to that one for about 2 years. Quote from a Greanpeace a$$hole “what do you switch to when you run out of water”. If that’s their best then it is dead in the water 🙂 They have been testing the “waters” for several ideas since climategate. They have tried methane, water, fracking, NO², deep water hydrates. They are fishing because they could see the end to their current scam on the horizon (it’s still a long way) so they need to prepare the numpties for their next tax scheme.
If only Warsawgrad was true. We in the UK are ‘led’ by sheep, and mediore sheep at that. The only people with any balls are Farage, for all his faults, and that ‘mad eye’ Monckton. All our politicians are so far behind the curve on Europe and climate change they are in danger of being lapped.
Personally I think that COP19 did rather well.
The messages that seem to come across are the increased certainty of IPCC about AGW, the urgency of cutting emmissions more drastically than ever, the settled nature of ‘the science’ and the need, and justice, of compensating poor countries for their costs in dealing with the effects and threats of climate change.
In Britain, where our future king has yet again confirmed that the recent typhoon was certainly caused by climate change, our goverments, of all colours, will step up and take responsibility.
The UK should immediately approve annual UK payments of at least £50 billion to developing countries, rising to £100 billion by 2020..
We need to immediately shut down all oil and coal power stations and learn to live with power only when renewables deliver. Let us heed the clarion call, reject industrial society and learn to live and work intermitently, as nature intends.
Politically, we should throw out most of the Lords from the upper house and replace them with appointees from the leading NGOs such as Greenpeace, WWFN, etc, together with leading green scientists and other advocates who will ensure our bright and innocent green future. These people will intervene as required to ensure that UK society never again pollutes the world.
About time, but then the truth always gets out and to paraphrase Scotty, ”you cannot break the laws of physics”.
The Russians did a great service to the World in standing up to these Greenpeace hooligans who have broken the law in so many countries of the World in their undemocratic actions in support of their narrow and often unworldly views on matters that effect us all. I dread to think of the reaction of the British government had Greenpeace’s criminal activities in the Arctic been carried out in British waters. I’m sure the perpetrators would not have spent a few weeks in prison for their actions.. We must all thank the Russians for doing what they did, and hope that it has sent a message to all other countries of the World that the law must be observed at all times,Countries must take firm action to stop the illegal activities of these fanatics who believe they have a right to take physical and sometimes criminal action against countries and companies who themselves are acting within the law.
Australia is not a lucid country yet
If voters knew the exact scientific truth, they would vote of scientific policies, but they don’t. They vote for unscientific type policies and only later discover that the Emperor has no cloths. The world now waking up to the fact that the jury is out on glow-bull warming itself, but that the cures are worse than the disease. Wind and solar power do not work and if they pick the wrong cure, where does that leave the original diagnosis?
Yet the media don’t tell that Warsaw was a defeat. This is what the French newspaper Le Monde writes:
Un accord sur la climat a été trouvé à Varsovie, samedi 23 novembre.
SYNTHÈSE. — Un accord sur le climat adopté à Varsovie.
Les tractations ont été extrêmement dures lors de cette “conférence d’étape” mais un accord a finalement été trouvé, fixant une feuille de route jusqu’en 2015.
So, “un accord a été trouvé”. Maybe those people see “la vie en rose”?
Jean Meeus says:
November 24, 2013 at 3:56 am
“So, “un accord a été trouvé”. Maybe those people see “la vie en rose”?”
No; all media in the EU are censored and controlled. Whatever you read in them is what the EU commission wants you to read.
rtj1211 says:
November 24, 2013 at 12:48 am
“‘Left wing women’ operate for money and power, attacking ‘right wing misogynists’.
‘Right wing capitalists’ operate for money and power, attacking ‘the Unions and socialists’.”
Blech. A capitalist, as opposed to an activist, first of all gains his money by selling a product. Making the product involves something called work. We argue with socialists because we hope we can help them understand these concepts some day lest they make another bloody mess like they did in the Purge in the USSR.
A very erudite chap picked it so scintillatingly well some time ago-
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2010/07/12/the-big-green-lie-exposed/
and with the bankers of London doing another Dunkirk with EU carbon emissions trading and abandoning their trading desks that leaves the socialists masquerading as environmentalists to invade Poland all they like. Besides the Russians aren’t interested in getting involved.
Hockeystickler,
“without American help, Stalin would have almost certainly lost the war.”
But you are ignoring the idiocy of Hitler. How many times did he order divisions, even whole armies to stand and fight to the last man. Instead of retreating and reforming they were made to stand in isolation, being rendered useless as a fighting force until succumbing to the inevitable.
Oh, and then there is the vast Russian territory to conquer. Stalin had already moved production to Siberia.
William Dilly,
Methinks you are having a laugh. It’s usually a good idea to end with a /sarc or smiley.
Absolutely right, but its not a laugh. The people of Britain are in the hands of willing idiots.
One day Ed Davey and his kind should be charged with treason
Why do our government whitewash Climategate, Tim Yeo, etc. and jump at the chance of handing billions to 3rde world dictators?
We must have a root and branch cleansing of the civil service, tainted politicians, professional learned societies that have gone leftist advocacy.
We have to find a voice and if UKIP will do it, fine.
Jon says:
November 23, 2013 at 3:03 pm
“Jon says:
November 23, 2013 at 2:44 pm
Yes like DDT?”
What about DDT?
What I mean is just because there are environmental cranks out there doesn’t mean that we should drop our guard with respect to our environment.
Not all uk media are censored, read Christophrt Booker. He has been telling the truth for a long time
Regarding the no leader ….may l suggest A. Watts, Dr Willie Soon, Prof Richard Lindzen, Steve Mcintyre,
C. Booker and Steve Goreham, to name a few. Where would we be without WUWT?
History will prove these men to be heroes imo.
Does anyone have a comprehensive list of which side countries took in COP19?
john piccirilli you write “Regarding the no leader”
I don’t think I have explained well enough about what I am talking about. I agree that there are many very able scientists who have been in the forefront of the assault on the hoax of CAGW. May I add the name of Dr. Judith Curry. But that is not the issue. No-one who matters is taking any notice of them. What we require is someone who cannot be ignored, and who with stand up and shout form the rooftops, that there is no science to support the hypothesis of CAGW.
I know it is farfetched, but the sort of person I have in mind is Sir Paul Nurse, or Lord Rees. If they stepped forward, it would change the whole situation overnight.
This article is illogical.
The nuclear power industry was to be the primary beneficiary of carbon tax or cap and trade schemes.
If uranium shares have bottomed, that is no sign of a collapse of the CAGW paradigm.
Col Mosby: “There‘s an exceedingly simple reason for the firming up of uranium prices – the world has begun building nucler power plants after a decades’ long hiatus.”
Wrong. The reason uranium prices are rising is because of the lapse of the Tenex uranium purchase agreement with Russia this year. This was the agreement which back in the 1990s was signed to turn Russia’s surplus weapons-grade plutonium stockpiles into reactor fuel. Over the course of about the last 10 years, the equivalent of about 20,000 nuclear weapons have been converted into nuclear reactor fuel.
The end of the agreement means that there is now a significant gap between available uranium supply and demand for existing reactors, let alone any new construction. To some degree, this was ameliorated by the shutdown of Japan’s 48 niuclear reactors post Fukushima, but this is only a temporary delay. It is expected that most of Japan’s nuclear reactors will be restarted over the next five years or so as inspections are completed and prefectures grant approvals.
Current world uranium production sits at about 55,000 tonnes annually, whereas annual consumption was about 70,000 tonnes annually. Most of this gap was met by the now-lapsed Tenex purchase agreement. So there’s a need for several large new uranium mines on the scale of McArthur River.
Any expansion of world nuclear reactor capacity will simply add to the supply gap noted above.
Ocean acidification seems to be their next move, but it is weak, and the public is fatigued by enviro scares. Nice article by the way! Long live WUWT.
Now as for this piece of nonsense
“Can Earth explode as a result of Global Warming?”
Jimbo is right to pour derision all over it. The earth’s core is radioactive because of the high concentration of uranium in it. But that has nothing to do with conducting fission. There can be no fission in the absence of a moderator.
And this:
“Overheating the center of the inner core reactor due to the so-called greenhouse effect on the surface of Earth may cause a meltdown condition, an enrichment of nuclear fuel and a gigantic atomic explosion.”
There are so many things wrong with this fantasy it’s hard to know where to start. Enrichment is done by removing U238, not by particle bombardment. There’s literally no way to increase the proportion of fissile material in the earth’s core. And without it, an explosion of the planetary core is simply not possible. Increased surface heat is utterly irrelevant; the core is already molten, and increased heating, however much, cannot speed up the rate of radioactive decay.
That such drivel was published in a supposed peer-reviewed journal shows how bankrupt the concept of peer review really is. Edgar Rice Burroughs published better material than this in imagining princesses and green-skinned men on Mars.
Jon says don’t forget get chemical contaminants in our environment. What is your CV? I am a Retired Chemical Engineer with 40 years of environmental experience. In the 60s and 70s we had problems and effectively addressed them.
What are you talking about? Sounds like you’re parroting someone else’s liberal dribble.
skunky says:
November 23, 2013 at 4:58 pm “With regards to the point in this post “Chinese cleverness”, I was in the room (as an observer) when the contract was signed, when the French (EDF) sold the entire UK power infrastructure to the Chinese (UK Power Networks). Can anybody let me know if any other country has sold its entire power infrastructure to a foreign government?”
Nigel Farage on the construction by China of a nuclear power plant at Hinkley:
“I am not concerned about Chinese money coming into this country – I welcome it. But what I think is bonkers is that we’ve gone for this plant at Hinkley, and we’ve guaranteed the Chinese investors a “strike price” as its called, over the course of the next 35 years, which is exactly double what the current cost of electricity is. It’s a dam*ed good deal for China, but I think it’s a rotten deal for the British tax payer. But it’s based on the idea I mentioned earlier on this show – they assume that energy prices will go up, and I think actually, if we get frakking, and start to use a lot more genuine new technology, the price can come down.”
In short, UKIP’s Nigel Farage objects to the “bizarre assumption that energy prices will rise in the next few years,” and counters that instead, shale gas has the potential to reduce energy prices by 50% in the UK.