#COP21 – the ritual, Josh edition

From The GWPF:

Each year since 1995, the nations of the world have gathered to try to reach a global agreement on carbon dioxide emissions. These ‘Conferences of the Parties’, or COPs as they are usually termed, involve all of the members of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and take place towards the end of the year. This year will see the twenty-first COP take place in Paris. Over the years the COPs have developed a style all of their own. Indeed, some observers have even gone as far as to suggest that each year sees less and less by way of meaningful activity, and more and more liturgy and ritual. They may just have a point.


Read the entire Josh illustrated essay here (PDF)

95 thoughts on “#COP21 – the ritual, Josh edition

  1. Can you imagine what that money could have done in reducing poverty. 20 years of Billions? Millions? of dollars. Damn, we could have bought a space ship and nudged the planet into a different orbit for that amount of money. Or taken all the people out of the slums and built them new cities with clean running water. Or built new electy producing plants in Africa, South America, Indonesia…everywhere. Instead our elected leaders spent it on partying??? And it was our money. I need to know. What is the price tag for one of these parties?

    • I don’t need to imagine; we have the recent example of the “Great Society” program under President Johnson. Spent billions and wiped poverty out completely, well almost completely. Just a little bit left over for succeeding presidents to spend more billions on. But poverty really is all gone, well almost. Except when it’s time to authorize a new and greater round of spending on poverty programs, then poverty is absolutely everywhere.
      Actually, according to this report, in the 50 years since the Great Society was launched we’ve spent 22 trillion (2.2 X 10E13) in constant 2012 dollars, and made very little progress.
      In 1964 the official US poverty rate was about 19%; in 2012 it was 15%. In the years in between it has dipped as low as 11%.
      But amazingly, in the 15 years or so before Johnson declared War on Poverty, the official poverty rate dropped steadily from a high of 34%. The dropping trend was fairly constant from 1949 to 1970, since then it has basically fluctuated between 11% and 15%. The majority of poverty reduction occurred before the government got involved.
      So if the history of the US government poverty program is any indication, the environment has a much better chance if we don’t spend any money to save it.

      If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert,
      in 5 years there’d be a shortage of sand.
      Milton Friedman

      • Ah, contraire, Alan–put the federal government in charge and in 5 years they’ll come up with enough sand to cover every continent. Tax something and you get less of it; subsidize something and you get way too much of it.

      • Cheese, meat, grain, fruit, vegetable mountains and milk lakes in the EU. Mostly gone to waste with millions starving.

      • In the US we define poverty as being a fixed percentage of the median income. By that definition, we will always have a percentage of people living in poverty, even if the poorest person in the country was living in a mansion.

      • “even if the poorest person in the country was living in a mansion.”
        except if everybody got the an identical mansion!

    • “Eve
      November 30, 2015 at 10:01 am
      …leaders spent it on partying???”
      Yup! I knew someone in Ethiopia who worked for a UN organisation (Or a charity I can’t recall exactly now but the point is it is funded by grants from the UN or donations from ordinary people like you and I) which spent almost all of the money it received on “parties”. Whiskey, food, trips, cars, bribes etc etc. You name it, it was spent on it and NOT on what the money was supposed to be spent on. She protested and resigned in disgust. An example of poor people in rich countries giving money to rich people in poor countries. I understand the practice still continues today.

      • I know someone who worked for the UN in Africa, to help with human right violation issues.
        He is afraid of the responsibilities associated with choosing an enterprise to fix plumbing. He is afraid of children at school. He is afraid of … everything.

  2. The “global warming” hysteria’s root cause is utterly racist. We, heirs to the colonizing oppressors are afraid to loose our white privilege generally linked to the moderate climate of the “white man’s geographical belt”.
    We have therefore to decidedly repudiate this sinful and noninclusive alarmism. If the mature beauty and profound wisdom of the proud cultures of the black man could develop so breathtakingly on higher temperatures, we, the whites should face the same challenge – it will be a just and fair competition.
    The ludicrous offspring of this racist opprobrium, the “climate change” hoax is, on the other hand, an overtly reactionary thought. As it is a common knowledge that climate always changed and will always change, we have to seek for a ‘reason’ behind this ideology. And we found it: the “climate change” hoax instrumentalizes the reactionary – and in general the white man’s – fear of social change, because it will inevitably bring the demise of the perpetrator’s oppressive culture and society…..but the wheel of history cannot be reverted.

    • If you really want racist environmentalism, talk about lion conservation. The movements to ban hunting of lions has huge negative impacts on Africans (loss of income from lion hunts, increased crime from poachers, increased predation of livestock, and increased predation on humans) and is entirely pushed by white Americans and Europeans.

  3. United Nations is out of line with its charter:
    By its charter United Nations were supposed to:
    – To maintain international peace and security…
    – To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples …
    – To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character,
    – To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
    These are the priorities of the worlds population (Among those able to vote, aware of the query and inclined to vote) Action taken on climate change was dead last:
    United Nations IPCC has itself become an international problem of an economical and cultural character.
    The economic problem is evident from the vast amount of resources which are allocated to the climate scare – and thereby restricting available resources for relief of human suffering by known and real causes – within the charters of United Nations – in line with the priorities of the people.
    The cultural problem is evident from the unscientific principles governing IPCC. IPCC is an undemocratic body based on unscientific principles. A body on which they have imposed a mission (§1), a principle to strive for consensus (§10) And a principle which in effect will diminish dissenting views: Principles governing the work by IPCC
    United Nations has created a body, which by its unique position, by the resources allocated to it and by being uncontested by political counterparts must be regarded as an authoritative body. Hence – on might start to wonder if United Nations is also out of line with human rights.
    The human rights states that:
    “Article 21
    3 The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections”
    Who voted?

  4. I liked the idea that the COP resolutions were written on (what I guess were) the back of a stamp. A Penny Red? Priceless!

  5. If you look at the agenda for COP21 it’s inconceivable that there will be any meaningful activity. The entire conference is geared toward the presentation of reports, and for making statements. Reports should have been read and commented on long before the conference, along with any substantive position statements. I think so many of these “world leaders,” (sic), don’t even know how to sit down and hammer out an agreement, all they know is “posturing.”

      • Are you saying that these extremes are more worser? Or that they are more extremer? (sarc)
        Now and again, I make the mistake of looking at alarmist websites and I come across these “it’s even worse than bad” sort of claims.
        Surely they will eventually run out of combinations of superlatives and comparatives. Language is being stretched to breaking point.
        And, yes, absolutely, the world faces far more pressing problems.
        And also many great problems that can be easily solved through relatively small investment of money.
        Compared to the money that is being wasted on a non-solution to a non existent problem.

      • Right now the world is $710 Trillion in debt, with a global GDP of roughly $70 Trillion. What’s the problem with that?

      • “Surely they will eventually run out of combinations of superlatives and comparatives.”
        It’s the dreaded superlative peek.
        Worse than we thought. Language is doomed.

    • Given that the extreme events stated are not only hypothetical, but demonstratably wrong by current experience, I think we are fine. Stating both that there will be more extreme precipitation and more drought is internally contradictory, and the predictions of the IPCC models only support the first (with there being more water). There is no evidence of increased storms from current warming (tornados are flat, typhoons are flat, and hurricanes are actually down), so predictions of more extreme storms are not supportable be evidence.
      As for the last, cold weather kills an order of magnitude more than hot weather. Hot weather can be adjusted for by drinking water and sitting in shade during the peak of the day. Cold weather can only be fought with coats and fuel.

    • According to the satellites, there is no increase in ‘average temperature’.
      Nor is there any indication historically, that temperature change is not completely normal.
      People suffer from temperature changes towards colder cycles; even a 2-3 degree drop is unpleasant.
      Historically a period where the temperature increases by 2-3 degrees is called an optimum. People flourish.

      • Well AtheoK, I’m willing to grant the fools the 0.5 degree C RSS warming since 1979, which they tout.
        Ermagerd, let’s run around helplessly in terror (surely “in error”. ed).
        0.5 degree C, if accepted, is
        1. not outside of typical climate variability.
        2. not sufficient to allow me to remove one pair of thermal leggings.
        I was really hoping for a “one layer of clothing scale event”!!!
        not in my lifetime though.
        Not for 300years at the current rate.
        Imagine my disappointment!! 🙂

    • Indefatiguable — Except that temperature records in my part of North America (49N to 82N) shows the shift in your bell curve going the opposite direction. It still results in a “higher average” temperature but not due to higher high temps but LESS COLD temps. Your graphic doesn’t work.
      One “cherry picked” example (but one of many, many):
      Aw heck – one more – 125 years from a single location 49.5N:

      • Hi Wayne Delbeke, Apologies due. I should have made it quite clear that my interest in this replication of this now quite familiar shifted bell-curve, was purely based on the appearance of the grotesque assembly of words, “more worse extremes”.
        As for the flaws in the graph itself – these are numerous and probably justify an entirely separate topic of discussion.
        I’m pretty sure that such discussions have cropped up several times, just in the last year of my presence here on WUWT.
        And even if the assumptions upon which the graph were based were shown to be wholly valid – it is almost always used with the intention of deceiving the unwary!!

  6. Rather than simply mocking them, I’d rather see some reporting on what is happening. With all the pressure from Obama to save the world (in his name), something substantial may well arise out of this particular COP. I doubt it, but Obama has talked an awful lot of people into an awful lot of things, most of which have come out really badly.
    My belief is that the selfishness of nations will result in an agreement so riddled with loop holes that no one is committed to anything, except those countries with both wealth and deluded leaders. I live in one of those and would sure like to hear from people who are attending or perhaps covering the event as to what is happening so far.

    • This is why you need to keep combined tax rates at 50-60 percent and blunt any effort at reforms to reduce it. It takes a mountain of money to play these policy games while letting other priorities likes infrastructure drift off to delayed crisis. It’s really quite orderly and rational in their methods of misdirection while keeping the money flowing.

  7. This isn’t a ritual, it’s a soap opera. Now in its exciting 21st season, with all brand-new characters and plots recycled from the last 20 seasons.
    Loved it.

  8. Meanwhile these people are picking out their beach side villas in difference to their rising oceans and hurricane meme. They will laugh about their exploits later and fall back on the usual excuse of “who could have known.”

  9. Anyone who thought that the new leader of the opposition in the UK, Jeremy Corbyn was in the least bit sympathetic the the views of his brother Piers.

    Only 3 MPs in the British Parliament voted against the climate change act, Jezza wasn’t one of them.

  10. I am upset. All this hysteria is making my young daughter really afraid. Catastrophic stories on the French TV (on the news tonight: in 2100 Paris is almost like Mad Max, water and meat are becoming rare, and so on), at school as well (CO2 is toxic she was said, so she is wondering what happens when she breathes…)…

    • my daughter said – I might still be alive in 2100; I replied – so you will be around to tell them all they got it wrong!! Just teach kids to not take everything teachers say as gospel, it will serve them well in life……..

    • Every time she breathes out – an entire species of cute cuddly fluffy animals is lost forever.
      Because – science.

    • I gave a lecture to grad students at the China Agriculture University this afternoon on the subject of air pollution and the emissions from coal fired combustors. It included several references to the BBC’s hatchet job on the air quality in Beijing. No doubt all of you will be inundated by climate porn with Beijing as the central feature because there is a smog alert on right now. If BBC correspondents could find their way out of town they would find that places further north are 5 times worse.
      The BBC has it that the PM2.5 pollution in Beijing is caused by CO2 emissions. I repeated that and we all looked outside at the high humidity, fog-filled campus to wonder how they were educated, these climate commentators. The subject of the lecture was how the air pollution problem is an engineering problem. BC, OC, PM2.5, POM, PAH, VOC, 16-PAH, 7-PAH and so on are all combustible fractions of emissions that went walkabout. Complete combustion produces water vapour, plant food and SO2. SO2 is something we can deal with.
      The BBC’s plan to deal with air pollution is for people to fold up their factories and unfold their solar cookers. Thanks, BBC in London, you first.
      It has been really cold, unusually cold, the past week and believe it or not, people refuse to sit in their houses and freeze to death. The COP can decide and tax as they like; China is going to build 60 nuclear power stations. Until then they are going to keep warm with coal and sell expensive windmills to the Europeans. They say it is a deal that works for them.

  11. Some people who attended the first dozen or so COPs are now retired without having accomplished a thing…
    …but man-oh-man! they sure enjoyed one heck of a ride on the party train and now have a posh retirement.
    (After pondering that, anyone besides me feel like weeping?)

    • Is the Brit Cameron going to say “Yes, but we must do it in an economically responsible manner”?
      I doubt it, the G&Ts will be flowing and everyone will wax loquacious about SAVING THE PLANET FOR THE CHILDREN!

  12. If the reduction of greenhouse gasses works, won’t the World’s climates change back to the pre-industrial nirvana that the alarmocracy think is the right climate(s)?
    Will the demonstrations against climate change continue, giving Josh a continued source of fodder?

  13. http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/11/30/world/europe/ap-climate-countdown-the-latest.html
    “President Barack Obama is capping a day of high-profile climate talks with a quiet dinner at a chic Paris eatery.
    French President Francois Hollande is hosting Obama, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and other top advisers at L’Ambroisie — one of the finest gastronomic restaurants in the trendy Marais.
    L’Ambroisie’s menu is fit for a king — or an occasional president.
    According to its website, delicacies like corolla of scallop meet white Alba truffle, and the flavors of tasty lobster fricassee are set off with Saint-Germain mashed peas.
    It’s not aimed at diners with shallow pockets — dinner can cost up to 360 euros ($380).
    The White House dubbed the outing a “working dinner.” The group of 12 sat in a cozy, lavishly decorated private room.
    Obama told reporters snapping photographs to be careful in the luxurious surroundings, “Don’t break the chandelier. You can’t afford it.”
    Bunch of hypocrites.

    • And here I thought *most* restaurants were gastronomic. Are there restaurants where you can get an order of tires for your car, or shine for your shoes? /sarc.

    • Bunch of aristocrats if you ask me. Let them eat pea soup while we’ll eat Soupe Saint. Germain!

  14. Here’s some *GOOD NEWS* for a change:
    From Maurice Strong’s Wiki bio:
    In 2005, during investigations into the U.N.’s Oil-for-Food Programme, evidence procured by federal investigators and the U.N.-authorized inquiry of Paul Volcker showed that in 1997, while working for Annan, Strong had endorsed a check for $988,885, made out to “Mr. M. Strong,” issued by a Jordanian bank. It was reported that the check was hand-delivered to Mr. Strong by a South Korean businessman, Tongsun Park, who in 2006 was convicted in New York federal court of conspiring to bribe U.N. officials to rig Oil-for-Food in favor of Saddam Hussein. Mr. Strong was never accused of any wrongdoing.[11] During the inquiry, Strong stepped down from his U.N. post, stating that he would “sideline himself until the cloud was removed”.
    And the erstwhile V.I. Lenin advises the Paris delegations from the grave:
    Deepen, exacerbate existing problems, crises, differences, and if they don’t exist, create them or convincingly claim that they exist, and then deepen, exacerbate them…and profit the most from them in any way you can, and, in the resulting chaos, blame our enemies for the whole thing.
    Makes you wonder about some of the folks trolling this site, doesn’t it?

  15. Those of you you haven’t clicked on the “here” for the entire PDF version, do so.
    “The more climate COP changes, the more it stays the same.”

  16. We had a David Suzuki climate event/demonstration here in Ottawa yesterday. Some of the placards carried were ridiculous. The best one was “STOP CLIMATE CHANGE!”. I’m not sure how much comprehension of reality some of these people have.

  17. Oh the horror of climate change !!
    For Buffalo, the current average temperature range in January is 18°F to 31°F and could go as high as 21° to 34°F … all that melting snow !!
    And in summer, the current average temperature range in late July of 62°F to 80°F will soar to unbelievable heights of 65°F to 83°F … oh, the cruelty !! And [gasp] is it possible that we might actually see a triple digit high in the summer? The highest recorded temp for Buffalo so far is 98°F … how will we ever survive a high of 101°F ??
    Is it any wonder that, among real people with their feet planted firmly on the ground, they view their politicians with such contemptuous disdain? (to put it kindly)

  18. not so funny:
    30 Nov: ReutersCarbonPulse: Ben Garside: UPDATE – Governments, companies launch coalition to strengthen global carbon pricing
    Nineteen governments and nearly 90 businesses on Monday launched a global body intended to strengthen and expand carbon pricing across the globe. Although it was first announced in October, the Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition was officially launched on the opening day of UN climate negotiation in Paris by heads of state including France’s Francois Hollande, Germany’s Angela Merkel, Canada’s Justin Trudeau, Mexico’s Enrique Pena Nieto, and Chile’s Michelle Bachelet. The partnership’s members include governments such as Mexico, Germany, France, Chile and California, nearly 90 global businesses and NGOs including WWF and EDF.
    *** “The goal is to gradually set a sufficiently high carbon price around the world to encourage better behaviour … Let’s be very clear, the idea is not to impose it on everyone. It’s not one size fits all. But what we want to promote is the setting or development of instruments that will little-by-little modify the behaviour of the economic players,” said Hollande.
    “This is not exactly in the mandate of the UN framework, but it’s also not an issue that we can do away with … This whole trend towards carbon pricing could not be avoided and must be co-ordinated,” he added, pointing out that this was necessary to alleviate competitiveness concerns for companies in global markets. “By 2020, most of the G20 might be able to have carbon pricing in place … It’s very important to build up our coalition, as there will be nothing worse than having a huge discrepancy between carbon pricing here and there,” Hollande said. German Chancellor Angela Merkel agreed, adding: “Right now, locally at least we are in a testing phase, but we need to adopt a global approach.” Ethiopia also joined the coalition, helping to represent Africa…
    ***The coalition is due to meet next April in Washington DC at the World Bank’s spring meeting.

  19. 30 Nov: ReutersCarbonPulse: Stian Reklev: New $500m World Bank facility to explore policy-based carbon market
    Germany, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland on Monday became the first funders of a new World Bank facility seeking to carve out a new international carbon market by funding emission-reduction policies in developing nations. The Transformative Carbon Asset Facility (TCAF) will establish the world’s first programmatic carbon market and according to World Bank President Jim Yong Kim will garner some $2 billion in lending from the bank. “We want to help developing countries find a credible pathway toward low carbon development. This initiative is one such way because it will help countries create and pay for the next generation of carbon credits,” he said. The new facility will begin operations when funders have pledged $250 million. It is uncertain how much the first four funders have invested, although Norway’s initial contribution will be $25 million. The Bank said in a statement it expects the $250 million limit will be passed in time for TCAF to start in 2016…
    It will pay for carbon assets with high environmental integrity and a strong likelihood to comply with future international rules, and will share its learning with the international community,” a World Bank statement said…
    “We expect to achieve significant impact on the ground through the facility and ensure the sustainability of reducing emissions even beyond the facility’s initial support, for example, through carbon pricing instruments like emissions trading systems and carbon taxes, or stronger low-carbon policy standards and their enforcement,” she (Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg) said…

  20. 30 Nov: ClimateChangeNews: Avik Roy: No renewables without coal, says Indian energy minister
    Fossil fuel is imperative to meet India’s development needs, Piyush Goyal insists at the opening of UN COP21 climate talks in Paris
    Other countries must accept India will burn coal to bring electricity to millions without, energy minister Piyush Goyal2 said as UN talks opened in Paris.
    At a press briefing, he told journalists solar energy alone would not meet India’s development needs.
    “The developed countries also need to understand that India needs a base load for its ambitious power plans and economic growth plans. In any case, if we don’t have a base load we don’t have any renewable energy. It is integral element of India’s development imperative. We don’t have gas so obviously the base load will have to be coal to provide 24/7 power”, said Goyal…
    Although no country has demanded that India reduce its greenhouse gases, there have been repeated suggestions that, just as the developed countries are required to act, emerging economies like India too curb their emissions. Indian negotiators said they will ensure no such proposal is included in the agreement…
    More than 60 per cent of India’s electricity is generated by burning coal. Developed countries have been urging India to leapfrog to cleaner sources…
    “We are not at all apologetic of using coal. The US and the West have developed on the back of cheap energy — coal — for the last 150 years ramping up their coal consumption from 0.5 metric tonnes in 1870 to nearly 4.5 metric tonnes per capita few years ago”, said Goyal, adding, “We are not responsible for the problem. Our share is only 2 percent in the global greenhouse gas emission. It is a problem accumulated over last 150 years.”…
    A key negotiator added that from 1990 till about 2012 only a few European nations reduced their coal consumption. China, in a deal with the US last year, promised to peak its emissions by 2030, indicating a continued reliance on coal over the next decade…

  21. This is perfect, Josh. My feeling is this should be sent to every politician on the planet. Makes one realize just how thin it is all wearing. No wonder regular people on the street are getting so bored with it all, they are picking up subliminally what you are pointing out so brilliantly.
    Please, people, spread this around.

  22. My greatest fear is they destroy the West, limit emissions, and of course the world doesnt get any warmer, and claim it was their actions that saved the planet…
    Another 1000 year Dark Age looms, I fear, until the Stupid Gene is totally eradicated.

  23. JOSH many years ago working in the development department of a company I was given a copy of…………
    The 6 Phases of a Project
    1. Enthusiasm
    2. Disillusionment
    3. Panic
    4. Search for the Guilty
    5. Punishment of the Innocent
    6. Praise and Honours for for the Non Participants
    I haven’t yet worked out which phase we have reached but I have a sinking feeling many are still in phase 1. Although there are some who seem to manage all at once.
    James Bull

  24. On the news this morning, they introduced the COP21 as the world’s last chance to avoid catastrophic global warming.
    The Kool Aid is strong in that one.

  25. In one sense, I wish that the alarmists were right. Where I live, some warming is quite welcome and the 90’s rise in temps were welcome, where I live. Now, I am preparing for cold while the chicken littles prepare for heat. (I wish). More CO2 (well, it might help – a little bit but mainly because the plant life loves it!)

Comments are closed.