Again, why are we there? John Kerry admits at #COP21 that US emissions cuts accomplish nothing for climate

This is from his Dec. 9, 2015 address to Paris COP-21 conference. Kerry also emphasizes that even if all industrial country emissions were zeroed out, it would mean nothing for the climate.

What further proof does one need that #COP21 has no basis is science, and is nothing more than pandering to a bunch of sqalling eco-organizations and poorer countries looking for a handout. What a complete circus.

Here are Kerry’s exact words:

… The fact is that even if every American citizen biked to work, carpooled to school, used only solar panels to power their homes, if we each planted a dozen trees, if we somehow eliminated all of our domestic greenhouse gas emissions, guess what – that still wouldn’t be enough to offset the carbon pollution coming from the rest of the world.

If all the industrial nations went down to zero emissions –- remember what I just said, all the industrial emissions went down to zero emissions -– it wouldn’t be enough, not when more than 65% of the world’s carbon pollution comes from the developing world.

 

h/t to Steve Milloy of junkscience.com

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Resourceguy

It’s the thought and appearances that count, regardless of the cost to taxpayers. That is the prime directive of these media and perception masters and their advocacy groupies.

Janice Moore

Lol, Rahm Emmanuel was right… “{The Obama administration are a bunch of} #@%! idiots {or morons}.”
NOT there when they should be (post-Charlie Hebdo march in Paris).
THERE when it is pointless…
(except for the publicity, as you wisely point out Resource Guy, but still, cost-benefit makes the excessive magnitude of their delegation’s presence ridiculous).

Janice Moore

Cue Auld James Taylor (that was sad — using such a fine artist in such a BIZARRELY RIDICULOUS way)

Walt D.

Janice: Their is another group between idiots and morons – imbeciles. Very appropriate for Paris since it is a French word.

Walt D.

Should have been There instead of Their, otherwise you will need to include me in one of the categories!

Janice Moore

“Imbeciles,” indeed, Walt D. (and typos are NOT an indication of being one!! I SHOULD NO!),
(however… Rahm E. used one of the above two epithets (couldn’t remember which)).
******************************
Just listened to a bit of the James Taylor solo. Hard to laugh and cry at the same time…. but, you can.

localherog2

The Charlie Hebdo “shooting” was a drill and media circus – nothing more. All you have to see is the fake head-shot from the “terrorist” at the police officer on the sidewalk. If that had been a real round from an AK his head would have exploded with a fountain of blood and viscera. The whole thing was a hoax. Nobody died and nobody was injured.

Michael Jankowski

Localherog2 take your false flag bullshit somewhere else.

JohnKnight

Michael want a cracker? ; )

Janice Moore

Tweedle-lherog2 and Tweedle-Johnknight — never far apart — from each other. Miles from the truth.

JohnKnight

You either present a coherent explanation as to why you believe it is impossible that such an event could be staged, Janice, or I conclude you too are simply parroting what you’ve been indoctrinated to believe.

Mike the Morlock

JohnKnight December 10, 2015 at 4:05 pm
You either present a coherent explanation as to why you believe it is impossible that such an event could be staged, Janice, or I conclude you too are simply parroting what you’ve been indoctrinated to believe.
No Janice does not have to prove anything. First have you ever been to France let alone Paris?
next this is O/T and I soon expect the Mod to make your and my comments go away. I just wanted to say you are using a cheap brand of tin foil on your head.
michael

Janice Moore

Thanks, Michael (not a) #(:)).
@ JnKngt (and lohog, who is, no doubt not far away… heh, heh): Sorry. You are the ones making the assertion against the settled weight of opinion on that issue. Thus, the burden of proof remains firmly on you. Your wild verbal flailings above have not yet even made a prima facie case for your argument (much less shifted the burden of proof to those you challenge).
And, as my WUWT pal, M.D., has said, this topic is so off-topic that I ought not answer you further, here. You’ll have to go to a different neck of the blog woods to fight that fight. Off you go, my crazy (was about to write “my dear,” but it just doesn’t fit) man, and HAVE FUN!

JohnKnight

Mike the Morlock,
“No Janice does not have to prove anything.”
She does if she expects me to conclude something other than she’s parroting what she’s been indoctrinated to believe.
” First have you ever been to France let alone Paris?”
????????
I wasn’t even commenting on the alleged attack itself, I was commenting on the “knee jerk” sort of reactions I saw here. I simply have no real faith in the powers that be anymore. Staging a fake attack would not even be a crime, so what’s the big deal?

JohnKnight

Janice,
“Thus, the burden of proof remains firmly on you”
To prove what? That I think some people are over-reacting to a potential that lies well withing the realm of possibility? Please explain lest I conclude something even more devastating ; )

JohnKnight

localherog2,
Janice declared we’re never far apart, but I don’t recall ever seeing you before . . Have you been staking me at home? ; )

Pat Paulsen

It was a poor set up, musically. They had mic problems and Taylor had real difficulties. Very amateurish set up, IMO. I cringed during the performance for more than just the politcally amateurish display.

DD More

Resource, don’t forget it’s the Trigger.
U.S. House Science Committee – July 9, 2015
CHAIRMAN LAMAR SMITH: “On the Clean Power Plan, former Obama Administration Assistant Secretary Charles McConnell said at best it will reduce global temperature by only one one-hundredth of a degree Celsius. At the same time it’s going to increase the cost of electricity. That’s going to hurt the lowest income Americans the most. How do you justify such an expensive, burdensome, onerous rule that’s really not going to do much good and isn’t this all pain and no gain.
ADMINISTRATOR GINA MCCARTHY: “No sir, I don’t agree with you. If you look at the RIA we did, the Regulatory Impact Analysis you would see it’s enormously beneficial.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: “Do you consider one one-hundredth of a degree to be enormously beneficial?”
ADMINISTRATOR MCCARTHY: “The value of this rule is not measured in that way. It is measured in showing strong domestic action which can actually trigger global action to address what’s a necessary action to protect…”
CHAIRMAN SMITH: “Do you disagree with my one one-hundredth of a degree figure? Do you disagree with the one one-hundredth of a degree?”
ADMINISTRATOR MCCARTHY: “I’m not disagreeing that this action in and of itself will not make all the difference we need to address climate action, but what I’m saying is that if we don’t take action domestically we will never get started and we’ll never…”
Read more: http://www.climatedepot.com/2015/07/15/epa-chief-admits-obama-regs-have-no-measurable-climate-impact-one-one-hundredth-of-a-degree-epa-chief-mccarthy-defends-regs-as-enormously-beneficial-symbolic-impact/#ixzz3jxPsOENF

JohnKnight

(Mr. Smith) ~ “That’s going to hurt the lowest income Americans the most. How do you justify such an expensive, burdensome, onerous rule that’s really not going to do much good …”

(Ms. McCarthy) ~ ” It is measured in showing strong domestic action which can actually trigger global action…”
Do the math, so to speak . .

Ignoramus Kerry had this to say too.
“Try and picture a very thin layer of gases – a quarter-inch, half an inch, somewhere in that vicinity – that’s how thick it is. It’s in our atmosphere. It’s way up there at the edge of the atmosphere. And for millions of years – literally millions of years – we know that layer has acted like a thermal blanket for the planet – trapping the sun’s heat and warming the surface of the Earth to the ideal, life-sustaining temperature. Average temperature of the Earth has been about 57 degrees Fahrenheit, which keeps life going. Life itself on Earth exists because of the so-called greenhouse effect. But in modern times, as human beings have emitted gases into the air that come from all the things we do, that blanket has grown thicker and it traps more and more heat beneath it, raising the temperature of the planet. It’s called the greenhouse effect because it works exactly like a greenhouse in which you grow a lot of the fruit that you eat here.
This is what’s causing climate change. It’s a huge irony that the very same layer of gases that has made life possible on Earth from the beginning now makes possible the greatest threat that the planet has ever seen”
http://m.state.gov/md221704.htm
I’m surprised they haven’t tried to bury it.

Janice Moore

Oh man, AB, lolololol — that is SO FUNNY.
They TRIED to bury it, no doubt, but Kerry wouldn’t let them:
Staff: We HAVE to ERASE this.
Kerry: Why?
S: It plays right into Steyn’s “cartoon slogan science” assertion.
K: Cartoon?
S: YES. WHAT — YOU — SAID — IS — SO — WRONG — IT — IS — LAUGHABLE.
K: Oh, I don’t know, S. I don’t find it funny at all. Leave it in.
S: !??!!!
K: Took me 3 hours to memorize that. Worked on fine-tuning my language all week. No, no S, you are not going to erase that one. That one is one for posterity. It perfectly illustrates “me.”

lee

“because it works exactly like a greenhouse in which you grow a lot of the fruit that you eat here”
Appears to grow nuts as well.

Gary Pearse

Someone trying to explain the behavior of CO2 to this moron used the thin layer of pure CO2 that you would get if you gathered it all together into one band in the atmosphere to imagine the upwelling LWIR being captured. This is probably how Al Gore got his milllions of degrees celsius at the centre of the earth through a similar misunderstanding of what he was being told. How can these guys fake such passion for the science when they are clueless of these things?

JohnKnight

Gary Pearse,
“How can these guys fake such passion for the science when they are clueless of these things?”
Same way they fake passion about anything else.

Sceptical Sam

Fruit cakes too.

katherine009

One word you never hear from these guys: ADAPTATION. That’s why I don’t believe them.

Janice Moore

+1

Auto

Katherine
I’m more generous than Janice.
. . . I give that plus whole truck loads.
Adaptation is what has powered evolution.
It works.
Auto

Janice Moore

Dear Auto,
You are a generous person. I write to assure Katherine that I very much liked her comment — I decided awhile back to only give +1’s (unless it is Anthony recently refusing to dignify Carruuughthers’ vile remark with a response — that was “+1,000”). Something about the anti-“popularity” streak in me (I refuse to participate in Facebook, as useful for communication as that platform is, for just that reason: it reeks (not YOU, Auto, FACEBOOK) of high school pettiness with it’s “friends” and “likes” — and people really do get depressed by it when their natural human curiosity leads them to look around and start making comparisons… .
Sometimes, I even feel bad about giving out any +1’s. There are so many great comments on WUWT that should also be “plussed” but are not… .
Maybe, I’ll have to change my grading system… .
Good for you, Auto!
Janice
P.S. Glad to see that you are safely back(I hope?) from Paris. Did you follow my long-sleeved shirt fashion advice?
#(:))

Janice Moore

P. P. S. And! Lol, Auto — I just scrolled down to your humor about long-sleeved shirt sleeves at 3pm today — I had not read that when I wrote the above. You spoke of your trip to Paris (just days after the terrorist attack) and taking short-sleeved shirts and I advised long-sleeve to better impress the ladies (much more sophisticated and impressive (unless at the beach or something)).

dccowboy

And India agrees to reduce their ‘carbon pollution’ if the industrialized world gives them a mere $2.5 Trillion between now and 2030, just $166 Billion/yr. Of course, I’m pretty sure that China will want more than that.

Bernie

That’s only about $140 per year per capita for India. Extend that to 3 billion people total, and you’d only need $420 billion per year. If we take that from the top 1% income earners from the rest of the world, it’s only $14,000 per year. They should’t mind, and so what if they do? A kind and benevolent world government can accomplish so much!

dp

As a nation they are clearly not adherents to the “Snooze you lose” model. While they squandered their time on earth the rest of the world jumped on the modernity model of a classless industrial society. They are owed nothing, and are where they are because that is what they chose. Never mind that they have benefited from shared knowledge, goods, and medicines from that part of the world that developed it.

John Law

A small price to pay to reduce the temperature rise by 0.17 degrees!

Auto

John
That is C – so big hundredths of degrees – not small F-type hundredths?
Isn’t it?
Or is it bigged up and enbiggified to be 17 little itty-bitty F-type hundredths?
Or – at that level that you couldn’t tell – bare skin on atmosphere – which if either possibility were you playing guinea-pig to??
By any chance?
Auto, seriously concerned at the temperature difference between my wrist [in my shirt cuffs] and my knuckles [not between my shirt cuffs (NOR DRAGGING ON THE GROUND! Honest!)]
Auto

AntonyIndia

China emits 500% more CO2 than India so they are in totally different brackets: as useless as comparing the US with Brazil.
India is asked at COP21 not to develop cheap coal power as China, the US, the UK, Germany, Japan etc.did. If these old coal powers want this, let them pay the price difference, that is “climate justice”.

And yet my liberal sister who’s worked in the climate industry for over a decade and is attending the conference called his remarks “inspiring!”
And I threw up in my mouth a little even reading her Facebook post about it, much less typing it out. That man is in no way inspiring on any subject.

Janice Moore

Ugh. (shudder) That was hard, pukedude (well, it was how you felt!), er I mean pkudude99. My advice: Don’t read anymore of her brainwashed junk. Sickening, indeed. So sorry that it is a sister that is that way. Hard to take. Hey! Maybe you (or she) were actually adopted!
“Inspiring!” No doubt it is — her company is probably all set to sell windmill parts or solar parts or whatever enviroprofiteer – “sustainability” junk they peddle to “the developing world” (who will pay for it with funny money, but, by the time the currently industrialized world files for bankruptcy, her company will do quite well…).
Follow —> the —> money.

She usually just posts pretty pictures of all the places she goes all over the world, so it’s usually not too bad. Even with the conference, most of the pictures have just been the sights of Paris. But that one post…. *shudder*
What’s weird is that back in the 80’s she was as big a conservative/Reagan supporter as you’ve ever seen. But then she went to a liberal university studying Political Science and the brainwashing took. :'(

Janice Moore

Bummer. Well, she can no longer think straight, but, she has ONE wonderful thing going for her: a generous-spirited, loyal, brother. If her enviroprofiteer-earned assets were all to disappear tomorrow, she would yet be a wealthy woman.

Walt D.

To paraphase the great bard fro Richard III.
A horse’s ass, a horse’s ass, a kingdom for a horse’s ass.
Nay?
Or should that be neigh?

Resourceguy

Does she yearn to live in Denmark also? It’s the Bernie appeal for utopianism.

sailboarder

Why did it take so long to get honesty? Is the President unable to say the same thing? Inquiring minds wish to know.

MarloweJ

No when Kerry says “carbon polution” he is still being dishonest.

MarloweJ

typo sorry

CheshireRed

‘Carbon’ pollution is an oxymoron – it’s anything but a pollutant. That aside the meat of Kerry’s words – that a zero-carbon developed world would NOT impact the global issue in any meaningful way really does reveal what weapons-grade bo!!ocks the entire scam has become.

csanborn

Since the libs cowtow to anyone that is offended (oh my we mustn’t offend anyone), we should need only say we’re offended at carbon being called a pollutant, and they’ll stop this nonsense, right? Um, NO. Apparently Christians, AGW skeptics, and periodic chart elements are open game.

Janice Moore

Jews are, too, but they are now usually called: “neo-cons” or “Zionists” or “rich bankers.”

Gunga Din

Establish the “justification” for action now. Zero in on the individuals later.

kamikazedave

Why are we there? Because it gives progressives, envirowackos, ecoloons, and wild-eyed one worlders that warm, fuzzy feeling. That’s what it’s all about, man!

StarkNakedTruth

…and they get to dine on French cuisine and drink luscious French wine. Oooo la la!

Janice Moore

Paid for by: Joe the truck driver and Maria the teacher and Zach the bike repair man, et. al., who would have loved to have kept a few hundred of their taxed-away earnings to buy a ticket to go see dad this year… .
(Yes, I realize that the national debt of the U.S. is what, ultimately, the taxpayers’ taxes are funding at the moment, but, the cash flow of their tax revenue keeps the U.S.A. a “going concern,” making the wasteful trip to Paris possible.)

Latitude

well…just state the obvious

FJ Shepherd

Is Kerry working up to the suggestion of volunteering a prominent climate alarmist as a blood sacrifice to Gaia as a solution?

Fred Oliver

Me thinks Kerry wants to make a run for President and sees this as carrying no baggage!

Dobes

But if we sent them 100 billion dollars every year all would be perfect. I think the fat lady is warming up. There will still be a last minute face saving non-binding accord of good will and then we can all move on to thinking about the next “last best chance” to save the world at COP22 to be held on the sunny beaches of Antarctica.

Let’s see if I understand this, we are supposed to borrow a $100 Billion Dollars from China, and give the $100 Billion dollars to China so they can afford low CO2 emission power, then pay back the $100 Billion Dollars to China; then do it again each year; because some computer models that haven’t been shown to work, are predicting global warming that hasn’t happened for almost 19 years.

Michael 2

India has about three times the population of the United States; China has five to six times the population of the United States. Merely giving India and China money solves nothing; money is to buy food and necessities — but from whom? The United States?
This money doesn’t exist; nearly all money is already “IOU’s”.

RCS

Mark Steyn, in his book “The Undocumented Mark Steyn” writes a very funny account of an Earth Summit, with gory details of unbridled consumption.
It is called “Did the Earth move for you?”

Cromag

“carbon pollution”…now part of the lexicon! good grief.

ossqss

Marcus

We need a world wide ban on liberal and socialist ideas ! They will be the cause of WW3…..Hey, if they can push the limits, so can I…so there !

Marcus
“We need a world wide ban on liberal and socialist ideas !” Marcus. They were the cause of WW II

Luke

If you read the whole statement it makes sense. Every country needs to reduce emissions not just the US and not just the industrialized countries.

Luke

Every country needs to reduce emissions not just the US and not just the industrialized countries.

Why? Why should “every country” hurt their people, kill innocents, and ruin the their people’s lives …. to do NOTHING that will limit any “potential” increase nor change global average temperature by 1/100 of one degree?

tgmccoy

RACookPE1978 – By ‘every country’ they mean the
Third world Kleptocracies keep the money and the people starve/freeze .
Then you have no healthy, happy, prosperous, dark-skinned people.

Luke

Transitioning to renewables will not “hurt their people, kill innocents, and ruin their people’s lives”. California currently generates 25% of their electricity from renewables and are well on their way to reaching their goal of 33% by 2020. The last time I checked I didn’t see people’s lives being ruined nor dying as a result of this very sensible transition.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/tracking_progress/documents/renewable.pdf

Latitude

If all the industrial nations went down to zero emissions –- not 25%, not 33%

Alan Robertson

Luke said: “Transitioning to renewables will not “hurt their people, kill innocents, and ruin their people’s lives”.
Luke, you couldn’t be more wrong. The deaths of millions of people around the world have already been attributed to the transition to renewables. Just last winter, over 45,000 people died in Great Britain from causes related to fuel poverty. England is hardly an undeveloped country. What do you think happens to the world’s poorest who now have to make ends meet with the higher costs imposed by your desire for renewable fuels. Does your support for ideas which make life more tenuous for billions of people make you share the responsibility for their deaths?

Janice Moore

Re: Luke the Enviroprofiteer shill at 9:28am today:
You and your gang were told this at least twice in just the past 36 hours:
By Walt D.:


And then there is reality:
http://content.caiso.com/green/renewrpt/DailyRenewablesWatch.pdf
13%
I suppose that it close enough for climate science.

Here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12/08/ugly-arnold-schwarzeneggers-gas-chamber-fantasy-for-skeptics/#comment-2091518
And by me:

“Luke, AGW Cult Member 1st Class,
On December 8, 2015, “renewables” managed to make: 12%.
(Source: http://content.caiso.com/green/renewrpt/DailyRenewablesWatch.pdf )
Your Enemy in the AGW Battle,
Janice

Here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/12/09/germanys-impossible-and-impractical-wind-and-solar-goal/#comment-2092333
But, you’ve demonstrated repeatedly on WUWT that you are not interested in facts. Thus, this post is for those whom you would otherwise deceive.
Snake.

Edmonton Al

Luke: No one has to reduce carbon emissions. CO2 does not cause global warming. If it does, please provide me with a link to the empirical evidence that it does cause GW.
No… Not computer models or GHG Theory. I want empirical proof.
Thanks

Luke
Walt D.

Luke:
If CO2 emissions cause catastrophic global worming, then catastrophic global warming would actually be taking place. It is not and so far, we can not explain why.

Janice Moore

Empirical evidence for you, Luke, hustler for Big Sustainability:
CO2 UP. WARMING STOPPED.
AGW not only has no evidence (not one measurement) for it,
AGW is a belief IN SPITE OF the evidence,
a.k.a.,
“denial.”

empirical evidence that it does cause GW
=====================
this link shows the opposite. for the past 450 thousand years, when CO2 levels are high, temperatures fell. When CO2 levels were low, temperatures increased. For example. Look at 150k years ago. CO2 levels were low, and temperatures shot up. Then when CO2 levels increased, temperatures declined until 10k years ago, when the cycle starts to repeat.
So the only cause-effect conclusion that can be drawn regarding CO2 is that high CO2 causes temperatures to fall and low CO2 causes temperatures to rise.
http://www.brighton73.freeserve.co.uk/gw/paleo/400000yearslarge.gif

really take a look at the graph above, because the evidence is clear. Each time CO2 is low, temperatures start to rise, and rise rapidly. Each time CO2 is high, temperatures start to fall, somewhat more gradually. But still, 450 thousand years of evidence shows conclusively that LOW CO2 causes warming and HIGH CO2 causes cooling.

the problem is that we have only 50 years worth of climate data with increasing CO2. For all we know in those 50 years we may simply be measuring weather. 450 thousand years of climate data says the 50 years we have is WRONG.

Greg Cavanagh

Luke:
I went to skeptical science and read the “evidence”. Can you not find fault with any of that utter dribble?
Here is a classic example of Skeptical Science.
1. “On the surface, the moon’s temperature during daytime can reach 100°C (212°F). At night, it can plunge to minus 173°C, or -279.4°F.”
2. “Yet the Earth and the moon are virtually the same distance from the sun, so why do we experience much less heat and cold than the moon? The answer is because of our atmosphere.”
2. “The laws of physics tell us that without the atmosphere, the Earth would be approximately 33°C (59.4°F) cooler than it actually is.”
Did you notice they say the moon gets to -176C because it doesn’t have an atmosphere, but if Earth didn’t have an atmosphere, it would only be 33C colder.
And that was only one gaph, there are many more crammed into that little docy. You’ve got to read more scientific papers as they get posted, not just SKS, and you too will soon pick holes in the SKS nonsence.

Ric Haldane

Luke, WHY?????

Walt D.

Why?
There is no point doing anything until we find out why the climate models are not working and why there has been virtually no increase in temperature over the last 18 years despite massive increases in CO2 emissions from China and India.

@Luke: The proportion of California’s electricity generation that comes from renewables is less impressive when you realise how much of its electricity California gets from other states. California’s electricity prices are amongst the highest in the USA. If you don’t see people’s lives being ruined, it’s because (a) California is a warm place and doesn’t use as much electricity per capita as colder states — if you really want to see less energy used, work for a warmer world — and (b) you haven’t been looking in the right places. I used to work in CA and former colleagues have told me “don’t even think about coming back.” Despite the proportion of renewables, according to http://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA California is the second highest emitter of CO2 in the USA. The amount of jet fuel burned there is a close match in energy for hydro+other renewables (not counting biomass). If you seriously wanted to tackle CO2 emissions in California, I’m not sure that electricity would be the best place to start.
Finally, a small point of logic. Empirical evidence of global warming is not empirical evidence that human-produced CO2 is its cause.

AntonyIndia

No massive increase of CO2 emissions happened in India, only in China. Don’t fall for Green spin, astrology etc. stick to today’s facts.

Trebla

Exactly Luke. But what will happen is that SOME nations will reduce emissions, thereby shooting themselves in the foot economically, and others will benefit from that fact by NOT reducing emissions and thereby increasing their economic advantage. I can see it all playing out here in Canada. Our politicians are jumping over one another with their carbon pricing or carbon limiting schemes. Meanwhile, we produce a tiny 1 3/4% of the world’s CO2, so these restrictions have ZERO effect on global warming. They must be laughing their heads off in China, Russia and India. Meanwhile, the Earth’s atmospheric temperature has been flat-lining for nearly 20 years in spite of the massive CO2 increase that has occured in that time.

I can see it all playing out here in Canada.
=====================
Not only that, our Prime Minister just gave away 5 billion dollars to the UN, and will end up spending another billion a year bringing in refugees.
At a time when he announced during his election campaign that he would stimulate the Canadian economy with infrastructure projects. Instead we are seeing a give-away of hard earned taxpayer money to people that have zero interest in Canada. Money that Canada does not have and will have to be borrowed from foreign governments.
And why will it have to borrowed from foreigners? Because the Bank of Canada is now talking negative interest rates. That’s right, not only are we giving money away, now you are going to pay “negative interest” on the money you put on deposit in the bank. Put in $100, after interest you will get back $99, $98, who knows how little depending on how long you leave it in. However, don’t even think about negative interest rate loans, it ain’t going to happen.
What will happen instead is this. Money will hemorrhage out of Canada as the Americans are planning to increase their interest rates. Who in their right mind would leave money in Canada earning negative interest when you have earn positive interest right next door. And as the money floods out of Canada the looney will crash. We will look back fondly on the good old days, when it was still worth 73 cents.

MRW

Luke, that’s not what the CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION says:
“RPS Monthly Project Status Table” September 2015
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/NR/rdonlyres/A00F02FF-B55F-40AF-AECF-AA258DD74378/0/RPS_Project_Status_Table_2015_September.xls
The CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION states that California uses 265,000 Gigawatt-hours (GW) of electricity per year.
“How high is California’s electricity demand, and where does the power come from?”
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/cfaqs/howhighiscaliforniaselectricitydemandandwheredoesthepowercomefrom.htm
The report you cite says that there are only 6,770 MW of renewables currently online. That’s 6.7 GW. Figure 5. The rest is pending, or estimated to come online. Read the footnotes.

Just tell China and India they’re being moved to the “developed” side of the table.
Their meltdown would be epic…

To paraphrase “We are going to fail folks but at least it won’t be our fault”.

We, the heavily in debt developed nations, are to cripple our economies and send a few hundred $ Billon per year to the growing developing countries like India and China, via borrowing the money from???… Maybe China?
While China, India, et. al. get a strong economic advantage via lots of cheap price depressed fuels and exemptions from mandated expensive “alternatives”… Oh, and $ Trillions… And a debt strangle hold on western governments and economies…
All to achieve no change of CO2 nor climate.
Anyone from “The West” who signs up for that is either a traitor, pwned by China et. al., an idiot, heavily on the take, or all of them…

Greg Cavanagh

My vote is on Epic Idiot.

G. Karst

Doing “something” is considered better than doing “nothing”, even if the end result is exactly the same and global treasure is irretrievably lost. It seems that warm fuzzy feeling are worth the entire wealth of the world and has no upper limit. We are lost until prolonged financial disaster resets our “feelings sensitivity” to one that accepts reality. We are lost in a hostile nightmare wilderness, of our own making. GK

Tom in Denver

The problem is that Kerry was making a point that the only way to solve this problem is to install a global government that can force all countries to comply, and then of course they would force rich countries to provide wealth redistribution to the 3rd world countries. It’s all covered in Agenda 21.
COP21—> Agenda 21. you think that is just a coincidence?

Latitude

Tom, I hate to say it….but I agree with you

richard verney

Kerry is merely acknowledging what Lombourg already stated, last month, namely that if every body adhered to their emission reduction commitments/proposals, that would reduce the forecast warming by only about 0.17degC (and that is assuming that there is such a thing as climate sensitivity to CO2).
Everything being discussed is futile since none of the policy responses achieve any meaningful reduction in global CO2 emissions. Wind and Solar do not reduce CO2 emissions since energy from Wind and Solar is not despatchable and requires 100% backup from conventional fossil fuel generation.
Carbon bonds, trading and a floor price for carbon, does not reduce CO2 emissions on a global basis, but merely transfers/relocates the place where the emissions originate from; heavy energy intensive industry is relocated from one country (usually the USA or Europe) to another country (usually China or India or BRICs). Overall there is no reduction in global CO2 emissions.
The only way CO2 emissions can be reduced on a global basis is to either for the developed world to adopt an 18th century life style akin to that presently enjoyed by the developing countries, and for the developing countries not to develop at all, OR to go nuclear such that fossil fuels is only used for air transport, and plastics etc. Cars, trains, busses would be electric running off a nuclear powered grid, ships would be nuclear powered.
Whilst there is no sound evidence that there is any measurable Climate Sensitivity to CO2, what concerns me the most is that none of the political responses remotely addresses the emission of CO2. nothing suggested achieves the goal of reducing on global basis CO2 emissions.
It is clear that a policy of targeted adaption is the better option. First, CO2 brings with it many benefits (greening the planet) and if it also brings some warming for many countries that would be very beneficial. Second, there is no global disaster, at most there may be regional problems that are best addressed by targeted adaption. Third, CO2 may not drive warming/climate change to any significant degree such that all or most of the recent warming/climate change is natural in origin such that CO2 reduction/mitigation will achieve nothing of substance and merely be a waste of money, time and effort.
It is about time that discussions centred on adaption since this works whether the warming/climate change is manmade or natural, whether it is dangerous, or not, and allows those countries which will benefit for increased CO2 and/or warming/climate change to reap the benefit of that.
The Kerry interview should be widely circulated to the politicians since it demonstrates the futility of what is going on, and what a farce COP 21 is..

Mark from the Midwest

The Secretary of State should be nothing, if not able to secure an effective “bargain.” Yet Kerry, through this, has basically reset the entire dynamic of the negotiations in Paris with less than 48 hours to the close of the conference … and you wonder why the U.S. standing in the world is in the toilet.

Bruce Cobb

The translation to the Kerry-speak is that not only will we have to punish our economies by spending $trillions switching to “green” energy, but we will have to spend $trillions more helping developing countries do the same. And that’s in addition to the climate reparations. But hey, we’re “rich”, right? We can afford it. And besides, what could be more important than “saving the planet”?

finnpii

Without knowing what the next sentence out of his mouth was, I suspect this statement was a prelude to a plea that the developing world needs to develop without fossil fuels, and needs lots and lots of “help” in development of renewables.

Janice Moore

Yup. Obama & Co. is just the lobbyists for Big Wind, Big “Sustainability, and Sort-of-Big Solar.
(and B. Hussein is highly internally motivated: you don’t remain a member of a church where the pastor screams, “God, damn America” every other Sunday if you love America…)
*************************************************
Mark (from the Midwest) and Peter (at 9:07am and 9:09am) sum it up nicely:
Mark:

… basically reset the entire dynamic of the negotiations in Paris with less than 48 hours to the close of the conference …

Peter:

… the developing world needs … lots and lots of “help” in development of renewables.

*****
Yuck!!! A drop of the drool from the grinning mouths of Big “Sustainability” just landed on me. Yes… those greedy giant leeches are very big… .

Tom in Denver

What Kerry is saying is that the only way to solve this (perceived) problem, is to create a world government to dictate what emissions each country can have. Of course that would also presume that all rich countries would have to redistribute their wealth to the poor countries. This has been the underlying goal of this trumped up crisis all along. It was spelled out by the UN in Agenda 21.
COP21—–> Agenda 21 you think that number is a coincidence?

firetoice2014

The ultimate goal is a global vegan commune run by some subset of the tinpot despots represented in the UN General Assembly.
What could possibly go wrong?

Power Grab

I keep returning to the concept that the eco-loons want to turn the US (and likely the rest of the developed world) into a larger version of Haiti. I hear they sometimes resort to eating dirt, food can be so scarce. That’s even more austere than veganism.
Dang, people! Aren’t the populations poor who live in those tinpot dictatorships, BECAUSE the people running those countries want it that way?!?! So how is it going to change anything for the poor, to simply shovel boatloads of money into the hands of the dictators? Isn’t it their history that they use the funds for their own pleasure, rather than building something that will raise the level of prosperity of their populace?

Resourceguy

I hereby pledge $2.5 trillion to India and another $2.5 trillion to other claimants as their demands are received and processed. You may pick up your checks at the DNC/Clinton Foundation at your convenience.

joelobryan

As I’ve said before, the quickest way to ID a scientific moron is their use of and belief in the correctness of the term “carbon pollution”.
The use of that term indicates a clear ignorance of the scale of man’s CO2 relative to Global carbon cycle. And in SecState Kerry’s case it is willful portrayal of ignorance that reaches the level of fraud. The entire US xelegation of COP21 negotiator’s should be prosecuted for Conspiracy to Commit Fraud under the US Code of RICO statutes.

Mark

Not surprised. This whole scandel is to keep the developing nations from not developing by not allowing the use of cheap fossil fuels.

troe

John Kerry: Wrong when it matters.
How can some one so wrong for so long still be so conceited. An amazing automaton.

Janice Moore

“Why, in the name of Glory, was he proud?”


Keats in “Pot of Basil”

simple-touriste

Laurent Fabius (Fafa) needs to be remembered for something not related to giving HIV-contaminated blood to children (as ministry of health).
Will someone think of the chil … I mean of Fafa?

This piece misrepresents what was said, even while quoting it exactly.
Kerry said

If all the industrial nations went down to zero emissions –- remember what I just said, all the industrial emissions went down to zero emissions -– it wouldn’t be enough [“to offset the carbon pollution coming from the rest of the world”], not when more than 65% of the world’s carbon pollution comes from the developing world.

This is not a surprise, this is not new, this is not unexpected — this has been known for at least a decade.
It is the emissions of the developing world — mostly China, India, Pakistan, SE Asia — that represent the real threat of ramping-up out of control — if they want to really reduce emissions, it is the developing world that must be reigned in.
It is rather refreshing to see a major US politician state it so simply.
The reason they are all in Paris is to convince the Developing World to find a way to develop without that ramp up in CO2 emissions.

Latitude

so it’s a total waste of time and money….

Reply to Latitude ==> This is the 21st try….maybe they will do something useful at COP22?
Note: These COPs are a tremendous boost (usually) for the local economy — might not be true in Paris due to the cost of extra security in the aftermath of the recent terrorist attacks. Who wouldn’t like to spend two weeks in Paris? especially on your employers tab?

Walt D.

KIp: I imagine the Paris call girls have had a bonaza, just like the Brazilian call girls durning the world cup.

richard verney

But there is no way. It cannot be done with either wind or solar since these are not despatchable energy sources.
The only viable option would be to go nuclear. This is extremely expensive, and who is going to supply the technology?

Walt D.

richard:
If I am not mistaken India is actively pursuing nuclear power – fast-neutron breeders and thorium reactors.
Their target is 2050.
I am not of big fan of government sponsored research, but if the billion dollars a day currently being pissed away on renewables was diverted to a “Manhattan Project’ to develop commercial fusion reactor technology at least we would have some possibility of actual solving the world energy problem once and for all.

French take on the effectiveness of “wind”
https://youtu.be/WbeKmib8VbI

Say! Can you power this Bessemer furnace on wind? Industry for me, but not for thee. Just leave the modern comforts and industrializing to the first world. Oh, by the way, the models we told you about don’t really work at all and we don’t really have any data so we had to adjust everything upward to make a record average temperature by .01 degree, whatever that really means, but hey, NASA! Just quietly stay poor and trust us. We’re the first world smart people. Oh and the antarctic ice growth is from warming too, in case you were wondering. We have a paper by a scientist that says that, so it’s true. Don’t you read the newspaper?
It is truly astonishing to watch this farce.

PiperPaul

Neverending climate theatrics. It just goes on and on and YOU get to pay for it.

Walt D.

Never mind a Bessemer furnace, how about Arnold in the Terminator series? Can he be powered by wind? there was a hilarious cartoon with Arnold as the terminator, power by a mobile windmill powered by Al Gore blowing.

firetoice2014

Before CO2 emissions can be eliminated, they must be reduced.
Before CO2 emissions can be reduced, they must be stabilized.
Before CO2 emissions can be stabilized, their growth must be halted.
The growth in CO2 emissions is occurring in the developing world;
so their growth must be halted in the developing world..
If any additional CO2 is dangerous, then ALL additional CO2 is dangerous, not just additional CO2 emitted by developed nations. Even politicians should be capable of grasping that simple reality.

joelobryan

Which says nothing about why all the island nation heads of state are at COP21 with their hands out, demanding reparations for something that hasn’t happened and likely won’t (accelerated SLR due to anthroCO2).
COP21 and the UNFCCC is different things to different actors in this Kabuki dance. For those island nations, it’s about hand-outs and then to be left alone. For the BRICs, its about the West committing economic competive suicide. For Obama, Kerry, and their band of Merry Morons, it’s about getting a wdge in for public suppport for carbon taxes and carbon trading schemes.
US Congressional Budget Office forecasts the US federal budget deficits starting to rise inexorably after 2017 due to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security growth. The Democrats are adamant that there will be no significant reforms (cuts) to those programs. For that to be so, they desparately need to find new revenues. Since energy underlies GDP and GDP growth, a carbon tax, such as what California now has, is their holy grail. CO2 emissions and the Climate Scam are thus simply tools. Since with all things Progressive, the means employed (honest or not) are justified by their desired ends.

Bruce Cobb

“Why are we there”? To cement Obama’s “climate legacy”.
Pay attention.

Goldrider

Obama’s “legacy” is firm: He’s “The Black Guy.” Place in history assured! Now come home already and do something intelligent about the REAL problems trying to break down our door!

Resourceguy

Try holding the next big 2-week event in Detroit so they can see the full force of the climate change effects on the community.

Janice Moore

Resource: +1!

zemlik

we are looking at this all wrong. India and China should be paying us to sort out their mess.

richard verney

Well everyone should be paying Australia, since it is a net carbon sink.

Ziiex Zeburz

Zemlik,
I believe that humans breath in oxygen and exhale Co2, China-India, how many billion? plus a methane dump 2-3 times a day ( food for the masses not so good ) etc, etc,.

Joe

what do you mean why are here?
government or someone else paying first/business (or economy for putzes) airfare, good hotel, free food, spouse goes shopping, etc
so what if there is one or two meaningless meetings + photo op

Michael Jankowski

We’ve known this at least since the time of Kyoto almost 20 years ago.

Chris Hagan

localherog2 has to be a troll. the comment about all those people not being killed by terrorist is not true! Trolls make irresponsible comments on this blog to discredit it

Resourceguy

If Kerry agreed to $2.5 trillion to meet India’s demand, then Pakistan would demand the same deal. This would either set off a new cold war in south Asia on top of the military spending there now or WWIII. So basically Kerry is a war monger by extension.

Ron

Here in Canada our new PM has contributed 2.5B CDN (1.5 B USD) over 5 years to the 100B Fund. Given we are about 2% of global CO2 emissions and according to Bjorn Lombourg all the committed reductions will account for a .17C drop in global temp, Canada’s contribution will be about .0034 of a Degree less warming! Are you kidding me? Go Trudeau! He was a teacher that taught drama, need I say more!

I’ll see your drama teacher and raise you one community organizer!

Resourceguy

I’ll see your community organizer and raise you one ketchup heir-in law.

our new PM has contributed 2.5B CDN
=======================
with the looney in freefall the total contribution will work out to something like 80 cents US.

dp

There is carbon, therefor I am. Pretty simple rule.

urederra

I have been wondering lately how many solar panels do you need to install to produce 1 metric ton of aluminum or steel. Or if you can actually produce it only by using solar panels. You need coal to produce steel, so if you cannot use any coal it means that you cannot produce steel.
The reason I am asking is because Kerry mentions riding a bycicle and since bycicles are not made out of wood, but of metal, usually aluminum alloys, I was wondering if it were feasible to build the frame by only using the energy produced by solar panels, and if it is feasible, how much would it cost.
Also, India says they need 3.6 trillion to stop emitting CO2. I was wondering if anyone had actually calculated how expensive would be to produce and weld metals by using only solar energy and what would the price difference be when the solar only method is compared with the traditional method.
Since there are like 40000 delegates at COP21 discussing climate related issues and demanding measures, you may think that someone should have worked out the numbers.

H.R.

urederra December 10, 2015 at 11:11 am

[…] Since there are like 40000 delegates at COP21 discussing climate related issues and demanding measures, you may think that someone should have worked out the numbers.

You’d think, but you’d be wrong.
The only numbers anyone is working on are the ones with $$$$ in front of them, not to mention lots of 000,000,000s behind them, and whether the numbers are going to go to their country, in their personal bank account, or both.
That’s why they are there, eh?
.
.
.
Oh… and the food… yeah… the food is great! and isn’t costing them a dime.

GTL

“The fact is that even if every American citizen biked to work, carpooled to school, used only solar panels to power their homes, if we each planted a dozen trees, if we somehow eliminated all of our domestic greenhouse gas emissions, guess what – that still wouldn’t be enough to offset the carbon pollution coming from the rest of the world.
If all the industrial nations went down to zero emissions –- remember what I just said, all the industrial emissions went down to zero emissions -– it wouldn’t be enough, not when more than 65% of the world’s carbon pollution comes from the developing world.” – John Kerry
Actually if all industrialized nations, all developing nations, and all natural sources of CO2 were reduced to zero it would not be enough. The climate and global temperatures are not particularly sensitive to CO2. It would be enough to end life as we know it on earth.

Ron

What a compelling pitch to try and get India and China to comply!
Kerry is not the world’s best salesman!
Hope he runs for President.

AJB

It’s pretty simple. Even John could work it out if he had two brain cells to rub together …
http://s14.postimg.org/lu0r37e9t/Fiat.jpg

Resourceguy

Is this the post-Gore era or was he out putting wanted posters up for the fact checkers of climate science?

joelobryan

Gore undobtedly was probably too busy looking for a little RR massage release to waste time littering Paris with posters most working Parisians don’t get.
http://www.businessinsider.com/two-more-women-accuse-al-gore-of-assault-2010-7

Bruce Cobb

The Math Whiz Kerry has figured out that the US production of some 7% of the world’s output of life-giving CO2, being less than the other 93%, means that stopping all of our CO2 output would still leave the other 93%.
Stop the presses.

Janice Moore

+1

Kerry actually said this:
“Try and picture a very thin layer of gases – a quarter-inch, half an inch, somewhere in that vicinity – that’s how thick it is. It’s in our atmosphere. It’s way up there at the edge of the atmosphere. And for millions of years – literally millions of years – we know that layer has acted like a thermal blanket for the planet – trapping the sun’s heat and warming the surface of the Earth to the ideal, life-sustaining temperature. Average temperature of the Earth has been about 57 degrees Fahrenheit, which keeps life going. Life itself on Earth exists because of the so-called greenhouse effect. But in modern times, as human beings have emitted gases into the air that come from all the things we do, that blanket has grown thicker and it traps more and more heat beneath it, raising the temperature of the planet. It’s called the greenhouse effect because it works exactly like a greenhouse in which you grow a lot of the fruit that you eat here.
This is what’s causing climate change. It’s a huge irony that the very same layer of gases that has made life possible on Earth from the beginning now makes possible the greatest threat that the planet has ever seen”
http://m.state.gov/md221704.htm
Kerry must really believe that there is a CO2 blanket-sphere around the Earth. This is incredible stupidity at the highest level. Normally this degree of derangement would preclude one from Public Life, but after O’Bummer was elected President, the way was clear in to office for Kerry.

Janice Moore

Kerry actually said this.

Kerry: The Gift. That keeps on giving (over and over 😉 ).
#(:))

Marcus

And over and over and over……….

Janice Moore

(as others have said)
Biden = “Assassination Insurance” (Ann Coulter, I think)
Kerry = “Makes Me Look Smart by Comparison” “Another Person as Stupid as I Am in the Room”

Resourceguy

Clearly the WH has reverse engineered the crazy ant strategy of the North Koreans and they have now weaponized it in John Kerry. The Russians may have laughed at this strategy early on but now they realize he is talking in code to such an extent that they cannot read him, like Navajo code talkers in WW2. This also explains Gore and Biden by the way. They have all been to the ranger camp for training on mindless eloquence in goop talk mixed with fear mongering. You are completely defenseless against them. Might as well throw down your rational arguments and facts now.

BigWaveDave

It is but one kind of clarity that supersedes the need for a rational explanation.
There are all sorts of attempts to define and justify the mistake, but as far as explaining what a greenhouse gas is, Kerry’s explanation appears to be as correct as any.

u.k.(us)

I can be a bit of a control freak, but I’ve never dreamed I might control the climate and the worlds population.
How much does it cost to become a high ranking member of the UN ?
(besides your soul).

Marcus

Face it, if you question your morals, you don’t have it in you to be part of the U.N. !!

Gunga Din

I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe Kerry actually believes in CAGW? He doesn’t want Washington to become like the Mekong Delta? He was a coward then. He’s being a coward now because he doesn’t want to relive the experience he lives with every day.
(He got a medal for that then. He want’s another one now?)

GTL

I have little regard for Kerry’s ability as politician or statesmen, but if you did not serve with him in Vietnam you should not belittle his service there.

Mac

adapt? whodathunk? wouldn’t Canada just love to be a little warmer? imagine the possibilities

Eve

John, I never believed they could scare Canadians with warmth. But yet there are people outside marching against climate change in the cold and snow. Our government is adding to the scare with their pictures of climate change..all taken outside of Canada of course. It makes me think Canadians are stupider than I ever thought. I am so scared of climate change that I moved to a warmer climate.
Signed Eve in the Bahamas, sitting in shorts and a tank top with all the windows open, it is 77F

Marcus

Pictures ???? ….Ooops sorry, wrong thread !!

Janice Moore

Well, until Eve takes a selfie, here ya go, Marcus! The movie star I’m guessing most resembles Eve! No, I do not know why my brain picked Candace Bergen. From Eve’s comments over the past 2 years, I just got the impression of a lovely woman who resembles Ms. Bergen of roughly the same age.
Kind of fun for Eve to see what another person imagines her to look like from her writing alone, I think.
Now, DO NOT POST THAT PICTURE OF ELEANOR ROOSEVELT THAT YOU THINK I LOOK LIKE — OKAY???!!! I DON’T NEED THAT, Maarrrrrcusss.
#(:))
“Eve” (just a guess)
http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1786214/thumbs/o-CANDICE-BERGEN-570.jpg

The pictures Eve is referring to are related to a Canadian briefing and the research that Steve McIntyre has done on the images used in that briefing:
http://climateaudit.org/2015/12/07/what-science-is-telling-us-about-climate-damages-to-canada/

Marcus

Garymount……I was referring to pictures of Eve in a tank top and shorts ! LOL
Janice, that’s not a tank top !

Janice Moore

Marcus!
I know!!
It was the only photo I had of her (lol).
And it is a representation of what I think of when “Eve” “talks” here.
LOLOLOL.

Marcus

. . . .. . .We are the BORG……Resistance is futile !!!!

Resourceguy

And they have already assimilated the media, some religious orders, professional associations, and all federal agencies.

Marcus

Don’t forget Prince Chuckles !