Via the GWPF – Paris Climate Poker On A Knife-Edge
£2.3 Trillion: Rich Countries’ Bill For Climate Deal
Britain and other rich countries face demands for $3.5 trillion (£2.3 trillion) in payments to developing nations to secure a deal in Paris to curb global warming.
Developing countries have added a clause to the latest draft of the text under which they would be paid the “full costs” of meeting plans to cut emissions. The amount paid by rich countries is a key unresolved issue at the climate conference in Paris, which is supposed to end tomorrow. The latest version of the text has more than 360 points of disagreement. –Ben Webster, The Times, 11 December 2015
The night saw an ugly brawl as US secretary of state John Kerry threatened that developed countries, including the US, would walk out of the agreement if it help up the wall of differentiation or if it was asked to commit to a road-map or a goal to deliver on its financial obligations in the Paris agreement. “You can take the US out of this. Take the developed world out of this. Remember, the Earth has a problem. What will you do with the problem on your own?” he said behind closed doors in negotiations to other ministers on the second revised draft of the Paris agreement. –Nitin Sethi, Business Standard, 11 December 2015
US Threatens To Walk Out If Financial Obligations Made Legally Binding
Business Standard, 11 December 2015
Nitin Sethi
Talks go beyond deadline as developed countries block differentiation in revised draft of Paris agreement and oppose financial road-map
Paris climate talks got pushed well beyond their scheduled deadline of Friday 6 pm. The French foreign minister Laruent Fabius formally announced that the next, and hopefully the final draft, of the Paris package would be brought out on Saturday morning followed by negotiations in afternoon. Bruised by the fractious arguments that had split countries along the developed-developing lines through the night between Thursday and Friday, many negotiators across the divide assessed that the talks would stretch in to Sunday.
The night saw an ugly brawl as US secretary of state John Kerry threatened that developed countries, including the US, would walk out of the agreement if it help up the wall of differentiation or if it was asked to commit to a road-map or a goal to deliver on its financial obligations in the Paris agreement. “You can take the US out of this. Take the developed world out of this. Remember, the Earth has a problem. What will you do with the problem on your own?” he said behind closed doors in negotiations to other ministers on the second revised draft of the Paris agreement.
He added, “We can’t afford in the hours we are left with to nit-pick every single word and to believe there is an effort here that separates developed countries from developing countries. That’s not where we are in 2015. Don’t think this agreement reflects that kind of differentiation.”
Making a veiled threat again that the agreement could fail if the US was pushed for financial obligations, Kerry said, “At this late hour, hope we don’t load this with differentiation…I would love to have a legally binding agreement. But the situation in the US is such that legally binding with respect to finance is a killer for the agreement.”
His remarks were made during the Indaba negotiations at the night between Thursday and Friday. Right after his short intervention Kerry left the negotiating room while other US delegates stayed back, making delegates from other countries point out that the sessions were to exchange views and not just threaten and leave.
Business Standard was able to confirm his remarks and other statements made during the night by speaking to multiple negotiators in the room during the night.
Kerry’s intervention was later followed by developed countries collectively refusing to give a road-map for delivery of their financial obligations behind 2020. EU said it was not acceptable and umbrella group of countries which includes the US too demanded scuttling such a plan.
IN the past the developed countries have been unable to deliver financial flows against their commitments of providing US $ 100 billion annually by 2020. The OECD produced a report recently claiming the rich world had delivered US $ 62 billion by 2014 which the rich countries showed off at the Paris talks. But developing countries, including India, noted gross levels of double accounting and counting of high interest loans as climate finance – which is seen as a reparation cost. The developing countries asked that a road-map for delivery of the US $ 100 billion be fixed at Paris and that the accounting rules too be set by the UN climate convention blocking attempts of creative accounting by developed countries. This was partially reflected in the second revised draft of the Paris agreement.
The proposal got the developed countries in a knot. One after the other each took the floor demanding that developing countries be asked to pay as well. The US went to the point of saying that at best the countries could ask for a one time goal being promised by developed countries in 2025. In other words developing countries would not be able to hold the developed world accountable for their financial commitments post-2025.
“Kerry’s statement against differentiation and legal obligations was shocking. They (developed countries) see this is an opportunity to walk away from their obligations. At all costs the developed countries want the rules rewritten in departure from all the principles and provisions of the convention,” said Meena Raman, from the observer group Third World Network.
The collective pushback from the developed countries got the rest of the developing countries together as well. Southern Sudan, a country formed only four years ago after strife and war, said, “Some developed countries are proposing all parties (countries) shall provide finances but many developing are poor vulnerable, with special circumstances and will not be able to pay for mitigation, adaptation and loss and damage because the amounts we are talking of are significant.”
He added, “We cannot afford to use the money for hospitals saving lives, providing education, water and schools to be used on these matters. The agreement needs to provide adequate predictable new additional and verifiable resources.”
Some of the umbrella group of countries also said they were not in favour of a review to see if the support provided for adaptation to climate change by developing countries was adequate or not.
India, China, Argentina and many other developing countries intervened through the night pushing for differentiation as well as explicit financial obligations from the rich world.
The talks remained inconclusive and the French foreign minister announced the extension of the talks beyond deadline promising to meet countries and groups in bilateral format through Friday and hope to produce the ultimate draft of the text on Saturday.
Key issues that have delayed the agreement
1. Should developed countries have a legal obligation to deliver finances against a road-map
2. Should developing countries that do not have historical responsibility for emissions also contribute to climate flows
3. Should the burden sharing in the agreement be based on self-differentiation based on current economic capacities or on both, historical emissions and current economic conditions
4. Should the actions of developing countries be linked, even if weakly, to the provision of finance and technology or should they be treated as par with developed countries during next ratchet up of emission reduction commitments
5. Should there be a periodic review of delivery of finance and technology by developed world or not
6. Should the long term goal of the agreement unambiguously be to keep global temperature rise below 1.5 degree by 2100 or should the agreement refer hedge on this goal
7. Should poor and vulnerable countries continue to hold rights to file for damages and liability against permanent loss and damage caused due to climate change
UN Climate Talks Deadlocked, Officially Delayed Until Saturday
The Times of India, 11 December 2015
Vishwa Mohan
The UN climate talks are officially delayed until Saturday. Overnight negotiations could not result into convergence on many issue.
Stage 5 of the UN Climate Ritual … breakthrough tomorrow?
The next and final text, which was supposed to come on Friday, will now be released on Saturday morning and discussion will begin over it the same afternoon to bring out a global deal latest by the evening to save the world from the impacts of climate change through countries’ post-2020 actions.
As overnight negotiations could not result into convergence on many issues, the French foreign minister and COP21 president Laurent Fabius had to officially announce this morning that he would not present the text on Friday evening as he had thought earlier (to meet the deadline as the Paris talks was scheduled to be concluded on Friday by arriving at an agreement).
As overnight negotiations ran on, Fabius will now present the final text on Saturday morning so that the talks would conclude by the evening.
He said, “There is still work to do. Things are going on in right direction”.
Most of the decisive issues are still open. It include the climate finance, transparency of action and the crucial one on how to share responsibility between developed and developing countries.
China has strong objections on differentiation as it thinks the second text that came on Thursday night was an attempt to dilute this provision. Egypt on behalf of African Group, on the other hand, wants the ‘greenhouse gas neutrality’ should be removed from the second version of the text.
Note: shortly after publication the first paragraph was reformatted to include some missing headline text.
Don’t bash the developing nations. They didn’t invent the CAGW hoax. A lot of the developing sector probably doesn’t believe a word of the GHG Dogma. They’ll play the game for what it’s worth… I hope Kerry sticks to his word and walks out in a huff. This is so delicious.
It’s simple! Walk away, go home and then via respective Parliaments “cancel” all Climate Change Laws and Regulations and all Renewable Energy subsidies, tax breaks, and guaranteed minimum unit power prices. Cancel all such related Climate treaties. Then re-introduce competitive open free markets in power and energy throughout the developed world and let the market and the law govern. Leave those and those countries supposedly suffering from the negative effects of our man-made CO2 driven global warming and climate change, in the past, the present and in the future with the opportunity to seek damages from those parties deemed responsible and in the appropriate court of law. The onus would be on those suing us would be to
1. prove cause and effect,
2. identify and prove entities actually solely responsible,
3. provide evidence of actual loss in both type and valuation
4. etc. etc.
Problem solved, particularly now that the Developing Countries are emitting far, far more CO2 emissions and particulate carbon, sulphates, NOX emissions etc. than Developing Countries.
And back on the local front; 350.org will be standing around demanding 100% renewable within the next 35 years:
“Saturday, December 12, 11:00 AM
Lane County Fairgrounds – Holiday Market Entryway, 796 West 13th Avenue, Eugene, OR 97402
The biggest international climate summit of the decade will end on December 11th.
In Eugene, and around the world, people will be standing in solidarity to demand a binding, science-based climate treaty. We must keep fossil fuels in the ground and finance a just transition to 100% renewable energy by 2050!
Our community “Climate Red Line Vigil” joins hundreds of other actions in sending decision-makers the message that we will protect and defend what we hold dear, our children’s future; and that there are concrete limits we must respect if we are to ensure a livable planet for next generations.
For one hour we will hold space for this global, resilient and unstoppable movement, with beautiful banners, an Eiffel Tower, song and festivities. Love will win out over fear, and our movement will win over injustice. This year we stand up for CLIMATE JUSTICE!”
350.org is holding a one hour “vigil”. Apparently beautiful banners, faux Eiffel Tower, and songs will take place throughout the hour. My guess is that the “one hour vigil” will not be well attended, even though it is for “our children’s future” and is necessary to create the Red Line.
Hi DonM
I’m looking forward to their Little, tiny, unlikely to occur “vigil”.
Guess what the weather is like?
Surprise ….
http://www.weather.com/storms/severe/news/pacific-northwest-storm-impacts
Better wear proper attire…
Laughing just laughing
michael
@Mike the Morlock,
Thank you for that!
Here in Ontario, Canada, we cut out our coal-powered plants and added more gas-fired plants (while keeping our aging nukes, benefiting from our hydro, and of course, overpaying by $9.7 billion for our “green”).
So, when it came to actually place those superspeciallookatthemtheyarenotcoal plants…well, the NIMBYism hit overload (during an election), and the plants were moved from a Liberal party riding to a gross old Tory riding.
I thought it was too bad that we couldn’t route brown and blackouts first through those places that want energy, but don’t want to be bothered with how its created.
I now with that we could force 350.org, Greenpeace, WWF, etc. to use only solar and wind power for their servers…
I wonder if anybody would bet against me/anyone with the price of one billion dollars, never mind one trillion dollars if anyone had anywhere remotely near it. The bet being CAGW is a load of unscientific nonsense and definitely won’t happen in future over the next 30 years. The friends in the AGW camp are seeing the light for what it has all been about and that is the exchange of wealth.
at some point the rabid “environmentalists” will become pissed as they realize that while they scammed conservation to their socialist cause, the capitalist “renewables” out-scammed them for the bucks
Exhibit #1. GE
Lemme ask you ONE question:
Gas here right now is retailing for $2.13, and that’s including 45 cents’ tax. If “global warming” disappeared tomorrow, would you go pay $40,000.00 clams for a Prius?
A couple of stations around here have dropped to $1.75
The attraction of hybrids have always been on getting the balance right between cost, performance, reliability and environment friendly. Problem being until electricity can be relied on without using fossils fuels there is little overall value to it. Either use fossils fuels from factory that produces the electricity or use fossil fuels that provides fuel for the petrol car. Without global warming it would appeal less for most people, unless the performance/cost/reliability can match the petrol car. I’m in favor of saving/reserving/recycling as many natural resources as possible. Meet the main categories in a hybrid and the answer will be yes, even without global warming.
The best counter contrarians could make would be a billion dollar bet against warmist temperature projections. (Base it in a country where betting is legal, like the UK.) Even if no warmists took it up, that fact would be damning, in PR terms. This is such an obvious opportunity to show them up and pocket some cash–too bad no bigshot has been rude enough to say, “Put your money where your mouth is.”
(Hmm …. Trump!??)
It is going to be a long night.
I’ve sent out for more popcorn.
I believe they have agreed to a days extension. I will have a stiff drink with dinner, and arise afresh in the morning to contemplate the COP21 shambles. Sailor, not motorized ‘stink potter’. Strictly recreational, unlike yourself.
I think it wise that commercial sailing vessels were all retired some 100+ years ago. Wind does not always blow, as the wind turbine folks are just rediscovering.
The prospect of ‘free’ money is all that has kept this show on the road for at least a decade.
There has been no warming so what else are they there for other than the prospect of freebies?
Britain and other rich countries face demands for $3.5 trillion
KMA. I will give this cash on the condition that no recipient country ever uses any ‘Western’ devised technology.
After all, we generated CO2 developing it all and if we must have ‘climate reparations’ then the very least that recipients can do is to stop using the results.
“Pacific Islanders give up Antibiotics, medicine in general, IC engines, airports, hotels and tourism for ‘climate change’ reparations”.
Like that’s ever going to be a headline on the front page of ‘The Times’.
Truth to be told “Paris talks break down as Western nations refuse to borrow Chinese money in order to pay China ‘climate reparations'”
We live in strange times indeed.
“Truth to be told “Paris talks break down as Western nations refuse to borrow Chinese money in order to pay China ‘climate reparations’”
Hard to believe this is not parody!!
re “Suddenly I’m a Sceptic”—As we contrarians have said all along, it’s not a question of IF, it’s a question of HOW MUCH.
“Right after his short intervention Kerry left ..”
This mouth-off and retreat strategy is common procedure in the US Senate; as reported by Mark Steyn, Dec. 10; titled Markey Mark.
“… their financial obligations …”
their = you and me
I don’t know about you, but I don’t feel the obligation. Some of these countries should be paying me for the shoddy products I am forced to buy because nothing else seems to be available.
I learned a long time ago…FOLLOW. THE. MONEY.
It’s always about the money. All of it.
A timeless comment. And so , so deliciously true.
I think the best way for the situation to resolve this issue of differentiation is for everyone to adopt the much acclaimed Chinese climate change solution which was so loudly applauded by Obama and global green groups. Do nothing and keep emitting until 2030 when your CO2 levels can top out. If everyone thought that deal shows how committed to action on climate change China is let’s make it the gold standard.
Then there is no differential between developed and developing nations and everyone should be happy.
Money talks and bullshit walks.
Re: the $$ motive:
Given that Obama & Co. are just Big Wind/”Sustainability”/Sort-of Big Solar’s rainmakers…
there must be some way the developing nations are still going to get $$ aid for buying “renewable” energy infrastructure.
Otherwise…. O & Co. really messed up this deal…
**********************
Re: the political motive
Yeah, they know the Senate is highly unlikely to ratify a treaty binding U.S. to financial obligations…, but, that wouldn’t stop them. In the AGW Cultmembers-Democrat base’s eyes, their achieving that noble treaty (just as with the never-ratified Kyoto treaty under Bill Clinton) would be a big plus (even without ratification making it enforceable).
In sum:
1. It was in O & Co.’s party’s interest to have a binding “save the planet” treaty.
2. It was in O & Co.’s client (Big Wind, et. al.)’s interest to have the developed nations fund “renewables” in developing nations.
So, I am really wondering…. why would O & Co. do this? Looks, on the face of it, like a pretty dumb move.
That is why I am wondering… what’s in it for them (or their clients)?
The answer is: “follow –> the –> money”…. but I can’t see the trail at the moment… .
Possible answer:
Kerry is the “bad guy” setting the stage for “climate savior” B. Hussein Obama to be the rescuer of the planet by creating the impression that he and he alone was able to get all the other developed nations to agree (behind closed doors so no one can see that it had nothing to do with his feeble hand wavings — rather, some hardball tactics played out by those who do his thinking for him). Big O has a dedicated little group of followers (Bill Ayers is one) who promote this view of him for their own ends (“Follow this man! (and turn the U.S. into a socialist police state which we, the neo-weathermen, will control) He is the “chosen One” (sickening)).
That is, could be that this deal is already a done deal. Just theatrics to make the Democrat’s “Magic Negro” (L.A. Times editorial) a hero to help the Democrats in their attempt to win the 2016 presidential election.
The O Administration has used this tactic before (and thanks often to crybaby Boener, they got away with it).
Just for fun Friday night speculation I’ll go with this from Janice. Entirely possible that some kind of sweetener deal was worked out between the Obama administration and the main developing nation players well in advance of Paris. The rest may well all be just part of the circus showbiz with possibly a smidgen of i-dotting also and we now wait breathless for Barry Obama to sweep into the Big Top in a spangly suit for the grand finale to the rapturous applause of the World. Have to doubt that he’s left open the possibility of coming away from this looking like a total dickhead.
Oh, Cephus0,
Thanks for taking the time to post your reaction. I really wanted to hear what someone else thought of that idea. Glad to know another thinks it plausible!
Remember Obama in Berlin during his 2008 campaign? It was really, really, disgusting, yet, people vulnerable to a cult (and there are millions who have this vulnerability) fall for this sort of thing…
Barry Soetoro — Savior of the Planet (barf)
(youtube)
echoes of “Corporal H1tler” (W. Churchill)…..
Barry Soetoro, Democrat = > planet savior => vote Democrat in 2016 and save the world.
Average 20-30 Democrat (socialist in U.S.): Well, Obama says we need to wreck America to help the rest of the world. So, like, OKAY, MAN! Let’s get on with it! {smashes in window of Chevy Suburban — yeah, it will still run… we’re not dealing with high IQ on the average, here}
Average 31-120 Democrat: Go, man, go! I’d join you, but I have {a job — a child to care for — arthritis}.
Ah well, fun speculation Janice but disappointingly all we got in the end was a mush of happy pledges. I should’ve known that Obama wasn’t smart enough to puppet master like that and I generally adhere to Hanlon’s razor – which if you’ve not come across it before is similar to Occam’s razor and states “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity”.
It doesn’t matter who is there, who walks out, or who bellows the latest stream of platitudes. At the end of the day, it will be framed as “Success!”. The reality of this exercise, however, will be hollow – except for one certainty: Schedule the next publically-funded extravaganza – for the public’s own good, of course.
If / when a Conservative wins the White House, The U.S. will not be attending the next little Love Fest, making it even more useless !!!
@Janice Moore,
You’re dead right that it’s the money, but you muddy the waters with sneering comments about Obama’s race and calling him by his stepfather’s name, and dragging in the ole’ buggaboo “socialism,” which you don’t even understand. Cut it out. It diminishes both you and your argument. Stick to the point.
Obama’s current US Trade Representative is the same guy who ran the COPwhatever in Copenhagen in 2009. The two are related. Our current US Trade Representative has an office in Geneva, Switzerland, out of US jurisdiction. The TPP, TTIP, and the other global trade agreement (can’t remember the acronym) are the done-in-secret legal frameworks for the globalization that they were hoping to finally achieve with this climate scam, one they’ve worked on since 1987 by enslaving an entire new generation to phony science that doesn’t understand basic radiative physics. They couldn’t git ‘er done in 2009. So they worked on the secret trade agreements, the legal part, in the interim. Actually, the UNFCC has been doing it . . . all to benefit the multinationals–the real 1%— out in the open since 2009. They don’t even make a secret of it anymore. Just check UNEP’s Financial Directives webpage. Go look. It isn’t about climate or the environment; it’s about cashing in by international bankers who do understand what you and the majority on this board don’t or refuse to figure out: how fiat currency really works in countries that issue their own currency, and can “denominate their own debt in their own currency.” Which means in plain English: federal governments that provision themselves by issuing the currency to pay for it out of thin air, without the need to borrow. Countries like Great Britain, Canada, Japan, Australia, and the United States. We don’t borrow from China, darling. We’d kill them if they were counterfeiting our bills. China parks its USD sales in US treasury securities–just like you would buy a CD at your bank with your excess income–because the alternative is to let its USD sit in a checking account at the Fed not earning interest, or exchange for Yuan and wire home. And China needs to keep a reserve of USD to buy oil. By law, USD cannot leave the US banking system. By law! Get that? (Walmart and Best Buy pay China in USD.) So China buys treasury securities with its USD and leaves the dough in its savings account at the Fed. It ain’t “borrowing,” Janice. It’s China’s money parked in a federal government US Treasury CD.
Take a look at who his Chicago donors are. Obama recently installed one of them as Commerce Secretary: Penny Pritzer, the owner of Hyatt, a multinational. Guess who reports to her? The current US Trade Representative. Getting the picture? And he’s Don Quixote tilting at windmills.
Obama’s problem is his lack of judgment in who he chooses to listen to. He appointed Tim Geithner as Treasury Sec after Geithner as Prez of the NY Federal Reserve ignored the FBI warning in open testimony in Sept 2004 that there was an “epidemic of mortgage fraud.” (90%, the FBI said, see CNN). It was Geithner’s JOB to regulate mortgage banks; mortgage banks don’t come under federal banking charter, they’re the ‘wild west’ of banking. He appointed Eric Holder, whose idea of justice was pick and choose. He appointed John Holdren as US science czar, who is a Nutcase-in-Chief with a record to prove it. Obama’s risked WWIII and began the demise of the USD as reserve currency with his inopportune remarks about Putin interfering or stealing Crimea when the 1992 Ukraine Constitution specifically states that Crimea has the legal right to determine it’s own future and has the sole right to vote whether it wants to be a part of the Ukraine or Russia (the Ukraine government wrote that provision, not Russia). Which Crimea did in March 2014 with a referendum. Obama never demanded that subject matter experts weigh in on this before he accused Putin of something he didn’t do, and forced Putin to create financial alliances with China that will mean the demise of the USD reserve currency by 2030. Obama doesn’t understand how ISIS was created as a result of Bush illegally bombing Iraq, and is backing the ISIS rebels because the neocon think tanks and traitors like Victoria Nuland want to dismantle Syria and get rid of the democratically-elected Assad, which the MSM conveniently doesn’t educate the people about.
In short, Obama wasn’t ready for prime time. And still isn’t.
But, in one thing you and Obama are exactly alike (including his other bad judgment call: Jack Lew as Treasury Sec). Both of you do not understand how federal accounting works. I’ll bet dollars to doughnuts you’ve never read the federal government’s daily checkbook: The Daily Treasury Statement. If you had, you’d know that in Fiscal Year 2014, for example and because I have it on my desk, the US Treasury created $69.8 trillion dollars to run the entire federal government–yes! out of thin air; it’s been doing it since 1933–but only brought in $2.5 trillion in federal taxes. Federal taxes don’t pay for anything. (If you want the annual, pick September 30th of any given year.) Obama could have ended the Great Recession in four months if he understood how this worked, and saved millions their jobs and homes with no debt to children or grandchildren. Taxes didn’t pay for FDR’s government programs either, because no one had jobs to pay the taxes, and subsequent generations never paid for them either.
It’s a slice of this $69.8 trillion-making-abiliity that the bankers and multinationals want a piece of. But they need that treaty, by getting the people clamoring for it. They already have Obama convinced that TPP, TTIP, etc are good things; he’s so effing stupid. (Betcha’ Penny Pritzer helped him reach that conclusion, or no library money, btw). Get it? The bankers want a piece of that dollar-creating action. Baron de Rothschild in 1987 euphemistically called it a “Second Marshall Plan” at the 4th Worldwide Wilderness Congress, the phrase that captivated the idiotic Naomi Klein in 2012 when she heard it from a Bolivian NGO official, and spawned her latest book. No s**t it’s a “Second Marshall Plan.” Only in return for nothing. The First Marshall Plan brought work to 9 million Americans returning from WWII rebuilding a devastated Europe, and created the middle class.
Here’s the link to the Daily Treasury Statement. They go back to 1998: https://www.fms.treas.gov/fmsweb/DTSFilesArchiveAction.do?qtr=1
The Don Quixote in graf #3 above is Obama, not the current US Trade Representative.
so now that Chinas got into the game with the imf/sdr and can still keep dropping values..
thats going to upset a few applecarts financewise globally sometime soon..hmm?
and russia n china and others trading direct NOT in usd allowing cream skimming by yankbanks?
ouch 😉
John Kerry is already on record as stating that even if the Developed nations revert to a Stone Age Culture, there will be no affect on the Global Climate. Now that the AGW Bill for “Helping” Developing Nations is becoming the only reason for continuing COP21, look for all of the “Rich” Nations to Bail Out of further talks and end this Ridiculous Nonsense called “Climate Change”. If there was irrefutable evidence, QUANTIFIABLE Evidence of AGW effects, then maybe there can be some sort of Compromise – But since EVERYBODY KNOWS that there is no such thing as AGW, once the subject of Money or Reparations comes up, the topic is over and done with. Kerry knows that a binding monetary agreement is DOA in the US Congress.
BTW, What happened to all those Carbon Trading Credits / Taxes that were supposedly administered by the UN? Surely there was money that changed hands in those Deals? Or has it turned out that Carbon Credits are as worthless as the COPXX Love Fests?
I have observed this sort of behaviour before, everything comes around at least twice.
It is fashion, like sun spots.
my own opinion is that we got here because of the nature around us helped us live. Our sort of speciality takes many thousands of years to work itself out. There is no guarantee space travel will save us ( although that is my wish) and so I really would like to see less pollution generally, if that would be OK ?
CO2 is NOT pollution, it is plant food !!
On that score, CO2 has much in common with urine and feces.
yr fx8ted m8
So does water Brandon… that’s why I drink Scotch whisky
“Brandon Gates
December 11, 2015 at 1:13 pm
…in common with urine and feces.”
Two very good sources of nitrogen, the OTHER plant food.
I’m reminded of the time my father trucked in several years’ supply of horse dung for his garden. The neighbors weren’t happy.
This was obvious all along.
If the developed nations get into a panic over emissions and want the developing world to refrain from using cheap energy sources then the developed world has to pay.
We have the stupidest leaders in the history of civilisation.
And,ironically, there was no need for the panic in the first place.
“US Threatens To Walk Out If Financial Obligations Made Legally Binding”
This is realism. Congress is never going to accept the obligations, and without Congress the Obama regime can’t make a treaty, so cannot make a legally-binding agreement.
Yours is the 2nd post in this thread I’ve seen which nails it.
Just before this OP appeared, I was wondering why we were talking about somebody in Australia driving an SUV. So I concocted this post on COP21, and then forgot to post it. But now it’s relevant:
Why are we talking about this trivia, when the U.N. has just agreed to agree on finalizing the final version of its non-binding draft of what everybody needs to agree on.
Containing this shocking confirmation that the mysterious triple hash “###” is definitely in the pipeline.
“Each Party shall regularly prepare, communicate [and maintain] [successive] ###4 and [shall][should][other] [take appropriate domestic measures] [have in place][identify and] [pursue][implement] [[domestic laws], [nationally determined] policies or other measures] [designed to] [implement][achieve][carry out][that support the implementation of] its ###].”
And apart from lots of ### they “strongly urge” all developed nations to give them hundreds of billions of dollars.
You can read the full steaming heap of complete ####, right here:
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/da01.pdf
at the risk of being banned for being too off topic too many times I must say that there is no way I can explain why are humans so smart compared to the rest of the earthly creatures.
I really, really, really hope that the old stories are true. we were made from aliens and they might come back and explain a few things.
This is on topic! is about the global system and that, why Earth ?
Humans are not that much smarter than some animals. I think we are smarter overall because we have come to depend on tools and other types of technology to live. We are physically very degenerate. Compare us physically to any other primate. It is embarrassing, frankly. We have compensated by our “over-developed” intellect and highly agile fingers. We are literally freaks of nature.
And, I suspect, an evolutionary dead end.
If this talk fails big time, that could be what it takes to get greenies to realize that nuclear is their only path to decarbonization–and that it is the lesser of two evils. Until now, they’ve been hoping they could have it all–a greenie utopia, running on renewables. Afterwards, they may realize they will have to settle for half a loaf. It’ll be their only fallback position.
everybody wants the same thing
What a bitter irony if it turns out that way: It’ll then be the greens who cost us 20 years in getting started on decarbonizing, and thereby pushed us past some tipping point into planetary calamity. But their bigshots, mostly, just HAD to play holier-than-thou among their peers. It was all a game of ego-driven one-upsmanship and childish wishfulness. As Henry Adams said, “It is always the “good” men who do the most harm.” Well, anyway, the Pranksters on Olympus won’t be suffering.
Not a chance. As I understand it wind and solar are the only two options on the table for the greenies.
Population implosion is the only path to de-carbonization, seeing as we are all carbon life forms. Of course, when we rot, we will release CO2. Quite the quandary. Maybe we should embrace this carbon thing. You know, peace, love and all that.
Well, more than half a dozen beat me to it in comments above, but as soon as I read
you just have to laugh… and I did actually LOL.
“We’ll sign anything, promise anything, but if we actually have to deliver anything we are OUTTA here!”
Remind me again; where is COP23 being held? ;o)
I live in the UK and I can NOT afford to connect my house to the local electricity grid.
Nor do I have mains water or mains gas.
Even though my house has been occupied for 150years.
And even though I can see a major town from my window.
But, the hefty pricetag on mains connection is outside of the reach of my meagre financial resources.
It seems ironic that both my income and my spending on essentials are heavily taxed and that some of that money will now be spent on providing foreigners with super expensive renewable electricity.
I would also like some electricity.
Hurrah for climate justice.
you must be in SNP territory ?
I’m on the Somerset Levels.
A couple of years ago, the local electricity supply monopoly dug up the road only 1km from my house, in order to connect a solar panel farm several km into a local town, where there is a substation.
I spoke to them at the time. They casually reckoned that a connection would cost me about £40K per km.
There is no competing provider to my knowledge.
And NO they could not connect me to the solar connection.
Due, I suppose, to the surges and lulls on that limb of the network.
So much for the lovely idea of local microgeneration, it had to be piped for many miles on its own special underground connection.
Dear Indefatigable Frog!
Oh, I am so sorry I ever got angry with you (even if you deserved it, heh). What you are living with is HORRIBLE. And I am amazed that it is legal in the U.K. In the U.S., at least in Washington State (where I looked up a bit of the law on this topic awhile back) a utility that did that would be breaking the law.
Are you sure there is no “Commission on Public Utilities” or the like to which you can go for help??
And I thought the mid-1900’s case of Mr. Pilgrim’s land being taken with-OUT just compensation was bad… .
You, O Frog, deserve a hearty round of applause for even managing to be on WUWT — it can’t be easy to make that happen.
Take care, over there,
Janice
Why Janice, the frog will be allowed to use an evil fossil fuel powered generator, with the help of a battery and inverter he can probably have more electricity than you or I could poke a skick at without the burden of unaffordable renewables being heaped on. Here in QLD Australia, grid electricity is at break even with (effciently used ) local diesel fuel generation.
In fact with just 3KW of solar at current feed in tarriff I can just about buy all the diesel I need for a diesel generator powered house using the earnings from my unreliable useless solar feed in.
Well, Bobl, that is good to hear. Not how things OUGHT to be (should be NUCLEAR powered electricity from the 100 new plants built all over the UK!), but, glad Froggy is not, I hope, as miserable as I feared.
to: indefatibablefrog
you are quite near me then. perhaps I should purchase a beer for you ?
when I was in that situation I think it was 300 quid per pole ( wanted to get 3 phase) managed to squeeze enough (80 amps I think) out of single phase
!2yrs ago they wanted £11,000 to upgrade to 3ph over 4 poles !!!! So I spent ~£2000 on a 3ph genset, fuel tank, pluming for hot-water takeoff + a small block shed. All the 3ph & all the heating for ~ £450/yr
In rural British Columbia, if you choose to live at a distance from existing lines, you can expect to pay $100K a kilometre (minus a couple of poles, goodwill) to bring power in.
If you find power poles unsightly, you can pay considerably more to have the supply put underground. 3 phase costs more.
Other options include moving to a property that is already serviced or persuading the Marshall Islands to subsidize your existence.
Australia will have to borrow ALL the money which we will give to developing countrys and we will never know what they will do with the money, all the while we have large number homeless war vets living in our parks every night very sad .we should be looking after Australians first
tango at 1314, today.
Yes. “We should be looking after Australians {and Americans, and… } first”:
http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Obama-Homeless-Veterans.jpg
(Source: Federalist Papers: http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/tag/veteran-homelessness )
“Australia will have to borrow ALL the money which we will give to developing countrys”
Does dept created to pay COP money qualify as odious dept?
In 2007, Australia was in surplus BILLIONS in surplus. in 2008 Australia was in so much debt, the Govn’t started borrowing (I don’t recall the daily figure, may have been AU$100mil…or something silly like that) to pay people some money during the Global Financial Crisis (Wholly man-made). So now, the country is broke, in debt, industry walking away and a PM, Turnbull, willing to commit Australia to some sort of FINANCIAL climate deal in Paris. Way to go Australia, we’re certainly lucky have politicians like Rudd, Gillard and Turnbull.
“tango
December 11, 2015 at 1:14 pm”
It’s not only vets who sleep in parks and are homeless. I see many people, mostly middle aged males, begging one streets in Sydney where the median house price is now close to AU$1mil. I give them what I can…but there are simply too many. I helped a middle aged woman who had slept rough in a bus shelter. I offered to get her some food, she would accept only water.
Australia, the lucky country; Lucky to have job, lucky to be able to pay for a roof over your head, lucky to find support from a system most workers have being paying taxes in to for 40 years or more.
Wait. You mean they thought we would actually PAY?
Hahahahahahahahaha!
Developed countries be like
“The only thing we can do now,” said Benjy, crouching and stroking his whiskers in thought, “is to try and fake a question, invent one that will sound plausible.”
[…]
Then Frankie said: “Here’s a thought. How many roads must a man walk down?”
“Ah,” said Benjy. “Aha, now that does sound promising!” He rolled the phrase around a little. “Yes,” he said, “that’s excellent! Sounds very significant without actually tying you down to meaning anything at all. How many roads must a man walk down? Forty-two. Excellent, excellent, that’ll fox ’em. Frankie baby, we are made!”
Under “Key issues that have delayed the agreement” there should be a number “8” stating: Does anyone here really believe that CO2 is/has caused a noticeable change in the climate?
Is there a “safe space” for those who don’t like what they are hearing at the “Paris Circus”?