Asia's coal power climate joke


Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Mother Jones is celebrating that China has just committed $3.1 billion to help poor countries fight climate change. Mother Jones cautiously states they don’t know what China means by this statement. My guess is they know very well what China probably means – but they don’t want to detract from their climate story.

According to Mother Jones;

China followed up its promise Friday to create the world’s largest cap-and-trade program with yet another significant climate policy announcement: It will commit to spending $3.1 billion to help developing countries slash their greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change. China’s financial commitment, along with its new carbon market, are part of a comprehensive package of climate measures to be announced at a joint press conference featuring US President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping on Friday in Washington, DC.

The new pledge, emerging from high-profile bilateral talks between the two countries, “is a game changer in international climate politics,” says Li Shuo, a climate policy analyst for Greenpeace. “It is a drastic increase from China’s previous finance commitments.”

Of course, there is much we still don’t know about China’s plans, including which projects the new multi-billion dollar pledge will end up financing, says Billy Pizer, a fellow at the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University, who recently returned from a climate conference in China.

Read more:

As WUWT previously reported, there is currently a coal energy rush occurring in Asia – both China and Japan are competing to finance massive industrialisation and increased coal generator capacity in poor countries.

How can financing coal capacity be reconciled with public statements about reducing CO2 emissions? As Japan helpfully explained, they consider building coal plants in poor countries to be “climate finance”, when the coal plants in question are high efficiency supercritical coal generators.

The argument appears to be, the coal plants will be built anyway – so when Japan finances the construction of high efficiency supercritical coal generators, rather than the smoky low efficiency units which would have been constructed without their financial help, they should be allowed to count the difference in emissions between the high efficiency units which are built, and low efficiency units which could have been built (up to a 50% reduction per plant according to the IGCC) as a contribution to reducing CO2 emissions – even though as the new plants come online, it seems likely that overall global CO2 emissions will actually surge.

The net outcome of this charade, in my opinion, is Western politicians are committing to skyrocketing energy prices and unworkable renewables schemes, inanely celebrating that everyone is onboard with their lunacy, while at the same time, China and Japan are busy helping their Asian neighbours make coal power even cheaper.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 25, 2015 4:11 pm

Most people who are gullible are willingly so.

Mike Bromley the Kurd
Reply to  citizenskippy
September 25, 2015 4:46 pm

Of THAT I have little doubt. The “Prius” mentality for the ordinary citizen, the “Tesla” mentality for the rich.

Bob Burban
Reply to  Mike Bromley the Kurd
September 25, 2015 8:40 pm

“Golf”, anyone?

Reply to  Mike Bromley the Kurd
September 26, 2015 2:17 am

From the Natural Resources Defense Council we see that South Korea and Green Germany are doing their bit to reduce coal co2 emissions.

September 25, 2015 4:14 pm

I just want to say that the photo in the above caption is very misleading.
I tried for several hours and could not even get a fan to run on coal power, using the method outlined thusly.
Come to find out that even coal mined right here in the U.S.of A. does not supply AC power at 120 volts and 60 hertz.
As for China, I wonder if by helping all those other countries get off the coal, they aim to preserve to supply for themselves, buying up reserves via the stock of beaten down countries, and doing so principally during the inevitable economic downturns caused by misguided energy policy, thus performing a sort of ironic and cynical double dip of their strategy to pillage resources right out from under those who now own it.

Reply to  Menicholas
September 25, 2015 4:26 pm

“Come to find out that even coal mined right here in the U.S.of A. does not supply AC power at 120 volts and 60 hertz.”
Don’t be silly, everyone knows that coal output is low voltage DC. Much like PV, you need many lumps in series to get high quality output.

Reply to  Paul
September 25, 2015 4:30 pm

Hmmm… that photo looks like one-half of a Clacker (also banned but never disappeared).

Reply to  Paul
September 25, 2015 8:48 pm

In BC (Canada), we have realized that by leaving the coal in the ground, prosperity springs forth from every side; the sun beams down with more beneficence, the aeolian streams flow benignly over the hills, ensuring that there are always (on average) 120 chevy Volts available at every one of the 60 Hertz stations in the province.

Reply to  Paul
September 26, 2015 7:55 am

I use potatoes….

Reply to  Paul
September 26, 2015 10:48 am

Horse manure gets you more BTU’s.

Reply to  Menicholas
September 25, 2015 4:58 pm

… does not supply AC power at 120 volts and 60 hertz.

You clearly are new to green power. Everyone who reads American green magazines knows that Germany is the greenest country in the world—their car Diesel engines test the cleanest—and the brown coal in all their newly built green power plants supplies 220 volts at 50 hertz.
Paul is just trying to confuse you with techie mumbo jumbo.

Reply to  Colorado Wellington
September 25, 2015 6:59 pm

You are correct, I am rather a neophyte at this green power dealio…but as my comment below proves, I am a quick study.
Dinner smells like it is coming along nicely, so I am going to put on some loud music and jump in a nice hot shower while no one else is home…

Reply to  Colorado Wellington
September 26, 2015 7:32 am

I don’t know where you get your information , but BC is mining coal on Vancouver Island

Reply to  Colorado Wellington
September 26, 2015 8:08 am

Herkimer, You need to calibrate your sarc meter. Mebbe’s comment was a sarc factor 6.5 for me.

John Slayton
Reply to  Menicholas
September 25, 2015 5:25 pm

Your problem is likely that you are using bituminous coal. The Chinese scientists working on thorium reactors also have a (black) secret program to build AGW compatible power plants using anthro-cite coal.

Reply to  John Slayton
September 26, 2015 7:47 am

What about anthro – pomorphic coal?

Reply to  Menicholas
September 25, 2015 6:48 pm

On closer examination, the reason for my difficulty became evident: Take a careful look at the extension cord terminal, and you will note a plastic tab on the top side! I had assumed that the extension cord was plugged into the coal, but that tab is only found on the female end of this type of extension cord. Meaning that it is not the cord plugged into the coal, but the coal plugged into the cord!
I had not realized that the coal had to be charged up prior to use as a power supply.
I corrected my apparatus here at home, and am hoping the coal reaches a full charge son.
Hmm, excuse me, I have to go now…there seems to be some smoke in the house and a funny smell…must be dinner time. I love that women!

Reply to  Menicholas
September 25, 2015 8:09 pm

I got out a lump of coal that Santa brought me back in the 1940s, but it didn’t have any power left in it either; but I know that some of the coal he carries is used for Rudolf’s nose so bright to guide his sleigh at night. Does this, or does this not minimize his carbon foot print on Christmas Eve?

Reply to  Menicholas
September 25, 2015 9:04 pm


I had not realized that the coal had to be charged up prior to use as a power supply.
I corrected my apparatus here at home, and am hoping the coal reaches a full charge son.

Did you really want to charge your son with the full power coal, or only the half power coal?
Can you charge your girlfriend with compressed coal, or does she get charged only with diamonds?

Reply to  Menicholas
September 25, 2015 9:33 pm

It takes lots of pressure to make and give a diamond.

Reply to  Menicholas
September 26, 2015 6:27 am

Excellent reverse engineering, Menicholas. Just remember to charge your coal lump with 220 volts.
Next, could you crack this Iranian product and explain its working and origin?

Reply to  Menicholas
September 26, 2015 9:44 am

So coal lumps are essentially a “male”? No wonder so many women oppose its use.

Reply to  Menicholas
September 26, 2015 11:18 am


Reply to  Menicholas
September 26, 2015 2:56 pm

>>Next, could you crack this Iranian product
>>and explain its working and origin?
Ah yes, the Iranian propaganda mock-up, with a wing camber is so fat that it would only be good for 120 knots max. This is the real version:

Warren Latham
Reply to  Menicholas
September 25, 2015 11:14 pm

Dear Menicholas,
I have to say: your narrative is most eccentric, tasteful and brilliant !
I DENY that I have seen the photograph you mention but of course, “someone” in particular (oops, did I just say that ?) may have reasonable DOUBT about my (above) statement.
PS: It’s darned cold here in Blighty [F38 degrees at 7 a.m.] so I have just lit the fire using best Welsh anthracite and English birch logs. This carbon “stuff” is magical: it keeps me warm cutting it, sawing it, digging it, shoveling it and then burning it.
Wonderful stuff – and you can even send smoke signals with it too !
Just thought you might like to know that I DENIED the pesky jackdaw a place in mi chimney.

Reply to  Menicholas
September 26, 2015 12:09 am

You are probably trying to plug in to the wrong side of the coal lump.
If you are using US coal outside the country you might need a converter.

Reply to  Menicholas
September 26, 2015 3:20 am

I think you will find China has bought or done deals WITH sth african n other they can profit from the mines and the sales of it TO that nations power plants that they will build, own/own high % of etc
theyre not silly.

Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 26, 2015 8:18 am

Oz, I have a hunch that China will be the superpower that lifts the third world into productivity and affluence, while the west reverts to damage control and struggles to maintain any status quo.

Reply to  Menicholas
September 26, 2015 7:04 am

“As for China….” Such a cynic you are.

Reply to  barryjo
September 26, 2015 8:49 pm

Moi? Cynical?
I doubt that very much!

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Yellow Springs
Reply to  barryjo
September 27, 2015 9:34 pm

A cynic is an informed optimist.

Reply to  Menicholas
September 26, 2015 12:58 pm

Spot ON!! China and India have seen the BS, why not take advantage of it?? Give away a few billions in view of making 10 times that!

Reply to  Menicholas
September 26, 2015 8:50 pm

Why didn’t I think of that!

September 25, 2015 4:26 pm

“China and Japan are busy helping their Asian neighbours make coal power even cheaper.”
Maybe because they know that being downwind of a coal plant reduces life expectancy; they are going to war with them! Slow but sure.

Reply to  trafamadore
September 25, 2015 4:51 pm

Maybe because they know that being downwind of a coal plant reduces life expectancy…
In China, maybe. In the USA coal plant emissions are safe. The only compounds emitted are H2O and CO2 — both are completely harmless downwind.
Particulates are the bad stuff. Scrubbers remove them.

michael hart
Reply to  dbstealey
September 25, 2015 7:57 pm

And I’d much rather be downwind of a coal plant than having to cook using burning wood or cow dung inside an enclosed space.

Reply to  dbstealey
September 25, 2015 11:59 pm

With millions of people in Asia and Africa being forced to cook that way.

Keith Willshaw
Reply to  dbstealey
September 26, 2015 3:33 am

That I am afraid is a very naïve viewpoint. You may want to consider the case of Cheshire Ohio where the residents sued AEP over the acid rain and sulphurous smoke from the nearby Gavin Plant that was making it uninhabitable. In the end the company bought the entire town at above market price. I am no greenie but coal is NOT an environmentally friendly fuel. Even plants fired with low sulphur coal emit a lot of NoX pollutants just like those VW cars. Modern plants CAN be a lot better but these days its all but impossible to get the permits to build them in the USA or UK so the old dirty plants soldier on. The Gavin plant is a typical example having been built in the mid 70’s
As for those precipitators they are fine when they work but they tend to fail a lot and I well recall the admonitions to operators to only run the soot blowers at night. I would (and have) live downwind of a nuclear power station or gas turbine plant but not coal thank you.

Reply to  dbstealey
September 26, 2015 9:03 am

Keith, I live 10 miles NE (downwind usually) of Ameren’s Portage De Sioux scrubber equipped pulverized coal gen plant. I had 11 foot corn this year. My timberland is like a jungle and I have to mow after every five days this year. No one in our area complains of any harm caused by this plant.
Here is what sourcewatch says about it, none the less
My question is how many more would die burning all the wood they can scrounge to cook and stay warm?

Reply to  trafamadore
September 25, 2015 8:19 pm

now that you have our attention, can you tell us why it is that the Chinese want to slowly kill off their Asian neighbours?

Reply to  trafamadore
September 26, 2015 2:53 am

Particulates may take days, weeks or months off your life expectancy. Poverty robs you of decades.

Reply to  trafamadore
September 26, 2015 7:11 am

Do you have multiple studies that indicate health problems downwind from clean coal plants?
Given that most studies are unrepeatable at least 3 studies would be needed.

Reply to  trafamadore
September 26, 2015 9:24 am

Yes how dare anyone try to lift people from poverty and allow them to approach the same standards of living as western countries? Per wonder does trafamadore believe the way to happiness is poverty and low standards of living? If so why not give up the computer and internet connection.

September 25, 2015 4:35 pm

The point here is the Chinese are right, powering Africa is the best way to alleviate the many issues they suffer, but it will not change the temperature.

Lewis P Buckingham
Reply to  sanaerchi
September 25, 2015 7:48 pm

Its not clear that China wants to power Africa.
As I understand it the new ‘Silk Road’ is about setting up trading links with Africa.
That means local power stations to run coal mines and extractive industries.
The power is then used to build and run railways to a new deep water port, which they construct, then ship the coal gas and minerals back home to China.

Reply to  Lewis P Buckingham
September 25, 2015 9:00 pm

True. China has always fought the “Long War”.
And we are losing this one.

Reply to  Lewis P Buckingham
September 26, 2015 8:37 am

But China building infrastructure in africa has a side effect of improving local conditions.
And once people get lmited access to power, they want more.
Then it becomes a snowball effect.

Reply to  Lewis P Buckingham
September 26, 2015 10:57 am

Chinese wages are rising fast so that means their competitive advantage to the West is eroding – what happens when cheap Chinese goods are no longer cheap? The Chinese are investing in Africa as the next source of global cheap labour. However the big problem holding back Africa is still corruption.

Reply to  sanaerchi
September 26, 2015 12:02 am

The issue I see with this investment in Africa, is that most of it won’t go to where it is needed. Most of the money will be sucked out of projects by corrupt Govn’ts and officials making rich people in poor countries even richer.

Reply to  Patrick
September 26, 2015 3:34 am

Patrick, much of what you say is correct. HOWEVER, things aren’t the same as in the 1980s. There was a recent coup which was put down. It might have been tolerated back in the cold war.

WSJ – 16 April 2014
Africa Is Refuting the Usual Economic Pessimism
Even as Nigeria battles Islamist terrorism, this remarkably entrepreneurial nation is racing ahead.
……For too long, a self-serving alliance of Western aid groups, politicians and journalists presented sub-Saharan Africa as a dangerously failed place in need of outside salvation. They offered only corrosive images of conflict, poverty and disease, leaving tourists scared to visit and making fearful businesses slow to engage. The real story is rather different: It includes the stuttering spread of democracy, impressive economic growth and a continent that now has more people who are overweight than go to bed hungry each night………
Goldman Sachs GS +0.23% predicts that Nigeria’s economy will be bigger than Canada’s or Italy’s by 2050—and not far behind Germany’s. And this is just one of 54 countries on a large continent that is home to six of the world’s 10 fastest-growing economies and the youngest population on the planet.
McKinsey & Company2010
What’s driving Africa’s growth
The rate of return on foreign investment is higher in Africa than in any other developing region. Global executives and investors must pay heed.
June 2010 | byAcha Leke, Susan Lund, Charles Roxburgh, and Arend van Wamelen
Africa’s economic pulse has quickened, infusing the continent with a new commercial vibrancy. Real GDP rose by 4.9 percent a year from 2000 through 2008, more than twice its pace in the 1980s and ’90s. Telecommunications, banking, and retailing are flourishing. Construction is booming. Private-investment inflows are surging.
The Economist online – Jan 6th 2011
“Africa is now one of the world’s fastest-growing regions
But an analysis by The Economist finds that over the ten years to 2010, six of the world’s ten fastest-growing economies were in sub-Saharan Africa.”
Economist – 1 May 2013
Growth and other good things
THERE is no shortage of economic growth in Africa. Six of the world’s ten fastest growing economies of the past decade are in sub-Saharan Africa….
Economist – 2 Nov 2013
Many of Africa’s fastest-growing economies have not relied on oil or mining
…..Since the mid-1990s the economy of sub-Saharan Africa has grown by an average of 5% a year……
…..A study published this week by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) finds that eight of the 12 fastest-growing economies in Africa in recent years did not rely on natural resources……
…..Why did the six economies grow so fast? Stable and purposeful policy-making helped. All six countries took steps in the 1990s to control public finances and curb inflation……
…..Progress was not restricted to economic policy. The six countries in the IMF study are far better governed than they were in the mid-1990s. Based on indicators compiled by the World Bank, they are less corrupt, have better bureaucrats, enjoy more stable politics and are better regulated than their African peers……
The climate for private business is also much improved. Price controls and state-backed monopolies have been swept away……
…..They are still a long way short of their potential. There are big gaps in their infrastructure. Poor roads hold up trade. Power shortages are a bar to manufacturing. Development is uneven. The bulk of the population still scrape a living in agriculture……

David A
Reply to  Patrick
September 26, 2015 4:26 am

If energy is made readily available at a reasonable cost, then all boats will rise.

September 25, 2015 4:37 pm

You know you can cook a live frog to death without a struggle if you very slowly turn up the heat…Why do I get the terrible feeling we’re nearing the boiling point with Big Green?

Reply to  Dog
September 25, 2015 5:44 pm

Nice analogy, but the frog in the pot thing is complete nonsense. When the temp in the pot becomes uncomfortable the frog will jump out.

Reply to  Lancifer
September 25, 2015 5:58 pm

For all the intelligence demonstrated on this blog, neither of you two know that you need to put the lid on the pot when boiling your frogs.
Sometimes the simplest answer is the best.

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Lancifer
September 25, 2015 6:53 pm

Lancifer No you can’t, the poor thing would bump it’s head etc and then spoil the meat clearly not a gourmet are you. Savage. 🙂

Mike the Morlock
Reply to  Lancifer
September 25, 2015 6:58 pm

Oops sorry I meant Muzzer.

Reply to  Lancifer
September 25, 2015 8:06 pm

The slow heat analogy…
… or remove the legs first, then sauté. They jump around a little but they no longer have the appropriate leverage to get out of the pan.
Who boils frog legs?

Reply to  Lancifer
September 26, 2015 3:22 am

whadda they call it now?
sous vide or somesuch?
reckon you gotta stick it in a plastic bag as well

Bruce Cobb
September 25, 2015 4:38 pm

China does what it can. For China.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
September 26, 2015 9:36 am

Trump would fit right in.

Curious George
September 25, 2015 4:42 pm

How many MWh per ton of coal does a “high efficiency” power plant produce, as opposed to a traditional one?

Crispin in Waterloo but really in Yellow Springs
Reply to  Curious George
September 27, 2015 9:42 pm

A combined cycle coal plant puts out about twice the power of a single steam boiler with the same input of coal. You can estimate like that. It is actually slightly less that double.

Reply to  Curious George
September 28, 2015 5:18 am

Plant efficiency is measured by a heat rate (which is in units of BTU/Kwh). Coal varies in it’s MBTU content. Coal plant efficiency can range from 32% to 42%. (So rough delta calculation is around 25 to 30% less coal with efficiency) This range is mostly accounted for by the heat and reheat steam temperatures and pressures. Plus there are trade offs in pollution reduction techniques that draw power from the plant reducing net output and overall efficiency.
A coal plant might have a conversion of 1 lb per kwh. Or roughly a half a ton per MWh..
Combined cycle operation usually refers to natural gas units where a gas combustion engine first “burns” the fuel and then the waste heat drives a steam turbine. By heating coal you can produce gas for use in a combined cycle facility – but that is a very costly enterprise. Whenever such economics might work it would have to be part of a combined cycle process.
More info here –

Power Grab
September 25, 2015 5:10 pm

Maybe China is doing to their neighbors what was done to them. Once sufficient power was available to power factories, manufacturing was offloaded to them. They get to breathe the smog. Well, turnaround is fair play, I guess. They will clean up their environment and let the developing countries provide the cheap labor.
Isn’t that how things work?

Reply to  Power Grab
September 26, 2015 7:53 am

Until you one day run out of developing countries.
At which point you hire socialists to de-industrialize the developed countries so that the cycle can start over.

September 25, 2015 5:21 pm

The Chinese have an interest to reduce the imbalance caused by their one-child abortion policy and to secure natural resources in developing nations. This is similar to liberal societies’ interest to compensate for the progressive loss of population caused by their selective-child abortion policy and the evironmentalists’ effort to secure dumping grounds for their “green” industry clients.

Reply to  n.n
September 25, 2015 5:51 pm

One child policy only applied to the majority Han. Nowadays they can have more. In fact the government is encouraging the rich to have more children.
MSM cliches for vilification and many people fall for it. Reminds me of the whole global warming BS.

David A
Reply to  Alex
September 26, 2015 4:30 am

No matter how the policy was or is applied, the demographics are real: China has serious issues in this matter.

Reply to  Alex
September 26, 2015 7:55 am

The demographic problem caused by the one child policy still exist, even if it is no longer universally enforced.
Beyond that, it was in affect for a sufficient length of time that one child became the social norm, one that the Chinese govt is having a hard time reversing. Even with bribes to people to encourage more children.

Reply to  Alex
September 26, 2015 8:42 am

The big problem however, is the one child policy resulted in a lot of girl babies dying since they were not considered as useful as a boy.
As a consequence, there is a massive imbalance of males to females.

Reply to  Alex
September 26, 2015 11:39 am

The one-child policy was actually more rational and humane than the selective-child policy, and the consequences of the latter, including normalizing biological and cultural dysfunction, continues to reap rewards.

September 25, 2015 5:23 pm

Hummm, committing 3.1 billion to any country to not find, and use, cheap energy, still doesn’t provide for such in the end, with no viable substitute.
Electricity is addicting to those 1.5 billion inhabitant’s who don’t have it.
Just sayin, they are human too.

September 25, 2015 5:47 pm

Kinda sounds like Oblama’s Iran deal !!!!

September 25, 2015 5:58 pm

The age of economic rationalism is here and is generally a net good, but one thing it tends to do is make things that are not economic compete in the market, but some of them can only compete using ideology, government subsidy, an army of bureaucrats and so on.
So what you get is a kind of frankenstein economy where things compete with each other but which have no basis for being in the market together.

September 25, 2015 6:12 pm

Coal will save the world.

Reply to  Klem
September 26, 2015 3:24 am

do it faster if we could either throw BIG chunks at the green ones
or drop a dumpster of it ON them

Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 26, 2015 7:06 am

“or drop a dumpster of it ON them”
…or drop a recycling dumpster of it ON them.

September 25, 2015 6:30 pm

It would be very Macchiavellian if China’s plan was to invest in transmission lines from it’s own coal-fired power plants to their ‘third world’ neighbors, providing the neighbors with cheap electricity to which they would become quickly addicted – and dependent on China.

Reply to  tadchem
September 26, 2015 7:56 am

You can only transmit electric power a few hundred miles.

Reply to  MarkW
September 26, 2015 8:45 am

You should tell that to the australian power companies then.
The power lines there often cover a lot more than a ‘few hundred” miles.

Mark from the Midwest
September 25, 2015 7:31 pm

Since those crazy folks at Mother Jones probably have difficulty putting a modern economy into perspective let me help, 3.1 billion is about 86 minutes worth of China’s economic output. You could take a long lunch, run a few errands and there you have it, 3.1 billion. They do these trivial kinds of things with the expectation that it pressures the U.S. Federal Government to take actions which, by raising energy prices, could put an indirect tax of about 12% on every dollar of U.S. output. From a competitive standpoint the 3.1 billion would be well spent.

Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
September 25, 2015 8:43 pm

They do these trivial kinds of things with the expectation that it pressures the U.S. Federal Government to take actions
They are doing THIS thing to provide a facade of support for Obama’s climate activism. Given Obama’s demonstrated skill at the international negotiating table, one can only wonder what tiny concession China got from him in return.

Reply to  davidmhoffer
September 25, 2015 9:19 pm

First poster … been reading this website for a looooong time. One of my favs, esp the comments. Disciplined in staying away from fallecious arguments and a yeoman effort in avoiding descent into self defeating sarcasm.
Unfortunately, I notice the posters are slipping in the effort it takes to clearly articulate counterpoints. Stay strong. Trust in the slow but steady crawl of critical thinking. It sucks to watch deception take root. It’s painful.
The masses tend to chose the course of least resistance. Individuals can be found that dont, but en mass does.
Increasing energy prices.
Higher food prices.
Lower standards of living.
It takes time to make the masses unhappy enough to examine the reasons for their unhappiness. It will come and eventually some group will decide that they want a better life. They’ll break from the herd and seek cheaper energy. A better life.
The seeds that your webpage plant today will matter more tomorrow. It takes time to understand what’s behind the curtain. It’s hard work and so something has to be painful to motivate the hard work.
Be articulate.
Be clearheaded.
Show simple forms of fallacious argument. .. appeals to ad homs, cherries, authority, etc.
I like this webpage and want it to succeed.
Please continue to lead.

Reply to  davidmhoffer
September 26, 2015 5:34 am

Very good, Knute.

Reply to  davidmhoffer
September 26, 2015 9:38 am

LOL! Yes, due to Obama’s negotiating skill China not only gets Alaska but a life-time supply of arugula from Michelle’s garden.

September 25, 2015 7:42 pm

Everyone knows that CO2 emissions are going no where but up for the foreseeable future yet Western countries are willing to commit economic and personal well being suicide with draconian emission laws and taxes. How long will it take before the people in those Western countries realize they have been scammed? Starting when? Meanwhile other countries are gladly stepping in to fill the industrial shoes left vacant. And some call this a conspiracy theory.

September 25, 2015 8:43 pm

The ONLY winners in cap-and -trade schemes are the SELLERS of credits, and that means, in the case of Other Casinos, the “Hous”e or the “Bank”. China, like Al Gore, and the Chicago Cap-and trade dealers made money selling these made up fictitious securities. The. BANK has an unlimited supply, and can keep on printing them indefinitely. Any buyers of these cap-and-trade securities are stuck competing with the bank to sell them to anybody else. Since the BANK is always able to sell new securities, other sellers will have to sell at a discount, basically distressed sales. As Global Warming continues to fail to appear, the demand for cap-and-trade securities will dry up, as everyone realizes it is a hoax. As the REAL Climate Change disaster of cooling continues, and becomes undeniable, it will trigger a selling panic. This will appear very soon. The Chinese, along with the inventor of Cap-and-trade securities, who has gone to China for refuge from fraud charges,, are positioning themselves to sucker the rest of the world into buying these securities that will soon be worthless. China, the “BANK” has no obligation whatsoever to buy them back at any price. China already knows there is no global warming catastrophe looming now, or for 100 years. Instead, clear scientific analysis and evidence says deadly cooling has already begun that will last at least 30 years. China is selling insurance against a disaster that will never come. China will be laughing all the way to the bank each time they sell Cap-and-trade securities, without regard for these securities becoming worthless in less than 5 years. This prediction is based in firm verifiable facts, not political hot air, as the Global warming scare is denied by the actual weather.

Edmonton Al
Reply to  paullitely
September 26, 2015 9:18 am

Thanks for that. It is much better and more complete than my planned comment

September 25, 2015 9:18 pm

China has lost trillions (dollars, pounds …) however way you cut it from their stock market crash.
How to recover?
Build a new Ponzi Scheme stock market based on Carbon-Credits! Brilliant!
Ah, ack ack, very late to the gate as Europe Carbon-Credit markets have already crashed!
Who wants to bid in to a Ponzi Scheme run by VW with Merkel and her butt in the driver seat!
Ha ha

September 25, 2015 9:33 pm

And the USA, thanks to our climate goons, is going to sit out of this phase of world progress.

September 25, 2015 9:59 pm

MotherJones probably thinks the Pope is genuinely concerned about CAGW!
you may recall in July, this Guardian headline: “Vatican ‘may’ consider divestment from fossil fuels, despite pope’s call to arms” in which a spokesman for the Vatican bank, Max Hohenberg, claimed the issue was largely irrelevant because “there really isn’t much to divest”.
anyway, divestment is no closer at the Vatican, so:
23 Sept: Los Angeles Loylan: Jesuit Divestment Network urges Pope Francis with letter to divest in fossil fuels
by Thomas May, News Intern
On Monday, 81 campus and community groups from around the world signed and sent a letter to Pope Francis in support of raising awareness of fossil fuel divestment.
This past year, LMU coordinated with six other Jesuit colleges from the Association of Jesuit Colleges and
Universities (AJCU) to form the Jesuit Divestment Network. The group works to promote climate justice and urges universities and organizations all over the world to divest in fossil fuels…
These signatures included five schools from ACJU, including University of Notre Dame and Saint Mary’s College.
Prestigious U.S. schools such as UC Berkeley, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Yale University, Dartmouth College and Cornell University have also had campus groups sign in support.
Campuses around the world including the University of Queensland and the University of Tasmania in Australia also have campus groups in support; and in England, the University of Oxford is represented in the signatures…
The Jesuit Divestment Network intends for this letter to be the beginning of further collaboration with Jesuit and non-Jesuit Schools…
“I would hope that this letter could help people, especially students that have signed this letter, that we have
overwhelming collective power,” she (Karina Alvarez, a junior environmental science and head of Fossil-Free LMU) said…

Reply to  pat
September 26, 2015 7:59 pm

Research the Jesuits as deeply as you can. They are part of the continuum of disinformation. An enlisted branch so to speak.
Did you know that their primary mission was the protection of the papacy by any means possible? Do you know that the Jesuits are experts at teaching sophisticated uses of propoganda? And to further pique your interest, did you know that Obama’s speechwriter (Jon Favreau) graduated near the top in his class from Holy Cross, a Jesuit college? Go back and view early Obama speeches. They are fine examples of how to suspend intellect by appealing to emotion. He hooks the listener with a story the commoner can relate too (anecdotal). It creates commonality and likeability. The brain at rest struggles to fight thru the “I like him, but something doesn’t feel right about that fact conflict”. Half truths, forced choices layered with argument by extreme are received far more easily into the brain unchallenged when you like someone.
These are taught skills. Purposefully used. In fact, coupled with the proper body language and cadence, the listener is very typically unable to conduct critical thinking.
Perhaps Dante was right that the hottest depths of the afterlife (for believers) are for those who know better but use their skills to empower themselves while harming others.
This is the number one viewed website in the world concerning climate change. Use the credibility wisely. Try not to piss it away with pithy comments meant to attract attention to your frustration. It’s fun and we all do it but more should be expected of the readers of this webpage.
Yes, the Chinese have learned how to exploit others for their resources by getting them hooked to loans they can never repay. Europe and the Americas honed those skills and no doubt learned them from others. It’s a game as old as the first debtor/creditor arrangement. No more, no less. Tzu would admire how it is being used to win power (other nation’s loyalty) while giving an opponent (the developed west) something he desires which will make him even weaker. If Tzu was alive, he’d admire Soros’ recent megapurchase of coal assets.
Readers of this webpage know better. At a minimum they should inform other readers. Be respectful of where they are in their developing awareness, but also be a warrior in calling out fallacy. What more can you do ?
Perhaps not much.
Planning for what’s next is often overshadowed by what happens while you weren’t looking. What is that combination of events that will shuck meaningless agendas to the wayside ? What happens if the next global economic correction is far worse than 2008 ? The odds are good that will happen considering that every major crash has been retested and inflating fiat currencies has never worked as an economic solution.
Could even be something else that shocks the world. Sickness ? A nuclear war ?
Do you know how rare it is to have an independent organization who staunchly adheres to the principles of critical thinking ? Do you know what an incredible skill you are exposing readers too when you execute it articulately and succinctly ?
Despite the best efforts of this webpage and a few others like it, it is highly unlikely that you can do battle with the propaganda machine that has been used for this campaign. Your opponent has executed the greatest hoax in the modern history of mankind. He’s made the rich, ridiculously rich, given the poor validation for their sense of victimhood and enlisted the spiritual leader of 1B people. Who would have ever believed 10 years ago that RICO charges would be considered for “deniers” ? It’s astounding and should be honored for its sheer strategic brilliance.
In time, it will falter because it’s not real. The earth is not heating up. In fact, it may be entering a solar influenced cooling phase. Indeed, your opponent will attempt to conclude that they made cooling happen.
Other more pressing reality will likely determine actions that 6B people take over the next 100 years.
This webpage teaches people how to think. Knowledge is a profoundly effective thing. I know I’m not the fine physical speciman of younger years because the mirror tells me so. I can’t escape that knowledge. Once awakened it’s incredibly hard to ignore reality.
Keep up the good work.
Please be respectful concerning how awake people are. Be compassionate with the uninformed. Don’t bully with intellect. You’ll lose opportunity.
Avoid being pithy. Aware people know you just want attention and will ignore you.
Teach critical thinking.
Teach it with all your heart.
Be the firm warrior with those who should know better.
I want to see the viewers and commenters on this webpage be more than what they currently are because they should aspire to lead the awakening of a new enlightenment towards critical thinking.
Have you ever considered expanding the critical thinking skills that are applied here to others areas of human endeavor ?
Maybe the WUWT ________ fill in the blank topic.
And thanks most of all for giving me hope and thank you Mr Knights.

September 25, 2015 10:33 pm


September 26, 2015 1:07 am

I think the Mother Jones article reflects some widespread cluelessness, inconsistency and hypocrisy, but I confess to having endorsed the root idea in the past. When I first heard the argument that the U.S. Should move towards more research and investment in costly, intermittent renewables to reduce world wide “carbon” levels, my response was that I expected China and India to develop and they could not (and would not) with renewables. If we wanted to reduce global CO2 output the most effective thing we could do is expand research and efforts to clean up coal and share our technology worldwide. For us (and I think it is unfortunate) that train has probably already left the station.

Reply to  aplanningengineer
September 26, 2015 6:13 am

For us (and I think it is unfortunate) that train has probably already left the station.
For the US, the nuclear train has left the station too. Not much else left except space technology…

Reply to  beng135
September 26, 2015 2:24 pm

Sorry, but that’s gone, too. With the possible exception of DoD space, we rely on Russia to get astronauts to the space station, Japan & (maybe) European Space Agency to get food and other supplies there. It has been said – accurately, in my opinion – NASA has gotten so hobbled by politically correct restrictions that we could not bet back to the Moon, even if we had the b…, oops, make that “gall” to try. (Partial disclosure:I was employed by a direct-support-to-manned-spaceflight contractor for over 20 years)

September 26, 2015 2:22 am

>>t will commit to spending $3.1 billion to help developing
>>countries slash their greenhouse gas emissions.
You might find that this is a reference to China building a nuclear power station in the UK (no joke…!). Since China views the non-industrial UK as a ‘developing nation’, their $3 billion investment in UK nuclear power would explain this statement very well.

Dudley Horscroft
September 26, 2015 2:33 am

China’s plan re building coal power plants in small Pacific nations is very simple. Buy large amounts of coal dirt cheap from Australia and ship it in very large bulk carriers to China. Bulk cargo rates for very large bulkers are very low – economies of scale. Also price per tonne for 100M tonnes is almost certainly cheaper than price per tonne of 10 000 t lots, which would be the more likely size for shipments to these small nations. Sell the small new power plants in the Pacific nations the coal at rather higher prices, and ship to them in small Chinese bulkers at higher rates. Swings and roundabouts, but in coming and going the Chinese win both ways. Not economical for small bulk ships to use Australian coal ports, these work best pouring large amounts of coal continuously into very large ships.
China wins! QED

September 26, 2015 3:29 am

Burn, Baby, Burn! Here’s a Spoof article I penned a coupla years ago:
The Big Freeze, or How I Learned to Love Big Oil
This January of 2051 marks the 30th anniversary of the start of the “Big Freeze” which began in the winter of 2020-21.
We know now, and have known for more than two decades, that it was the misguided campaign of “Big Green” in the late 20th century and early this century which led to this near-catastrophe for the world. Only this week, The International Panel for Carbon Combustion (IPCC) published its fourth assessment report. In the Summary for Policy Makers, the message is clear. The Earth is cooling and mankind is to blame. From their headquarters in Beijing, China, their chairman Bernie Oyle (also chief executive of Athabasca Oil Corp., president of Friends of the Keystone Pipelines, and editor of Nature, Fracking News) said “The message is Burn, Baby, Burn!, and if I can make a few yen out of saving mankind, who’s to blame me?”. World leaders are due to meet next month to ratify and sign the Alberta Protocol, which commits nations to a 10% year-on-year growth in greenhouse gas emissions. China is so far the only nation meeting its obligation in advance of the summit, to be held on one of the huge BP oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico.
97% of climate scientists who can stop their teeth chattering have said that the evidence for Anthropogenic Global Cooling is irrefutable. The slowing of growth in greenhouse gas emissions in the second decade this century, reinforced by a reduction in cosmic rays and solar radiation triggered a “tipping point”, after which global temperatures plummeted. Carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere declined further as the oceans cooled, and they absorbed even more of the trace gas essential to life on Earth. Several forms of geo-engineering are already widespread, including “cloud-seeding” to induce precipitation and thin the cloud to “let the sun shine through”. NASA has already deployed two giant mirrors in space to reflect solar radiation onto northern and southern extremities of the Earth. Twenty more are planned, with five already in construction.
Worldwide, government subsidies for production and sale of electric vehicles have been increased after it was discovered that they indirectly cause more CO2 emissions than any other form of transport, and are the least efficient in energy use. In the US, the EPA is lobbying the Black House (formerly Disneyworld, Florida) and Congress to introduce legislation to further reduce fuel efficiency below the current 10 miles-per-gallon enforced. Corn and other grain-based generation of CO2 was stopped in 2029, as world food production declined with decreasing CO2 levels, but the growth in cellulistic (plant-matter) use has increased, as forests are felled for burning, and more land is cleared for food production.
The iconic Polar bear is under threat. Populations in Maryland, northern California and Britain are said to be in decline as the sea ice is too thick for them to dig holes to catch fish and inattentive seals. Plans to use Air Force planes to bomb holes in the ice were abandoned after it was realised the bears are difficult to see against the ice. There is some good news – Penguin populations in Australia are doing well, after numbers declined during the long trek from Antarctica 20 years ago.
Perhaps it’s fitting to end with a round-up on “climate refugees”, and with news of one of the smallest nations in the world – Tuvalu. The 30-metre drop in sea levels has been a disaster for the people of Funafuti, which used to be an atoll with a central lagoon, but is now a large island with a depression in the middle. The port facilities are high and dry, and tourists shun the island, especially the capital, where they face a 10-minute taxi ride to the sea in one direction, and an hour-long ride in the other. To highlight the plight of the islanders, the president recently held a cabinet meeting on the top of Mount Fongafale, a 34-metre-high hill in the centre of the capital. He is in negotiation with the president of Bangladesh, which has increased in area by more than three times, to send incoming climate refugees to Tuvalu, to attempt a similar strategy to that employed on Guam. There, the combined weight of several hundred thousand refugees and their vehicles has resulted in the island sinking by 10 metres, allowing several of the fishing ports to be dredged to operate at high tide.
Cuba has recently erected a 10-metre-high fence across the land bridge to Florida, to help stop climate refugees entering the country illegally. The fence is fronted by the existing 50-metre-wide shark-infested moat. The Coast Guard patrols the northern shores to intercept and turn back “boat people”, mainly from Texas and Louisiana. Mexico has reinforced its border with the states of California, Arizona, and Texas. Regular patrols by the Mexico Immigration Force in trucks and helicopters are backed up by unmanned drones. These are fitted with infrared cameras said to be able to detect a “greenback” (as illegal immigrants from the USA are known there) from 20 km at night. “Using GPS, the drone locates the greenbacks precisely, and we can activate a ring of land-mines around them” says Eduardo Chavez, senior MIF commander. “If they heed the warnings broadcast by the mines, we go in and pick ’em up for deportation. If they don’t we just replace the mines they set off”.
Finally, a campaign I support totally, and which, in a small way, can “make a difference” – Earth Hour. Citizens of the world should do their bit to support the campaign, by together turning on all the lights, electrical and gas appliances in their houses, and running their vehicle engines. After all, it’s only once a week, and energy is cheap, so remember each Friday between 8 and 9 PM – Earth Hour!

Rob Potter
September 26, 2015 4:17 am

This is politics, nothing else. The World Bank has been pressured into not funding coal power plants in developing countries (by the US and EU donors) and China has created a separate development bank which is making these loans available. China is already a very large player in dveloping country finance and this is just another step in becoming the go-to country for development loans.
I am not one of those people who thinks that China is taking over the world, but they are growing in influence in Africa and – in this case – the people of Africa are probably going to get something useful out of it.

Reply to  Rob Potter
September 26, 2015 12:55 pm

Rob Potter:
20 years ago when I was working in Africa, the Chinese had over 2,000 people working on development projects in Tanzania. I would imagine that today that number may be 10 to 100 times that for Africa and South East Asia. Historically, the Chinese take a long term view of things.

Reply to  Rob Potter
September 26, 2015 1:10 pm

The world bank was seemingly also pressured into not funding the Three Gorges Hydropower Project.
The single largest source of renewable energy in the world.
Thankfully, the Chinese just cracked on with it and funded it using loans issued by the Chinese Development Bank and Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, JP Morgan, Deutsche Bank, and Barclays Capital.
Pressure groups and NGO’s across the world are noisily furious.
Primarily, one suspects, because they did not get their way and did not get to control every aspect of everything that anybody ever does.
Having succeeded in building one big highly profitable hydropower dam – the Three Gorges Consortium appears to now be directing it’s attention to other possible locations for effective renewable electricity generation.
The world bank has recently banned the consortium from involvement in any of its projects.
I’m not an expert in this topic, but it looks to me as though quite a lot of very important people are getting very pissed off about the Three Gorges and the parties involved.
It does seem ironic that in this case the grandiose obsessions of Friends of the Earth, WWF, Greenpeace and now the world bank seem to be aimed primarily at putting a halt to the world’s largest and cheapest source of renewable energy.
The problem appears to be that big hydropower is cheap, effective and not something which they can control.
Which may lead a person to suspect that their anti-coal agenda really has bugger-all to do with carbon emissions.

September 26, 2015 4:44 am

3.1 Bills is less than a tenth of the interest we pay China in the debt it hold. So M.Jones should be more up front and tell China “they didn’t build that” Obama did.

Tom in Florida
September 26, 2015 5:07 am

If China is successful in keeping developing countries from producing enough power to run their own manufacturing plants then these countries will have to buy their material things from China. Clever way to open up new markets while looking like you really care about the world.

September 26, 2015 6:27 am

And in the latest news:
World expresses surprise as the Communist Party of China creates a centralized state-controlled plan to issue credits for the burning of fossil fuels.
“We never would have dreamed that communists would take to a scheme that seems to be an excuse to extend the reach and power of centralized state control of industry and energy production. We imagined that they were keen to grant power to individuals and the free-market” – said one deluded commentator.
And in further news:
Pope agrees with proposition that poor Catholic nations should be handed big wads of cash by rich Protestant western nations, in order to mitigate the effects of imaginary weather crisis.
The leftist U.S. President proposes that all world’s problems, even imaginary ones, can be solved by more government borrowing and spending.
New study by moronic ecologists proves that bears occasionally defecate in wooded areas.
“Yes, it’s the same old shit, on a different day” – said a random person when asked in the street.

Reply to  indefatigablefrog
September 26, 2015 11:15 am

A list of ‘left wing radicals’ supporting action on Climate Change:
The US Dept of Defense. Every Science Academy and Scientific Professional Society in the World (197 of them). NASA. NOAA. All Major Universities. 99.9% of Peer-reviewed Research Papers. 97% of Climate Scientists actively engaged in research.
George P Schultz, Hank Paulson, Lindsay Graham, John McCain, Bob Inglis (President of Energy and Enterprise Org), Eli Lehrer (President of Free Enterprise R Street Org), Jerry Taylor (President of the Niskanen Institute), Steve LaTourette, Mike Castle, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Olympia Snow, Sherwood Boehlert, Chris Collins, Mike Kirk, Bob Corker, Mike Bloomberg, Katherine Hayhoe (evangelical Christian and Climate Scientist)
According to a Yale Study, 52% of Republicans nationwide. CitizensClimateLobby.Org, The US Episcopal Church. The Catholic Church. Republicen.Org.
Nearly all world leaders.
Are all these the ‘bears’ in your anecdote?

Reply to  warrenlb
September 26, 2015 1:33 pm

warrenlb can’t help himself, his mind is controlled by the ‘appeal to authority’ logical fallacy.
All he has done is to confirm that the ‘dangerous man-made global warming’ scare is 97% politics; 0% real science.
The one thing that warrenlb never discusses is the complete lack of any measurements quantifying the MMGW scare. That means that everyone sounding that false alarm is disregarding basic science. In science, data is more important than anything. Measurements are data. But warrenlb has no such data.
It must cause alarmist heads to explode when it’s pointed out that satellite measurements — the most accurate measurements we have — show that global warming stopped many years ago.
But folks like warrenlb and his ilk have never let something like Planet Earth’s debunking their belief system change their minds. That’s one thing that’s beyond their mental capability. They’re worse than Jehovah’s Witnesses in their beliefs.

Reply to  warrenlb
September 26, 2015 8:14 pm

“No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.
Albert Einstein”
Thing is, there is NO conclusive proof that CO2 is an issue. So what action is appropriate??? I don’t think anyone really knows. Why CO2? Well, you can’t tax the sun, you can’t tax variations in the earth’s orbit, you can’t tax clouds, you can’t tax cosmic rays, you can’t tax volcanoes or weather, you can’t tax ENSO, PDO, AMO, AO, ad infinitum.
But, Warren, if you take the C out of CO2 and call it “CARBON” raising the spectre of black soot falling out of the air, then maybe you can scare people into going with a “CARBON TAX”.
Paraphrasing the UN – IPCC – It was never about the environment but transfer of wealth.
Enjoy the eclipse tomorrow all. Only a few years ago, a Harvest Moon Eclipse was considered a portent of bad happenings. Given CAGW, not sure we have gotten very far.

John Herron
September 26, 2015 6:57 am

Decades ago my Asian geography professor pointed out the difference between the oriental and occidental world view with a simple thought problem.
He asked, What are the qualities of a good father?
Have you gotten a long list? An occidental would likely have a dozen or more personal traits come to mind.
An oriental would likely say ‘the right spouse, and the right children’.
He wanted to illustrate that these are two different cultures with fundamentally different philosophies. Both have deep roots and both serve well in the context of their societies, but may not translate easily from one to the other.

September 26, 2015 6:59 am

Maybe someone who knows better than me can correct me. I live in in Pennsylvania, we create about 30% of our electricity with coal. We are downwind of other big coal generating states. Yet we have NO AIR POLLUTION, except in the large cities. The coal plants are not really located in the large cities. The pollution in the large cities is caused by something other than coal. Coal used to be a very dirty way to produce electricity, but with modern technology it is clean.

Reply to  glenncz
September 26, 2015 7:25 am

Not clean wrt CO2 emissions, which are inherent to the burning of coal.

Steve P
Reply to  warrenlb
September 26, 2015 10:42 am

Please explain how CO₂ is “not clean”.

Reply to  warrenlb
September 26, 2015 10:59 am

Re-read my post: ‘Not clean wrt CO2 emissions’.

Reply to  warrenlb
September 26, 2015 1:40 pm

Steve P, you won’t get a straight answer from warrenlb. We know that at current concentrations, CO2 is not only completely harmless; it is beneficial to the biosphere. More is better.
The planet is measurably greening as a direct result of the added CO2. There has never been any global harm identified from rising CO2; thus, CO2 can be classified as “harmless”.
Take that one small step further: CO2 is ‘clean’. Neither humans nor the biosphere could live without CO2; it’s as clean as pure H2O. Just like global warmth, we need more of it.

Reply to  warrenlb
September 26, 2015 3:06 pm

“Not clean wrt CO2 emissions, which are inherent to the burning of coal.”
My dear fellow; are you aware that you are producing CO2 right now and do so with every breath you take? I suggest you attend to your nasty habit right now.

Reply to  warrenlb
September 26, 2015 5:09 pm

I totally agree that coal is not “clean” regarding CO2. But the point I was trying to make is that many people think getting rid of coal is the right thing to do because it will get rid of pollution. If you look at the DATA across this country there is very little air pollution caused by electricity production. Countries like China, instead of worrying about getting rid of coal plants need to get modern technology to clean the air up. Countries like India and Africa nations s need to use modern coal technology to raise their people out of poverty. But the alarmist are quite content to have their “useful idiots” spread their ignorance that modern coal creates Dirty Air.

1 L Loyd
September 26, 2015 7:36 am

I recognize this. This is how the government of the United States ‘saves’ money, by cutting spending increase down. Now our ‘accounting’ has spread to climate change in Asia. *face on desk*

September 26, 2015 9:17 am

The countries that china plans to finance coal for will gain benefits from fly ash removal in the form of increased concrete supplies to build their emerging infrastructures. The asphalt industry is also helped by coal ash.
I suspect that a large portion of wind turbines are sitting on concrete which contains fly ash.

Reply to  Dawtgtomis
September 26, 2015 9:29 am

Oops; I was wrong about wind turbine foundations. from the flyash report: “Flyash used in concrete is a mature technology. Thirty percent of the flyash in the US is recycled into making concrete. The use of flyash concrete in structural applications such as wall-forms is standard technology. The use of recycled-content block, in particular fiber-cement, as part of a structural foundation system using flyash concrete is still early in development.”

Reply to  Dawtgtomis
September 26, 2015 1:42 pm

But… but… concrete production emits lots of CO2!
We’re DOOMED!!

September 26, 2015 9:47 am

Is $3.1 billion China is providing to developing countries the equivalent of me giving $1 to local soccer team for a candy bar? Seems trivial.
Nonetheless must be confusing to Mother Jones and Rachel Maddow, the $3.1 billion is an insignificant amount of money on a national level and leads to an insignificant increase in CO2, even though they are acting like it is an significant reduction in CO2. Much a do about nothing never had more meaning.

xavier guzman
September 26, 2015 10:18 am

I’ve tried to recreate the above mentioned experiment but followed the cautious path by installing a GFCI. Can anyone telll me how to determine l “line” and “load”?

September 26, 2015 1:38 pm

It sounds like an “oil for food” program to pay off partners and purchase influence. If anything, China’s colonization of second and third-world nations through export of their excess males will pay greater dividends to their development. Unlike welfare programs, colonization through intermarriage will ensure that the Chinese have a stake in those nations’ future.

September 26, 2015 3:21 pm

People in Japan, China, Korea and India are more intelligent than those in Europe and America and have not placed their heads in a CAGW bag. Africa and Asia will benefit from this.

September 26, 2015 6:29 pm

I guess this has sumtin to do with world bank not giving any money to developing nations anymore for building coal energy plants. Last year a bunch of B-class countries has launch their own BRICS Development Bank, ready to provide the finances for building new coal plants.
Looks like they take own direction instead of our rich Western climate madness…

September 26, 2015 7:37 pm

Reblogged this on Public Secrets and commented:
Obama wants to destroy the coal industry here, while California thinks it can heal the world on its own by forsaking the Demon Carbon. Meanwhile in Asia, they merely pay lip service to global warming while pressing on with building coal plants — and laughing at us behind our backs. And sometimes in front of them.

Reply to  Phineas Fahrquar
September 27, 2015 2:44 am

You are so right on – Chinese are not fooled by global warming forecasts that are falling flat.

Don B
September 27, 2015 7:38 am

“Japan is now the world’s largest supporter of coal-fired power plants in developing countries, using its advanced Ultra-Supercritical design. This clashes with the stance of the Obama administration, which has opposed the financing of coal-fired power plants anywhere in the world. (With pressure from environmental groups and the governments of Europe and the United States, the World Bank has stopped funding coal-fired power plants in developing countries.)
“Japan has undertaken to finance coal-fired power plants in the countries that the World Bank won’t. Construction of Ultra-supercritical coal-fired power plants around the world would help bring people out of poverty, while improving air quality where older, less efficient coal-fired power plants have been in use. It would put people ahead of climate change hysteria.”

Don B
September 27, 2015 7:42 am

“The leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (known as the BRICS) recently met to launch a newly-created international fund called the New Development Bank (NDB). The BRICS represent roughly a fifth of the world economy and 40 percent of the global population. The NDB will have an initial capital pool of $50 billion and maintain a currency reserve of $100 billion. The Shanghai-based NDB aims to challenge the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the two dominant Western international institutions.
“The first deviation that the NDB will take from the IMF and World Bank is funding coal-fired power plants. In June 2013, President Obama announced the Treasury Department will no longer approve financing for traditional coal plants abroad, except in “very rare” cases. That same month, the World Bank agreed to a new energy strategy that limited the financing of coal-fired power plants to “rare circumstances” in order to address the impact of climate change. Following this policy shift, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands also stopped funding.”

Reply to  Don B
September 27, 2015 11:33 am

Excellent link and clip. The battle has shifted away from confirming/rejecting agw and moved on to the “how” of wealth shifting.
What the climate does is irrelevant for the next decade as the meaningful shift (follow the money) occurs in identifying where the best ROR is for higher echelon investors.
Check but not mate.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights