US-China Climate Statement Is No Breakthrough

From Dr. Benny Peiser and The GWPF:

China Pledges To Peak CO2 Emissions – But Only After ‘Around 2030’

Today, the Presidents of the United States and China announced their respective post-2020 actions on climate change, recognizing that these actions are part of the longer range effort to transition to low-carbon economies, mindful of the global temperature goal of 2℃. The United States intends to achieve an economy-wide target of reducing its emissions by 26%-28% below its 2005 level in 2025 and to make best efforts to reduce its emissions by 28%. China intends to achieve the peaking of CO2 emissions around 2030 and to make best efforts to peak early and intends to increase the share of non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption to around 20% by 2030. Both sides intend to continue to work to increase ambition over time. —U.S.-China Joint Announcement on Climate Change, 12 November 2014


The joint statement by the United States and China on climate change, issued on Wednesday, is more important for its political and diplomatic symbolism than any practical effect it might have in reducing emissions. The statement reiterates policies China and the United States have been developing on their own and contains no new binding limits on greenhouse emissions. The joint announcement employs language very carefully. Throughout, the operative word is “intend” or “intention”, which makes clear the statement is not meant to create any new obligations. –John Kemp, Reuters, 12 November 2014

By adopting emissions targets on its own terms, China can influence negotiations leading up to the 2015 climate summit and head off pressure for tougher targets. China can point to its self-adopted targets as well as the principle of “common and differentiated responsibilities” to block any attempt to erect carbon tariffs or other border adjustment measures by the United States and the European Union to protect energy-intensive trade-exposed industries. Finally, the 2030 target should be fairly easy to meet. By then, the most manufacturing-intensive phase of China’s development will be complete and hundreds of millions more people will have been lifted into the middle class. Emissions are likely to stabilise by that date even without the joint statement. –John Kemp, Reuters, 12 November 2014

China is considering setting itself a new target to stop increasing overall emissions by 2025, according to Lord Stern of Brentford. He said that consumption of coal in China, which is the world’s biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, could reach a peak before 2020, much earlier than previously predicted. –Ben Webster, The Times, 25 September 2013

The man responsible for maintaining India’s power supply says he wants the country’s coal production to double within the next five years. Piyush Goyal, Minister of State for Power, Coal, New and Renewable energy, says India needs to dig twice as much coal as it does today if it is to meet its soaring energy demand. By 2019, it is expected to be consuming two trillion units of electricity annually, with one unit equalling one kilowatt hour. Describing coal as “an essential input for power”, Goyal said: “I see Coal India production doubling in the next five years. It makes about 500 million tonnes hopefully this year. We [will] do a billion tonnes in 2019.” –Alex Kirby, Climate News Network, 7 November 2014

Climate negotiations in the run-up to the global deal in Paris next year may not to be on predictable lines. After trade, the Narendra Modi government is now contemplating a strategic shift during talks, delinking India’s position from China. Although India will continue to insist that the global climate deal should have the principles of the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) and Kyoto Protocol that call for only rich nations to cut emissions while demanding money for poor countries to take voluntary action, it may now start questioning the idea of keeping the world’s highest carbon emitter China in the same league as the other developing countries. –Vishwa Mohan, Times of India, 5 November 2014

Crop producers and scientists hold deeply different views on climate change and its possible causes, a study by Purdue and Iowa State universities shows. Associate professor of natural resource social science Linda Prokopy and fellow researchers surveyed 6,795 people in the agricultural sector in 2011-2012 to determine their beliefs about climate change and whether variation in the climate is triggered by human activities, natural causes or an equal combination of both. 66 percent of corn producers surveyed said they believed climate change was occurring, with 8 percent pinpointing human activities as the main cause. —Purdue University, 11 November 2014

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mark Bofill
November 12, 2014 8:19 am

I’m rummaging around looking for a reference, because I’m pretty durned sure I read that this was China’s plan anyway. In other words, China has agreed to do exactly what they were already doing anyway and nothing else.
What a joke.

Reply to  Mark Bofill
November 12, 2014 11:27 am

Obama – the master of after the fact.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  philjourdan
November 12, 2014 11:54 am

Obama – the dimmest bulb in the room.

Reply to  philjourdan
November 12, 2014 12:15 pm

Hang on a minute.
Didn’t “secret” negotiations start nine months ago?
My concerns would be in the under handed way he kept this from the American people he purports to represent.
If he is so happy to receive the plaudits on the world stage from the global warming fraudsters.
Why keep it secret from the American people who have to now pay the fraudsters?
If he and his band of snake oil sellers in government are so confident about the reasons for jacking up your energy prices andmI’m not just talking about electricity prices.
He should have told Americans what he was about to announce BEFORE your half term elections.
That he didn’t speaks volumes for what ever credibility he may have had.
You have a lame duck president for another two years, swanning around the world crowing like a rooster.
It is to say the least a tad embarrassing for America.

Reply to  Leigh
November 13, 2014 9:34 am

It has been embarrassing for the past 6 years.

george e. smith
Reply to  philjourdan
November 12, 2014 1:39 pm

It seems that in the formal meetings of the “world leaders”, emperor Obama, was separated from the world leaders, by the wives of the world leaders; out in left field literally.
Meanwhile during the meetings, the Chinese military was flying around a flock of their new Radar avoiding jet fighters, designed with Lockheed-Martin secrets, stolen by Chinese tech spies.
Yes I believe China showed the Emperor, just who is boss, with his version of the Japanese exhortation; “That will be quite difficult to achieve.” translates to: “Dream on dummy; no way in hell that is going to happen.”
And the dame who fronts for the EPA is gloating on MSNBC that “this is not a treaty” so doesn’t require Senate ratification, it just an EPA regulatory matter.
That means of course, that the new Congress, can override, via the defund, the EPA, if the lame duck Congress is stupid enough to ok this nonsense.
If you think ebola and ISIS are world problems, you ain’t seen nothing compared to world energy starvation.
Once “renewables” feel the burden of coming out of the subsidy shadows, and have to stand on their own two feet, as will the TESLA Motors of the world, people will wake up and realize that renewable energy sources, are not sustainable, and they never will be.

Reply to  george e. smith
November 13, 2014 10:47 am

Meanwhile during the meetings, the Chinese military was flying around a flock of their new Radar avoiding jet fighters, designed with Lockheed-Martin secrets, stolen by Chinese tech spies.

Actually, Clinton gave it to them for campaign cash.

Reply to  philjourdan
November 12, 2014 2:35 pm

Gee george, most of us who remember the 70s (even though I was a kid during the “energy crisis”) are completely aware that “renewables” and “sustainables” are never going to work. Seems to me that those who fail to learn from the mistakes of history…. have climate degrees.

Mario Lento
Reply to  philjourdan
November 12, 2014 2:36 pm

philjourdan November 12, 2014 at 11:27 am
Obama – the master of after the fact.
Leading from Behind? Agreed.

Reply to  Mario Lento
November 13, 2014 10:59 am

Or leading with his.

Don K
Reply to  Mark Bofill
November 12, 2014 12:49 pm

Yes, Mark. You’ve pretty much nailed it. China, which, has an energy plan promises to stick to their plan (if it is convenient to do so). The US which has nothing remotely resembling a plan promises to keep on making promises.
Environmentalists can now, at long last, celebrate seeing the light at the end of the tunnel.

DC Cowboy
Reply to  Mark Bofill
November 12, 2014 1:10 pm

They also promised that they ‘intend’ to refrain from laughing at Obama in public too much.

November 12, 2014 8:19 am

Ok, can’t wait for the Iranian Nuke deal….

M Courtney
Reply to  tgmccoy
November 12, 2014 8:38 am

Already happened with Russia.
Russia to build Iran atomic reactors at Bushehr

November 12, 2014 8:20 am

Solar energy enters the global system at a relatively fixed rate. Energy of a certain wavelength excites CO2 molecule electrons which subtract the work function and emit energy in a wave length that agitates (not excites) water vapor molecules (like the microwave) which heats the atmosphere in general which transfers that heat to the surface & oceans which release more CO2 and loopy-de-loop. With more CO2, more energy is absorbed leaving less to leave the system and more to stay behind heating up the atmosphere.
If air were any good at transferring heat to water nobody in Phoenix would have to heat their swimming pools, they’d all rise to 105 F and have to be cooled. The latent heat of evaporation keeps that from happening. The oceans can handle the hiatus heat by increasing their evaporation/cloud formation .001%.
IPCC AR5 admits in TS.6 they have a poor understanding of the magnitude of the CO2 loop forcing especially over land, and high uncertainty about the water vapor/precipitation cycle, and a whole list of other rather critical known & unknown unknowns, like the ice sheets/caps, oceans below 2,000 meters, etc.
Whatever mechanism raised global temperatures during the first half of the twentieth century, the hiatus makes it abundantly clear it wasn’t CO2, not then, not now, not tomorrow.
Coincidence equals cause plus an anti-coal agenda stirred together with egos, money, politics, and voila, the AGW/CCC beast lumbered forth.

NC Brian
Reply to  nickreality65
November 12, 2014 9:03 am

I grew up near Phoenix. I can tell you that for 9am swim lessons, the water was very cold.

Brian H
Reply to  NC Brian
November 12, 2014 9:55 pm

It’s the sun, stupid. I also preferred afternoon lessons, in Central Ontario.

Reply to  nickreality65
November 12, 2014 10:26 am

CO2 change has no significant effect on climate. The two drivers that do explain the ups and downs of climate change since before 1900 with 95% correlation and credible average global temperatures back to 1610 are included in the paper at along with an explanation of why CO2 change has no significant effect.

November 12, 2014 8:23 am

Is President Obama really that gullible?

Reply to  John
November 12, 2014 8:26 am

Yes. Obviously. If you like your climate, you keep your climate…

Reply to  Rud Istvan
November 12, 2014 11:40 am

And the cost for your climate won’t go up even one thin dime. You can even keep your climatologist, if you wnat.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
November 12, 2014 1:21 pm

I thought we are too stupid to know the facts about climate…or was that ACA?

Reply to  John
November 12, 2014 8:31 am

You have to ask?

Alan Robertson
Reply to  John
November 12, 2014 11:59 am

There have been so many Obama actions which are destructive to the US, that many are now asking: “is this planned and wanton destruction?”
His parents were Communists. His grandparents were Communists. His principle mentor during his youth was a radical Communist. The person that introduced him to Chicago politics was a radical, violent Communist and (former) terrorist. L’Internationale was played at Obama campaign stops.
Here’s the new China/US deal in a nutshell:
Obama: We will continue to dismantle our carbon fuel- based economy.
Xi: We will curb our rate of CO2 emission increase after 2030.

Sal Minella
Reply to  John
November 12, 2014 12:49 pm

No. His interest is in damaging the US, transferring money to his friends, and gaining power for himself and his fellow travelers.

DC Cowboy
Reply to  John
November 12, 2014 1:12 pm

No, he wanted something, anything to take the public eye off of the recent election results

Brian H
Reply to  John
November 12, 2014 9:57 pm

No, his interests and goals just differ from ours.

Mark Bofill
November 12, 2014 8:26 am

here. Xie announced that they’d eventually set this emission peak date back in July. I tell you, these people aren’t negotiating a darned thing, they’re following their script to the letter.

Mark Bofill
Reply to  Mark Bofill
November 12, 2014 8:33 am

Here’s another one, from June of this year.

Emissions impossible
He Jiankun said that the next five year plan, that would run from 2016, would see an emissions cap and that overall carbon output would peak sometime after 2030.
But Mr He clarified his statements to say that he didn’t have the authority to speak on behalf of the government.
The issue of when China’s emissions will reach their peak and start to decline is of crucial importance to negotiators here.

Reply to  Mark Bofill
November 12, 2014 9:27 am

Gonna go way out on a limb here and guess that ‘sometime after 2030’ is when they’re expecting China’s population to tank as a result of 20th century birth limits.

Reply to  Mark Bofill
November 12, 2014 12:39 pm

I’m also betting that China is thinking that by 2030 the West might finally have come to its senses over CAGW and China won’t have to do anything. I wish I shared their optimism.

Reply to  Mark Bofill
November 13, 2014 1:42 pm

Bingo, Lee Harvey. Google China population projections and it peaks around 2028. They’re promising to increase the carbon intensity of each Chinese person forever.

Mark Bofill
Reply to  Mark Bofill
November 12, 2014 10:15 am

That’s an interesting idea. I have no idea if this is accurate, but a google search on the age distribution of the Chinese population gave me this, looks like the bulge is in the 40-49 year old age group. They should live 75 or 76years on average according to wikipedia, so they’ve got 25-30 years to go, naw, looks like we’ll miss 2030.

Flyover Bob
Reply to  Mark Bofill
November 12, 2014 3:10 pm

You must remember the key word, “AFTER!” By that any timeline fits.

James Strom
November 12, 2014 8:35 am

Looking at the policy side of this for a second, is this agreement intended to be a treaty? If so, it would have to be approved by the US Senate. I doubt that’s the plan, in which case it’s nothing more than a statement of “good intentions”.

M Courtney
Reply to  James Strom
November 12, 2014 8:41 am

I posted this on the “Gone Fishing” thread but I’ll repeat it here for relevance:
This is a win-win all round.
~China gets to show good public spirit that will be paid back in some way – good for them.
~President Obama gets to show to this fanbase that he can still stand up for the causes they voted for – good for him in his coming retirement,
~The US Senate gets to vote this down – good for the USA.
~The EU gets its opportunities to diplomatically back away, reduced – Good for China and the USA, relatively

Reply to  M Courtney
November 12, 2014 9:19 am

You’re assuming that this won’t get rammed through the lame duck senate. They have until January. What a perfect way for the lame duck senators to give the electorate a big fat middle finger.

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  M Courtney
November 12, 2014 12:23 pm

My Tucson pool heats up due to direct sunlight absorption. By March and into April, the daytime air temps are reaching in the mid-80F range, but the pool stays stuck in the 60’s simply because the air heats up much faster than the water in the sunlight, but the days are not yet long enough to drive a strong warming until May.
The air temp only has, at best, a very minor heat input effect. Along with relative humidity and wind, air temperature is just one of the set of variables that drives some pool heat loss by evaporative cooling and removal of water from my pool. But my pool cools by radiative heat loss at night, as I do not use a cover. Only cloudy nights, I note that the pool temp drop is less than it is on clear nights, just like the air temp, again due to surface radiative cooling in Tucson dry desert air. On cloudy days, the temp rise is much lower than on a completely cloudless day. The diurnal ratio between night and daylight determine the temperature regime in which the diurnal temp changes move, along with clouds. The pool pump keep the layers (10 feet deep-end) well mixed during the day, but it is off at night, which prevents layer mixing and reduces heat loss at night.
The problem of course is we humans assume that the air temp is primarily driving the pool water temp since we cannot uncouple the seasonal air temps from the length of days since that is also tied to the season. That is the false impression.

Just Steve
Reply to  M Courtney
November 12, 2014 12:43 pm

Harold….treaty ratification requires a super majority to pass. Harry doesn’t have enough D votes.

Reply to  Just Steve
November 13, 2014 9:38 am

Probably the best thing that could happen to the Republicans is the run off for Mary Landrieu. That will hold Reid in check for a month, and by then, it will probably be too late.

Randy in Ridgecrest
November 12, 2014 8:38 am

“Best Effort” – that says it all.

November 12, 2014 8:40 am

The only reason America needs to be seen to do a deal is because Russia has struck two major gas deals recently.

Reply to  rtj1211
November 12, 2014 12:53 pm

Russia and China won’t stop at that.
In fact there’s no reason at all for America to be seen doing anything.
Obama is just his usual mentally ill self. (I came to the conclusion that the ruling caste of the West is neither stupid nor evil but rather clinically insane.)

November 12, 2014 8:41 am

Reminiscent of government stated budget cuts. They always mean reducing future increases.
A side note that is kinda OT……
Did anyone notice the Anthropogenic Commet Change that just happned?
Just sayin, what could possibly go wrong with potentially altering a commets eliptical orbit by landing on it?

November 12, 2014 8:51 am

This deal is meant to be a counterpoint in arguments on capitol hill that “China isn’t doing anything, so why should we?” That’s its main purpose. It will carry some weight among fence-sitters.

D.J. Hawkins
Reply to  rogerknights
November 12, 2014 10:10 am

I can’t see how. The issue is very polarizing, so I doubt there are any significant numbers of fence-sitters. And once it’s clear that China has a free pass until 2030 with no limits whatever, I don’t see anyone being very impressed with this “deal”.

Brian H
Reply to  D.J. Hawkins
November 12, 2014 10:01 pm

Until AFTER 2030. Say, 2130?

Brian H
Reply to  D.J. Hawkins
November 12, 2014 10:04 pm

IAC, I see CO2 as an unmitigated boon. Go, Go, Gadget! Given scrubbing, burn as much coal as possible. Just like India.

November 12, 2014 8:56 am

Just following what the Chinese say and do in the press has lead me to the conclusion that they are masters at gaming the system and taking the Western climate hawks for a ride. Remember the scandal on fluorocarbons? The Chinese would build fluorocarbon plants and then shut them down to get the carbon credits from the European CDM markets. They made much more money that way than they would from the sale of the chemicals. The European eventually shut that down, but not before the Chinese walked away with a lot of cool cash.

Mr Pettersen
November 12, 2014 9:02 am

Chinas move is smart politics. Delay any decision until the problem is no longer relevant.
In 2030 the world will be a colder place and this warming hysteria will be forgotten. Nobody will ever blame China for not keeping their word.

November 12, 2014 9:05 am

China intends to achieve the peaking of CO2 emissions around 2030 and to make best efforts to peak early and intends to increase the share of non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption to around 20% by 2030. Both sides intend to continue to work to increase ambition over time

Mmmmmm. China could always ramp up co2 emissions in 2029 and 2030 by artificially setting ablaze fields of coal for example, thus giving it plenty of room to continue where it really left off. 😉

Ex-expat Colin
November 12, 2014 9:06 am

So really we’ve hung about for 18 years to discover that the temp record on average has moved less than a knats scrote. That’s despite the dreaded minor gas increasing. It’s a matter of observation rather than p*ss poor pieces of software guessing at multi scenarios.
The worst scenario is too cold and these MF’s have not even considered that as evidenced by the decreasing spare margin for power generation in UK for one.
My guess using brainware is that in 15 yrs from now the temperature record will likely still be similar to now, with a caveat that it cold so easily get too cold on the way. God help us!

Michael Bentley
November 12, 2014 9:06 am

Well, at least Philae “landed softly” as opposed to creating a big expensive hole in the nucleus of 67P/c-g.
Heck of an achievement for ESA – just getting there, have most things working (the rocket on the lander fizzled out. It was supposed to hold the lander to the surface while the harpoons and ice screws did their work. Apparently wasn’t needed.
The temp in Pueblo CO is 13 F today….burrrrrrr!

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Michael Bentley
November 12, 2014 12:44 pm

Temperature in Tucson right now, 79F and sunny. Just Lovely. Going to wash the car in the driveway in a few minutes. Then go for a run.
I had severe schadenfreude in that the Boys at NCAR-Boulder are enjoying some more Global Warming. Currently Boulder, Colorado is -16C and light snow, with 15cm of snow forecast by tomorrow, with a low of -25C… and it’s not even mid-November yet!!! The Boys of NCAR are likely rooting for Global Warming for more than just their reputation, but for their heating bills as well.

John F. Hultquist
November 12, 2014 9:14 am

Until we see a few hundred nuclear plants under construction – dirt being moved – it is too soon to talk about “peak” CO2 emissions.
I do not have the authority to say what the USA will do in 2030. Of course, neither does the soon to be ex-POTUS. I can say that my “carbon footprint” will be quite small, getting smaller, and soon enough sequestered.

November 12, 2014 9:15 am

Bottom line : Don’t buy US coal. The result will be US coal stocks to fall (also short selling) and the people who actually know what the climate will be, will buying the coal stocks back at rock bottom prices. So, if some people think it is going to get cold, who do you think they will be selling coal to? The person who is willing to pay top dollar or Yuan.

November 12, 2014 9:17 am

Obama ‘negotiating’ with China is like a chihuahua defending you aganst a pack of wolves. It’s cute and all, but man does it make you laugh… Also a nice small tasty snack to the Chinese…
Note that the Chinese cut a large Gas deal with Russia. So, continue growing and using coal Like Crazy for 15 years as the pipelines are all built and filled, then cut over to Russian gas and call it ‘for the environment’… all while convincing the POTUS to kill our coal power as rapidly as he can and hobble the competition.

November 12, 2014 9:18 am

China offered a face saving agreement for Obama and nothing more. They played him for the fool once again. The context states that China will base reduction efforts on 2030 emissions….which means it’s not only business as usual for them but now they are incented to increase CO2 output to increase their baseline. That is if they ever even intend to reduce anything but particulates and other smog inducing emissions and I doubt they are. Just like the last climate agreement with China the press put lipstick on it and touted a win.

Sal Minella
Reply to  markl
November 12, 2014 12:57 pm

China didn’t play Oblowme for a fool – he volunteered.

November 12, 2014 9:18 am

Amazing agreement to reduce CO2 emissions, where China basically agrees to keep increasing them for another 16 years! LOL

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Nylo
November 12, 2014 9:41 am

No limit on the rate of increase to this “peak”. A pretty open ended deal. They could build 5000 coal fired plants that they don’t even need by 2030, run them for a year and then mothball them after the base emissions are established. We are only fledglings in the socialist propaganda game compared to China.

November 12, 2014 9:20 am

Fossil fuels and nuclear are the only way to build cheap and reliable base load capacity. Obama and Kerry just agreed to unilaterally disarm the US economy.
The Chinese agreed not to stop us.
We can only hope the GOP Congress prevents such a catastrophe.

more soylent green!
November 12, 2014 9:25 am

An agreement with targets in the future, long after the two principals are long removed from public office. Perfect. Obama gets to keep his disgruntled billionaire donors pleased without any action.
The Chinese leader may still be in power at that time. If he is, well, they have ways to rewrite history.

November 12, 2014 9:25 am

Laughable. Our lame-duck chump-in-chief thinks China is sincere while they snicker behind his back and hack our commercial, government and military computer networks…

Sal Minella
Reply to  beng
November 12, 2014 1:02 pm

Obola didn’t get taken, we did. He is snickering behind our backs. Our utility bills will “necessarily skyrocket”, not his as we will support him and his spawn forever.

Mark Bofill
November 12, 2014 9:25 am

Here’s how the negotiations actually went:
Obama: How about you cut emissions and stop cyberstealing U.S. military tech?
Xi: How about we keep expanding our coal use and demo the stealth jet tech we stole from you.
Obama: OK, how about you cut emissions?
Xi: How about we keep doing exactly what we want to, but don’t bother to correct you when you tell the press you got a deal on Climate?
Obama: I’ll take it!
Historic deal my butt.

November 12, 2014 9:30 am

I’m still trying to figure out why everyone at that conference thought it was a good idea to dress like Bond Villains. Did China-Mart have a sale on Dr. No costumes?

Reply to  wws
November 12, 2014 10:44 am

I was puzzled too, wws, although it looked more like a Motown group from the 60’s to me.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  H.R.
November 12, 2014 2:32 pm

On the plus side, there weren’t any published pics of Obama doing the deep- bow thing, as he has done, so many times in past.

David L. Hagen
November 12, 2014 9:36 am

“Intentions NOT Obligations
Bjorn Lomborg highlights the legaleze:

Lots of attention to the climate promises of China and US, but little substance.
As Reuters point out, “the operative word is “intend” or “intention”, which makes clear the statement is not meant to create any new obligations. . . .China intends to achieve the peaking of CO2 emissions around 2030 and to make best efforts to peak early and intends to increase the share of non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption to around 20% by 2030.

In 2012, China and India installed about 4 coal power plants/week.
Obama basically “agreed” to China continuing to increase coal fired power at least for the next decade – until they can make thorium nuclear cheaper and sell our thorium technology back to us. What a deal!

Robert of Ottawa
November 12, 2014 9:37 am

I don’t know how Obomber can make international deals without Congress

Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
November 12, 2014 10:30 am

He can’t but now he can kick back until the election and claim “if was not for those evil republicans stopping him” which is why the mid-terms were good news for him as now his got a ‘get of a jail ‘ card that allows him to make any mad promises he likes knowing he never has to live up to it.

November 12, 2014 9:44 am

I know there was a reference to this a little while ago on here but couldn’t find it. Anybody know how far over Obama bent on this – the ‘All your technology are belong to us’ – part I mean? .
In a document submitted to the Geneva-based U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), China said that any reductions in its pollution will be “dependent on the adequate finance and technology support provided by developed country parties” in any new climate accord. In the ultimate holdup pitch, China demands incentive payments from “new, additional, adequate, predictable and sustained public funds.” In this new demand, China insists that the promised $100 billion in annual climate financing from the West is only the “starting point.” In another transparent demand, China wants the removal of “obstacles such as IPRs [intellectual property rights]” to “promote, facilitate and finance the transfer” of “technologies and know-how” to developing countries [meaning them] in advance of any future climate deal. Chinese citizens are choking on air pollution and some of us no longer go to China because of the continual shroud of brown air across cities and towns.
In other interesting developments, the Chinese showed off their new Stealth Fighter to Obama today. It looks the twin of the one that entered US service recently – odd that. Reminded me of when I was a teenager working for British Aerospace in the Hangar where the Concords were put together. The boast was the KGB had new design plans from the design room before they got to the shop floor for manufacture. They missed just one vital last minute one – anyone recall the Paris airshow where we showed off what Concord could do and the USSR showed what the Tupolev knock-off couldn’t? –
Lastly Mr Putin, upset that Tony Abbott had the nerve to tell him off again about the MH317 has sent two warships and their support ships heading towards Brisbane where the G20 is on now. The main vessel is Cruise/Nuke capable and has some but I don’t expect they will use them. Shame if they do, we have exactly none. It might just be country-sized game of ‘how high up the wall you can pee’ – if that’s the case then Putin wins .. and I don’t think we can rely on the US to play this time around even if Obama can remember where he put that darn briefcase…
Happy Days lol

Gary Pearse
November 12, 2014 9:48 am

“could reach a peak before 2020, much earlier than previously predicted…” This is 2015 and before 2020 is 2019. In this business, you can’t suddenly attenuate anything and replace it with something much different in a few years. The foundations are already poured and the long hole coal mining stopes already developed for the next couple of decades.

November 12, 2014 9:53 am

They say “…the global temperature goal of 2℃.”
1. A global temperature of 2℃ would pretty much be the end of life as we know it. Surely humans would survive around the equator, but that’s about it.
PS – I know the idiots mean the global temperature goal rise of less then 2℃. However, the next best chance to get a temperature rise of over 2℃ is during the next interglacial.

Reply to  Eric Sincere
November 12, 2014 10:51 am

Correct, but media so often ignores to inform us that the +2C goal is from ca. 1880, that is + ca. 1,2 C from today. One should think that with all the attention focused on a few parts of a degree more or less, they would be able to have a clear idea about this, but I suspect they just don’t care a bit CAGW any more, nor believe their own scares themselves any longer.

November 12, 2014 9:57 am

Barack Obama has to look like he is pushing the CAGW agenda in order to placate his Big Green donors! It doesn’t matter if nothing comes of it as long as he is seen asa doing something to “save the planet”!

James M. VanWinkle
November 12, 2014 10:00 am

China is doing us a favor by continuing to add CO2 to the atmosphere, thereby helping the world’s food production through CO2 fertilization and drought resistance (to the extent that humans have any real appreciable effect on atmospheric CO2 concentration).

more soylent green!
Reply to  James M. VanWinkle
November 13, 2014 7:33 am

Unfortunately, the CO2 will be accompanied by many real pollutants. Not a favor, not at all.

Ralph Kramden
November 12, 2014 10:09 am

Completely meaningless, President Obama leaves office in January 2017.

November 12, 2014 10:10 am

Reblogged this on gottadobetterthanthis and commented:

Dumb. Still, who is dumber, the President who agreed to such nonsense, the reporters who extol it, or the common citizens who react with anything other than derision?

more soylent green!
Reply to  Lonnie E. Schubert
November 13, 2014 7:34 am

Obama is not stupid. He’s not a genius, either, but he knows what he’s doing. It’s deliberate.

Climate Heretic
November 12, 2014 10:12 am

Jo Nova picked this story up as well
Climate Heretic

CWP Seattle
November 12, 2014 10:12 am

Given this site’s track record in climate fact checking, I thought I’d post a link to John Kerry’s statement about the deal with China and see if anyone here can spot the whopper. I’ll check in from time to time to see. Question to the peanut gallery: Is it an example of stupidity, sloppiness, laziness, or dishonesty?

robert Northrop
Reply to  CWP Seattle
November 12, 2014 12:12 pm

The entire piece is a whopper. How about the last line “Let’s ensure that this is the first step toward a world that is more prosperous and more secure.” Destroying the US economy will certainly not make the world more prosperous and secure.

Mike Maguire
Reply to  CWP Seattle
November 12, 2014 2:27 pm

“Our target builds on the ambitious goal President Obama set in 2009 to cut emissions in the range of 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. We are on track to meet that goal, while creating jobs and growing the economy, with the help of a burgeoning clean energy sector”
Kerry is completely delusional. I live in Indiana. 84% of our electricity comes from coal fired power plants. We use this to generate heat in the Winter and air conditioning in the Summer. Even more cheap electricity is generated, using coal for industry.
From the US Energy Information Administration:
“Indiana’s industrial sector, which includes manufacturers of aluminum, chemicals, glass, metal casting, and steel, consumed more energy in 2011 than the residential and commercial sectors combined”
Our economy thrives only because of fossil fuels. I am stupefied that our political leaders can make such ignorant statements such as those from Kerry. Atmospheric science is my field of expertise but I apply it to estimate crop yields during the growing season and energy use for residential heating and cooling.
Something is really wrong here. Seriously, how can an agenda with such incredibly obvious deleterious effects on the US economy(with no benefits) be falsely presented like this?
There is room for discussion regarding the amount of global warming that increasing CO2 causes, I get that. It is not right that one side chooses to ignore the massive benefits from CO2 to our biosphere, vegetative health and world food production……..this is blatant bias.
It is not right that one side blames extreme weather events on global warming, even snow and cold…….when this is false.
However, to state that cutting the use of cheap fossil fuels and replacing them with less efficient/reliable and more expensive renewable energy sources will help grow our economy is either delusional or the result of somebody with a hidden motive with the intention of greatly harming our country/people.
At the same time, making an agreement with China, based on them continuing to increase their use of fossils fuels for at least the next 16 years.
If Kerry’s/Obama’s way is going to grow the economy, then why is China doing the exact opposite for the next 16 years?

November 12, 2014 10:21 am

I smell another Nobel Peace prize for Obama in this. He just saved the world by getting China to state what their current plan is. Diabolical.

November 12, 2014 10:25 am

‘make best efforts to peak early and intends to increase the share of non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption to around 20% by 2030. ‘ last bit is easy there building lots of dam and never mind massive amount of concrete then require or the large amount of environmental damage the cause. The first bit is easer still as no one knows what their emission are they can make any old rubbish up and if people do not like it , then hard luck.

masInt branch 4 C3I in is
November 12, 2014 10:25 am

The Chinese know well that Obama is weak and his presidency is on life-support so they threw him a line.
The key word in the document is “intend.” And the key year in the document is “2030.”
In 15 year several wars, disasters, stock market crashes and assorted other things can and will happen, and we can bet that neither China nor USA will keep this “agreement” let alone remember this day or the text of the document.

Reply to  masInt branch 4 C3I in is
November 12, 2014 11:26 am

“The ultimate problem is the pervasive political ignorance on the part of the American people. And indifference to the threat that is emerging from these concealed institutions,”
And laissez-faire has preceded the worst depressions, not that other policies haven’t had their sharp downturns, but they were usually resulting from post war contractions or global market pullbacks.

Reply to  uıʇɹɐɯ pɹɐʍpE
November 12, 2014 1:00 pm

Well then you should be save. You have an oligarchy. If you’re American.

Reply to  uıʇɹɐɯ pɹɐʍpE
November 12, 2014 3:59 pm

Maybe, but when you’ve really got yourself into a predicament, who do you want standing next to you ?

Rhoda R
Reply to  masInt branch 4 C3I in is
November 12, 2014 12:51 pm

No, but the Obama Administration will use it to do as much damage as they can to our industrial infrastructure.

Mario Lento
Reply to  Rhoda R
November 12, 2014 4:31 pm

and skyrocket our energy costs under his policy…

Mike Maguire
November 12, 2014 10:26 am

“China intends to achieve the peaking of CO2 emissions around 2030”
In other words, China will continue to increase CO2 emissions for “around” the next 16 years.
“The United States intends to achieve an economy-wide target of reducing its emissions by 26%-28% below its 2005 level in 2025 and to make best efforts to reduce its emissions by 28%”
Just another example of why the foreign policy of the US with this administration is laughable……to the world. What sort of deal was this?
China tells Obama that he will NOT make any deals, so Obama says, ok, you can continue to increase CO2 emissions like you want but let me present it so it looks like we made some sort of agreement, so we will both look good and like the rest of climate science, I can spin/interpret it as propaganda.
How about this deal:
Let’s you and me have a joint investment arrangement. I will agree to use 28% of my income to finance it over the next 11 years. You pay nothing, in fact, you can collect all the money the investment makes for the next 16 years and I get nothing.
Let’s tell everybody that we agreed on a deal but because you don’t make as much money as me right now, all the benefits go to you and you pay nothing for “around” 16 years.
OK, who wants to partner with me so I can show others that we are working together on my project to save the world?

November 12, 2014 10:37 am

This is purely domestic politics for Obama. Apparently Obama wanted the election benefits of an announcement that would be seen as a culmination of his green and clean act of the past few months. The Chinese apparently disdained to be part of that and so prevented the critical timing, that is, an election eve announcement. So now Obama has to put the best face on a sham “agreement”.

November 12, 2014 10:38 am

Just found this today, Another Government milestone for subsidized solar:
Ivanpha want a taxpayer bailout for the bird roasting plant they built in the desert.
“Government Failure: Another Obama green energy project is looking like it was wired up wrong. This time it’s a giant mirror in the California desert. Its owners are now looking for a federal bailout to pay off their federal loan.
The Ivanpah solar power facility in the Mojave Desert southwest of Las Vegas covers 4,000 acres and has 173,500 heliostats used to turn the sun’s energy into electricity.”
Read More At Investor’s Business Daily:

Tom J
November 12, 2014 10:41 am

Can’t journalists bother to read the silly things they write. It’s unmissable. Right there in the very first sentence: “Today, the Presidents of the United States and China announced their respective post-2020 actions …” Hello? Last time I checked the U.S. (still) has a law limiting the president to two terms. By 2020 Obama will have been out of office (no executive order changing that one, buddy) for the better part of 4 years. So, what exactly are his post 2020 actions supposed to be? Me thinks that by 2020 all of us except the ‘One’ will be doing everything we can to forge ahead and forget the nightmare of his tawdry 8 years. And by 2020 the only thing Obama’s probably going to be doing (certainly not campaigning for any Senators, House reps, Governors, Lt. Governors, or Mayors) is improving his golf game to the point where he might actually get good at it. Gotta’ be good at something.

Billy Liar
November 12, 2014 11:11 am

I’ve just done a similar deal with Walmart.
Me: I’ll buy this thing for $5.
Walmart: We sell this thing for $100
Press release: Historic agreement with Walmart on purchase of thing.

Reply to  ossqss
November 12, 2014 1:02 pm

Are you American? Ever heard the letters N, S and A? Trust… you crack me up.

Reply to  DirkH
November 12, 2014 6:01 pm

Yep, born and raised in the USA.
I find the IRS, EPA, DOJ, just as a start, more concerning than the NSA. Heck, that type of stuff has been happening since you first started using a computer. We could probably drill down to some of your first emails ever sent in some of the data warehouses.
The other unelected officials in charge of those other agencies are impacting policy right now, and right in our face. NSA, not so much unless you deserve attention. Just sayin….. Don’t get me started on what Apple has done to every person who has ever registered and used their devices. You want to be scared, dig into that part of our technological advances. LOL

Jaakko Kateenkorva
November 12, 2014 11:36 am

The alarmists seem to be celebrating. The biggest polluter on Earth commits itself to annual pollution increase until 2030. No imminent panic then.

Reply to  Jaakko Kateenkorva
November 12, 2014 5:44 pm

LOL…you can’t make this stuff up.

Proud Skeptic
November 12, 2014 11:41 am

Agreements like this are meaningless. Targets are for years in the future. No accountability.
None of this is a problem, of course because their goal is silly and vacuous to begin with.
I suspect that this is something Obama has done to save face for is up and coming authorization of the Keystone XL.

November 12, 2014 11:45 am

I think that China has scored a strategic and economic coup. They have gotten the US to tighten it’s own belt severely for the next 16 years, while avoiding the obligation to do anything themselves for the same period of time.
The US will take the brunt of the damage, while China can continue to expand their energy sector at will.
If (as I suspect) the ‘Hiatus’ persists for as long, then by 2030 the world will have abundant empirical evidence that (1) increasing anthropogenic CO2 emissions/levels do NOT cause increasing global temperatures, that (2) the ‘free world’ has been played for fools, and that (3) there will be no reason for China to take any steps to reduce CO2 emissions.

Richard Nehring
November 12, 2014 11:47 am

For those of us who follow Chinese energy production trends (a difficult task, given their notorious lack of transparency on key subjects), what this agreement indicates is that the Chinese expect their coal production to stabilize and begin declining sometime between 2020 and 2030. Since there is no major source of coal imports they can draw on to offset an internal drop in production, they can confidently assert that their CO2 emissions will begin to decline before 2030 and thus take credit among the green community now for what will be a matter of stark necessity in the next decade or so. They also give Obama a figleaf for claiming a counter balancing action on the part of China for the burdens that he and the EPA are placing on the U.S. economy in reducing coal use by mandate.
And Obama wonders why the American people are losing their trust in government!

Billy Liar
Reply to  Richard Nehring
November 12, 2014 11:55 am

Thirteen percent of all Australia’s exports is thermal coal to China:

Stephen Richards
Reply to  Richard Nehring
November 12, 2014 12:30 pm

And of course with their russian gas deals they will gradually reduce coal consumption in their cities in favour of gas powered enrgy systems thus reducing co² emissions while increasing prosperity. Obama is a halfwit no sorry I exagerate, a no wit.

Reply to  Richard Nehring
November 12, 2014 7:04 pm

Richard Nehring
November 12, 2014 at 11:47 am
Interesting interpretation. Thank you.

November 12, 2014 12:03 pm

“As the campaign was turning against the Democrats last month, Mr. Obama quietly dispatched John Podesta, a senior adviser who oversees climate policy, to Beijing to try to finalize a deal.”
“Last night, President Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping jointly announced crucial new actions to protect our climate. And because of American leadership, China is making critical new commitments….. “John Podesta, Counselor to the President, The White House,@Podesta44”.
Podesta founded (with brother Tony) the powerful Washington lobbying and PR company Podesta Group (long enmeshed in Democratic strategy and responsible for many Obama appointments) also founded Center for American Progress whose creature, Joe Romm’s “Think Progress” and “Climate Progress” serve as “objective arm’s length” propaganda conduits.
Those behind the curtain seem currently tasked with “reputational preservation” for the exit strategy.

Jim Clarke
November 12, 2014 12:07 pm

I loved the juxtaposition on the AOL news feed. This agreement was the number one news story. The unseasonably cold temperatures sweeping over much of the United States was the number 2 news story.
Perhaps we have to come up with a new name: The Gorbama Effect.

Keith Willshaw
November 12, 2014 12:09 pm

The Gist of the agreement seems to be
China: We will carry on growing our economy and raising living standards to lift our
people out of poverty.
Obama: We will carry shrinking our economy and make energy more expensive destroying
whole industries and making millions poor.

Alan Robertson
Reply to  Keith Willshaw
November 12, 2014 12:23 pm

You are correct.

Stephen Richards
November 12, 2014 12:27 pm

That’s what you get from a social organiser. A pathetically niave clown that the rest of the world’s leaders use for the fool that he is.

November 12, 2014 12:32 pm

AGW biased ABC Australia the China-USA agreement top story…
HOWEVER…Newspaper this morning, I could not even find anything about it at all!
(Unless I missed a very small item hidden somewhere!)

Reply to  holts7
November 12, 2014 2:37 pm

It’s across all media outlets. Last few days we’ve had 3 or more articles about climate change in the run up to the G20 meeting being help in Brisbane.

November 12, 2014 12:34 pm

So from 1.5 gigatons of CO2 in 1980 to 7.5 gigatons in 2009 and they are going to “peak” at 2030? Maybe? Too funny.
Okay just a simple extrapolation of that rate (5 x in 30 years) gives us an improvement in CO2 of roughly half that. So they will be up to 10.5 gigatons annually. That will be great for plants and agriculture.
Of course then they “might” not stop. Depending on how their LFTR research goes.

November 12, 2014 12:36 pm

The climate change we have been experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans. There is no evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate. There are many good reasons to be conserving on the use of fossil fuels but climate change is not one of them. Such an agreement will have no effect on climate. No matter what action we take, the current interglacial period will end and another ice age will begin but that may take thousands of years. The real problem in terms of the Earth’s ecology is Man’s out of control population. If Man does not learn to control his own population, Nature will, catastrophically.

Reply to  willhaas
November 12, 2014 4:18 pm

All 7,000,000,000 people would easily fit inside less than half of the Grand Canyon. That number itself is not the problem. So what is the real problem? disease? poverty? unequal distribution of resources? Denying the third world access to affordable energy because of climate change condemns them to a sorry future – and they know it and don’t much like it.

November 12, 2014 12:43 pm

You can see the look on the face of China’s leader and it just says >……..

November 12, 2014 12:46 pm

I think it would be prudent if China focused on decreasing soot, aerosols and water pollution right now, and let CO2 fend for itself later.

November 12, 2014 1:02 pm

“the most manufacturing-intensive phase of China’s development will be complete and hundreds of millions more people will have been lifted into the middle class.”
While how many become poor in other places, because of the current politics of climate change?

November 12, 2014 1:09 pm

it’s all smoke and mirrors!
11 Nov: Bloomberg: China Blocks Smog Data After Failing to Clean Skies Before APEC
After failing to rid Beijing’s skies of pollution before a gathering of world leaders this week, Chinese officials took a different approach to smog control –***limit the data.
Phone and Internet apps that display readings of air pollution started excluding a U.S. Embassy feed yesterday. Wang Jun, co-founder of the Air Quality Index app for Apple Inc.’s iOS, said authorities told him to stick to the city’s data. “We had no choice,” he said by phone.
Government efforts to control smog ahead of the Nov. 5-11 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation events in Beijing had gained so much attention that the clearer skies got a nickname, “APEC blue.” …
“Upon orders from higher-ups, this month’s air quality index will use data provided by Beijing Municipal Environmental Protection Bureau,” the owners of the website said in an Internet statement. “Wishing APEC Summit great success!” …
The phrase “APEC Blue” began to catch on as the APEC leadership summit ended today. One shop on Alibaba Group Holdings Ltd.’s Taobao online mall offered a string of beads whose color it describes as APEC blue. The same description was given to a pair of GPS-equipped sneakers designed to track a child’s whereabouts.

more soylent green!
November 12, 2014 1:15 pm

There seems to be a general consensus among Americans that Obama is incompetent and not up to this task. Please consider the alternate theory that his actions are deliberate. Obama wants a multi-polar world. He believes the world will be a better place if the USA is just one among many. Obama doesn’t want the USA to be a leader in anything, except perhaps redistribution of income and property.
Just read his books. Listen to his speeches. Look at his backgrounds, his mother, his role models and his mentors.

Reply to  more soylent green!
November 13, 2014 6:25 pm

Very true.

Bill Adams
November 12, 2014 1:40 pm

The expressions on this news photo are painfully telling:
Thought bubbles, from left to right: “Is anyone actually buying this?” and “I know I’m not.”

Dudley Horscroft
Reply to  Bill Adams
November 12, 2014 7:08 pm

Much more like: “I can keep my supporters happy now” and “Jolly good, I feel like the cat that swallowed the canary. With a bit of luck he’ll give me the cream as well.”

November 12, 2014 2:34 pm

Under the “Supremacy Clause” of our Constitution, treaties cannot override the Constitution but do trump state laws. So signing treaties with other countries or the UN does two things. It provides a way for distant world bodies and the Federal Government to change domestic policy by fiat, and it gives the activist judges and courts everywhere an international document to refer to in deciding local and state cases. Courts in the US are known to refer even to unratified treaties. This they justify by saying it is “international law.”
Next, Beijing’s continuing clamp down on Hong Kong shows that these are communists and not reformed in any way. These clamp downs have cost Hong Kong in investments. Likewise the mere threat of litigious action and hostile environmental regulations on farming, ranching, and energy are going to change our business.
Perhaps a little perspective on the Boomers having secret meetings with Maoists in Beijing to set domestic policy for energy and agriculture is needed. They are also making gun control agreements IN BERLIN:
“The next meeting of the states that are parties to the Arms Trade Treaty — including the United States — is scheduled for November 27-28 in Berlin, Germany.”
Berlin and Beijing. In broad daylight.

November 12, 2014 2:52 pm
Reply to  juandos
November 12, 2014 4:06 pm

Do you know that Tonto went to his grave not knowing that “Kemosabe” meant “arsehole”?

Bill Adams
Reply to  toorightmate
November 12, 2014 5:21 pm

Don’t you mean, the Lone Ranger went to his grave, etc.

Reply to  juandos
November 12, 2014 4:32 pm

Actually, in a language of the Luo people, the ethnic group to which Obama’s dad belonged, it means “He Who Is Bent”, or something along those lines. “O” means “he” & is a common prefix. “Bam-” means “lean” or “bend”. The name might originally have been given to a boy baby by his mom who thought one of his limbs was crooked. Or something. Among the Luo, who, like most Kenyans, are predominantly Christian or follow a syncretic religion, “Obama” is traditionally a Muslim family name. Or so I’m told by East Africans of my acquaintance. Baraka (blessed) & Hussein (diminutive of beautiful) are of course names of Arabic origin. Obama’s dad pronounced his name “Bear-ick”.

November 12, 2014 3:05 pm

12 Nov: UK Telegraph: China-US climate change deal a ‘giant leap for mankind’, says IEA
Landmark accord an important step towards a global climate deal in Paris, without which “we may well say goodbye to the world we have today”, says energy watchdog

November 12, 2014 3:23 pm

12 Nov: BBC: Matt McGrath: Will Obama’s climate surprise deliver a global deal?
So where is the history in all these histrionics?…
But the deal doesn’t stem from a philosophical determination to save the planet.
It is based on the naked political necessities of both countries.
President Obama needs to show the US Congress and public he can create a level playing field for American industry to compete with China…
But in terms of steering the world to below the 2 degree C target that scientists believe is the threshold of danger, this agreement doesn’t cut the mustard…
Taken together with the EU’s recent announcement of new climate targets for 2030, you could be forgiven for thinking that a deal in Paris is in the bag.
If only.
Cutting emissions is just one part of the negotiations, and for many countries, the least important bit.
For many, the bigger questions are about cash to cope with the impact of climate change.
Many nations want a financial mechanism that would put a legal responsibility on those who have done most to cause climate change to compensate those who suffer most from it. This is a potential iceberg for the whole process.
“There is a need for the developing countries to see that there would be certainty in terms of future flows of finance, otherwise we won’t see much ownership of this process from many of the parties in Paris,” said Tosi Mpanu-Mpanu, a senior negotiator from the Democratic Republic of Congo, speaking to me earlier this year.
And no deal without it, I ask?
“I’m not afraid to say so,” says Mr Mpanu-Mpanu.
“No money, no fund, no deal in Paris.”

November 12, 2014 3:31 pm

Science deniers = Confederacy of Dunces

November 12, 2014 4:04 pm

This Obama sure is a fast worker. He’s been secretly working on this “let’s do nothing to China” statement for 9 months. Just imagine what happens to USA industry be 2025 when China’s power cost is about 25% of that of the USA?
Obama has achieved nothing with China in 9 months, just imagine how much he could achieve during a global temperature pause (18 years). The mind boggles!!!!!
We have the pleasure of his presence here in Australia for one night on Saturday 15 November. He is being accompanied by >1,000 people assisting – at this rate, the USA unemployment situation should soon be OK.

November 12, 2014 4:15 pm

For anyone who was raised and educated by Boomers, you may have never heard of China’s Great Leap. I had to educate myself and this may help you too. Much of the environmentalism which glorifies an impoverished, agrarian society is just Maoist Five Year Plans dressed up in Green. In fact, Rio +20 was organized and lead by known Communist Chinese who hate the US and are planning for its downfall. Please, look before you Leap.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
79 of 83 people found the following review helpful
“Liberation or Liquidation?
By Ronald P. Ng on September 19, 2013
Format: Kindle Edition
I was born and brought up in Hong Kong at the time when Mao conquered China and Hong Kong was still a British colony flying the British flag. I remember as a kid, my mother used to admonish me to eat all my food and to study hard. “If the communists come, the food you have eaten and the knowledge you have gained, they cannot take them away from you. Everything else, they could take away from you.” I was curious who were the communists and what she meant by those words.
I still have in my mind’s eyes these words in Chinese “共產黨到家散人亡”,(when the Communist Party comes, people will die and families will be broken up), written on the slope along the road going from Kowloon to Shatin.
Also as a kid, I remember the stories of massive illegal immigrants coming from China into Hong Kong, something in the order of 100,000 a month.
This latest book by Frank Dikotter, Professor of History at Hong Kong University answered all those questions I had in my mind when I was a kid. From primary source, Dikotter documented how the Communists confiscated land and property from all and sundry – thus my mum said, they will take everything from you except for the food which you have already eaten. They burnt books and heavily controlled the flow of information, controlled what your thoughts should be. Hence my mum said, study hard, retain knowledge, they can’t take that away from you. Quotas were given by Mao at every campaign, the Rectification Campaign, the High Tide, in the aftermath of the “Let a Hundred Flower Bloom” campaign for the number of people to be executed. People in order to survive, had to make up stories and point to name other people as “counter-revolutionaries”, as “rightists” and so on, turning friends against friends, even sons against father, accounting for those Chinese words painted as graffiti on the wall along the road to Shatin.”

Reply to  Zeke
November 13, 2014 6:22 pm

And there are people who want us to be like China. It is just too sad.

Evan Jones
Reply to  Tim
November 16, 2014 6:36 am

With any luck, it will be the other way ’round.

November 12, 2014 4:24 pm

In 2011 China consummed 3.8 billion tonnes of coal. In 2013 it was 3.7 billion tonnes. It seems they have already reached one of their goals! – five years early! Now that is the way to make a five year plan!

Reply to  les
November 12, 2014 5:06 pm

The five year plan is a construct of “business planners” that can’t get their clients to produce a five day plan.

November 12, 2014 5:40 pm

[China] intends to increase the share of non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption to around 20% by 2030.

Assuming energy use increases at anything close to the same rate as the past few decades, this means at best overall the CO2 output from China would remain the same. Most likely even if they met their goal of using 20% non-fossil fuels for energy consumption by 2030 their CO2 output would increase.
The point is moot however since according to alarmists, the situation is “irreversible” since at current CO2 levels we are doomed anyways.
Thats the way the fortune cookie crumbles.

November 12, 2014 5:52 pm

If republicans oppose this deal, it means they are not stopping the climate from changing. The Democrats supporting this will claim they have successfully stopped the climate from changing, which makes them look like morons.
You have to have stupid and hubris in equal and monstrous measure to state you can stop the climate from changing.

Reply to  rogerknights
November 12, 2014 6:31 pm

PS: That’s Friends of the Earth saying Phooey.

November 12, 2014 6:25 pm

Promises, promises and utter pretentiousness, but excellent support for the cagw propagandists even if nothing eventuates even after 2030.

November 12, 2014 6:54 pm

Nothing better than logging onto this website and seeing you lot foaming and drooling at the mouths. Two more years!!! Two more years!!!

Reply to  Siberian_Husky
November 12, 2014 6:59 pm

And your solutions is? Kill more people each year by government-enforced “energy poverty” policies deliberately restricting energy availability and forcing higher energy prices??
It has worked in the UK: 24,000 dead 2012-2013 and even more elderly and the innocent sick in 2013-2014 winter.

Mario Lento
Reply to  RACookPE1978
November 12, 2014 7:35 pm

RACookPE1978 November 12, 2014 at 6:59 pm
And your solutions is? Kill more people each year by government-enforced “energy poverty” policies deliberately restricting energy availability and forcing higher energy prices??
RACookPE1978, you’re right to let Siberian_Husky know… However, the problem is that Siberian_Husky most likely does not seek truth. I say, Ignorance is no excuse for bad behavior once introduced to truth. Siberian_Husky should know that ignorant, often well meaning, people have caused terrible harm to the lives of people for a fictitious daemon. Notice I used the past tense, because the harm has happened, is measurable and continues.

Reply to  Siberian_Husky
November 13, 2014 6:38 pm

“lot”, I love it.
Now, what exactly was your point ?
We’re not waiting, you are watching it.

Victor Frank
November 12, 2014 8:53 pm

Headline of on page10 of today’s San Jose Mercury (Bay Area News Group)
“8 women dead in sterilization drive” Program in India seeks to help slow population growth.
–and 20 others were in critical condition Tuesday after undergoing sterilization in a free government-run program to help slow the country’s population growth.
A total of 83 women, all poor villagers under the age off 32, had the operation Saturday in a hospital outside Bilaspur city in the central state of Chhattisgarh. All surgeries were conducted within six hours.”
The AP article’s next to last paragraph indicated “the state’s sterilization schedule had a target of 180,000 for the year ending in March set by the central government . . .The quota for Bilaspur was 12,000.”

Reply to  Victor Frank
November 12, 2014 11:15 pm

Sterilization isn’t necessary – just give each of them a TV and like magic, no more kids. I’ve seen it work everywhere in the world. The fancy theory is that they see families with one or two kids on TV having fun, going to Disneyland etc., buying smartphones and realize that more kids equals much more cost if they want to aspire to middle class lifestyle. Or maybe the TV is just more interesting than the old man and easier to explain than an headache.

Reply to  markopanama
November 13, 2014 1:29 am

You are ignoring medical malpractice.

Evan Jones
Reply to  markopanama
November 16, 2014 6:26 am

Bingo. Birthrates always, always decline (often precipitously) the very instant that offspring cease being a money source and become a money sink. It is a pattern repeated the world over. It’s remedial demographics .001. Even the UN has come to recognize this.
Or maybe the TV is just more interesting
When I were a lad . . .

November 12, 2014 10:48 pm

Not that you would know it from the MSM, which focused on Obama’s climate agreement, there was a lot of good news coming out of APEC, all of it tied to the BRICS, the Chinese creation of a new Asia Development Bank, the Silk Road economic corridor, etc. The new Asia Development Bank will do what the greens at the World Bank refuse to do — finance the doubling of India’s coal fired electrical capacity, making any Obama carbon reductions meaningless. The Chinese president explicitly invited the US to join in these great infrastructure building projects. Obama, needless to say, refuses to join with the BRICS to rebuild the world’s economy. The Chinese have the right long term plan – they propose to go to the moon to mine helium-3 to fuel fusion reactors on earth.

Reply to  tpinlb
November 12, 2014 11:10 pm

Sounds to me like Obama was agreeing to Terms of Surrender, especially when you see the nonsense that the “global treaty” folks are dishing out, thanks to Aiden’s comment above.

November 13, 2014 12:08 am

Having recently been in Beijing I would guess that there are more giant SUVs in Beijing alone than in all of Canada – suggesting that as China’s economy grows there is zero hope of curving CO2 emissions until the oil runs out. Given that less than 1% of the SUVs in Beijing were American, with BMWs, Mercedes, Volvo and all European brands abundantly represented, I would say there is very little likelihood that the US can’t help but meet its emissions reduction targets unless it finds some miraculous way to get its economy back on track. That might be hard to do with the Chinese holding so much of the American national debt. This wasn’t any kind of a climate statement, it was a photo op and about as meaningful as a treaty with Putin.

R. de Haan
November 13, 2014 1:12 am

<nine months of secret negotiations that will kill the West and put the Chinese in charge.
Great negotiator.
I´m sure this deal will turn Paris into a success.
Bunch of idiots.

Vince Causey
November 13, 2014 3:46 am

I can understand why the Chinese are thrilled with a deal that will see them stabilize CO2 emissions from a 2030 basis point. But I can’t see why the MSM are thrilled by a deal that will incentivise the Chinese to ramp up their CO2 emissions as much as possible so they have the highest possible basis point from which to stabilize at.
Are they just dumb or are they trying to con the rest of us that the Chinese are “on side” just to get the rest of us to act too?

Reply to  Vince Causey
November 13, 2014 9:24 am

“Are they just dumb or are they trying to con the rest of us that the Chinese are “on side” just to get the rest of us to act too?” It’s part of CAGW propaganda. Call every failure a success and flood the people with scare stories. In case you haven’t noticed…..the Greenies/Left/Liberals control the media in most of the world. It’s all part of the “plan”.

Evan Jones
Reply to  markl
November 16, 2014 6:32 am

They remind me of a country losing a war. Every perceived tactical success is front-page even as the front line is breached.

Jaakko Kateenkorva
November 13, 2014 4:03 am

Let’s assume for a minute that cAGW is true.
-why do Obama and Kerry applaud Chinese increasing their CO2-emissions until 2030?
-why did Obama say the Earth will boil over if young Africans can afford a big house, car and air-conditioning?
-why did Kerry parallel cAGW with weapons of mass destruction?

Evan Jones
Reply to  Jaakko Kateenkorva
November 16, 2014 6:33 am

-why did Kerry parallel cAGW with weapons of mass destruction?
Because neither one is a real existential threat? Perhaps he is trying to reassure us.

November 13, 2014 11:43 am

In the old days there were just photo ops at these international meetings. Now we have photo op policy agreements. I suppose a better to way to look at this is like arms reduction agreements where old nukes are chopped up and silos are closed in favor of mobile missiles.

November 13, 2014 1:09 pm

President Obama proposes, in a deal with China, to reduce USA emissions of CO2 by about 28% by 2025 relative to 2005 levels —…/us-china-climate-statement-is…/
Given that USA population is expected to grow to 349 million by 2025, about 18% re 2005 level (see ), per capita CO2 emissions must drop about 39% to 61% of US citizen 2005 individual levels.
US per capita yearly CO2 emissions have been essentially constant for more than 20 years at about 19.5 metric tons according to…/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxi… .
I don’t see how President Obama’s plan for CO2 can be accomplished without destroying the US economy.

Reply to  Philip Lee
November 13, 2014 6:17 pm

For the true believers everything the (not liberals) progressives want will make everything better. Do not listen to the nay sayers and do not be afraid of a little pain. The future will be better.
As Snoopy would say, blehhhh.

November 13, 2014 6:13 pm

What I can’t get over is how stupid the mass media thinks the average person is. They are making a big deal out of this. The green movement is making a big deal out of this. They are celebrating a new message: “China is joining the effort to save the world from global warming, errr, excuse me, I meant climate change.” What? How stupid do they think the average person is?
Oh, wait wasn’t another guy taped saying three times that you can count on the stupidity of the american voters, just use a little smoke and mirrors. Obviously many people out there want to believe so badly they will believe anything. So ruled Hitler, Stalin, and many others. Some people will believe anything and follow anything.

November 14, 2014 9:30 am

CO2 change has never had, does not have, and never will have a significant effect on climate.

November 14, 2014 7:59 pm

Here’s what ClimateReality sent out to its’ readers….
” Climate wins don’t come much bigger. How big? On Tuesday, the leaders of the world’s two biggest carbon polluters, US President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping announced a historic agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” Talk about lipstick on a pig. These people are in major denial…..or, they think everyone is stupid. This can only help the truth.

Evan Jones
November 16, 2014 6:17 am

The 1935 Anglo-German Naval Agreement springs forcibly to mind.

%d bloggers like this: