Philippines Demands Upfront Compensation to Meet Climate Commitments

Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte
Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte. By Ryan Lim – Malacañang Photo Bureau, Public Domain,

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, who won the Presidency in May this year, by promising law and order, and economic development, has demanded up front compensation to meet Paris Climate Commitments – otherwise his country will focus on increasing coal generation capacity, to facilitate continued economic progress.

He said he was angry with that ambassador and “wanted to kick him” when the diplomat asked him if the Philippines could maintain its carbon emissions.

“I said, ‘No. I cannot tell… You don’t do it that way, Mr. Ambassador. (Your country) had reached the apex (of industrialization) and along the way put a lot of contaminants and emission and went ahead in destroying the climate,’” the President said.

“We have not reached the age of industrialization. We’re now going into it. But you are trying stymie (our growth) with an agreement that says you can only go up to here,” he continued.

“That’s stupid. I will not honour that,” he added.

When the ambassador told him that the Philippines was a signatory to the agreement, Mr. Duterte said he replied: “That was not my signature. It’s not mine.”

Read more:

Former(?) Philippine Climate Commissioner Lucille Sering was quick to defend the President, claiming the question which triggered the outburst was “improper”.

MANILA — President Duterte’s statement on his refusal to honor the Paris Agreement on climate change could have been a reaction to an improper question from an ambassador, according to

Sering, who expressed hope the Philippines would not pull out of the Paris agreement, said Mr. Duterte might have been irked when the ambassador— still unnamed— asked him about the Philippines maintaining a certain level of carbon emissions, as that amounted to an imposition.

“In a diplomatic perspective, you don’t ask that question because that’s an imposition on us. It’s a diplomatic faux pas to even ask that question,” Sering said in a phone interview.

The Philippines’ commitment to reducing carbon emissions was conditioned on support from the international community, she said.

“What we said was we can’t reduce unless we’re supported,” she said.

“In short, if you don’t give us any support, we will continue our sustainable development, our economic development that may rely still on dirty but cheap [energy]. But if you want us to use clean, make those energy sources cheaper,” she added.

Read more:

The Filipinos I know are strong willed and proud. Nobody pushes them around.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Science or Fiction
July 20, 2016 5:01 am

United Nations has made a total mess out of pseudo science.

Reply to  Science or Fiction
July 20, 2016 6:45 am

A well known Australian journalist, Tim Blair, has today come up with this piece of pure gold:
“The UN is a noble organisation dedicated to the principle that there is no international crisis which cannot be made infinitely worse.”

Reply to  toorightmate
July 20, 2016 11:58 am

A couple of its first creations were the theocracies of Israel and Pakistan . Look how that’s turned out .

Reply to  Science or Fiction
July 20, 2016 9:21 am

What else would expect from pseudo politicians taking advice from pseudo scientists?

Bryan A
Reply to  MarkW
July 20, 2016 12:17 pm

Perhaps the new Philippine President will open a can of (whoop ass) or demonstrate his Sikaran technique

Matthew R. Epp
July 20, 2016 5:03 am

Buy Wyoming coal. We’ve got billions of tons and the man power to extract it.

Steamboat McGoo
Reply to  Matthew R. Epp
July 20, 2016 8:27 am

Yes. They should – in any case – continue their economic/industrial development. Whether it be their coal or ours (US) or that of someone else, let it be SO! Don’t let the “climate agreement” and b***s*** “sustainable” idiocy bugger their future.

Reply to  Matthew R. Epp
July 20, 2016 12:03 pm

Man power ? Diesel power .
Those endless coal trains roll down the Front Range , some stopping in Colorado Springs to supply our electricity and restore a little bit of carbon to the biosphere .
Of all the eKo absurdities the notion that you are going to add 2 atoms of oxygen to each of those atoms of carbon then shove them underground is the most absurd .

July 20, 2016 5:12 am

“That was not my signature. It’s not mine.”

Think what would happen if every country could abnegate all its treaties every time the government changed.
I expect that someone in the international community will apply a clue stick to Rodrigo Duterte before too long.
If I were a banker holding Philippine debt, I would be nervous. That might cause me to do something that would make President Duterte nervous. I suggest that President Duterte should speak with his equivalent in Venezuela. The international outlaw thing is highly overrated.
There is a way to leave the Paris Accord in a diplomatic, legal manner. Just saying “I didn’t sign that” isn’t how to do it.

Reply to  commieBob
July 20, 2016 5:33 am

If I was that banker you speak of, I would be very nervous of irritating the leader of a sovereign government.
He might just decide on the old 10% principle.
Randomly imprison (or worse) 10% of the bankers as a warning to keep the rest in line.

Mark from the Midwest
Reply to  Felflames
July 20, 2016 5:56 am

That’s a good approach if you want to become Venezuela. Right now the Philippines need bankers a lot more than bankers need the Philippines. If you look at their volatility both in foreign direct investment and balance of trade over the past 10 years you can figure, pretty quickly, that they don’t have the economic stability to bankroll any growth potential, (if they have any growth potential, since China and South Korea are kicking them in the a..).

Reply to  Felflames
July 20, 2016 1:31 pm

The Phillipines are currently the top economic tiger in Southeast Asia.

Reply to  commieBob
July 20, 2016 6:13 am

That treaty rests upon an unproven theory. Are you contending that if suddenly the world realizes that their plans to avoid global warming are both unnecessary as well as ineffective, a country would still be obligated to injure itself economically in order to meet the treaty’s requirements? Dutertes seems to be claiming that the treaty was signed unde false pretenses or assumptions – that his country could economicaly sustain their obligations. In that case, he is justified in rejecting the treaty.

Reply to  commieBob
July 20, 2016 6:36 am

You are forgetting the best example of a nation that can unilaterally pull out, and that is the US – because Obama knew he could never get the Senate to ratify it (because the majority of Americans would not sign up for the consequences), he simply treated it as an agreement, not a treaty, and therefore non-binding on future administrations. Not sure if that is the situation in the Phillipines, but if so, then Duterte is fully exercising the right to step away. Besides, as I remember, the treaty contains “quid pro quo” obligations to developing countries – all those billions we’re supposed to pay so that they can afford the unaffordable technology. If I were him, I’d wait for the check…

Reply to  commieBob
July 20, 2016 7:12 am

The United States is one of the only nations in the world who is required by their Constitution to meet their internationals treaty obligations. This is hwy so many nations signed the Kyoto Protocol, but did not meet the obligations.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  lorcanbonda
July 20, 2016 7:31 am

If it in fact a real treaty where 2/3 of the Senate gave approval. But this is not the case this time.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  lorcanbonda
July 20, 2016 10:40 am

Neither the Kyoto Protocol, the latest Paris Climate “deal” or any other climate “deal” is a treaty that the U.S. is required to comply with, because the only treaties that bind the U.S. are those ratified by two thirds of the U.S. Senate. Obama can sign anything he likes, and it will be nothing more than toilet paper – much as “king” Obama would like all that power, he can’t bind the U.S. to international treaties. Even when the Demonicrats controlled Congress, they wouldn’t have been stupid enough to bind the U.S. to one of these ridiculous “climate deals.”

Reply to  lorcanbonda
July 20, 2016 11:17 pm

@lorcanbonda July 20, 2016 at 7:12 am
Obviously you really don’t have a clue on countries outside USA. The fact is unlike your concept that USA is somehow special there are in fact hundreds of countries that require ratification of treaties to be imposed on the country and the Philippines is one of those … please read
So a treaty is entered into by the Philippines president but must be ratified by the state representatives and senate. If you look at section 5 it gives the step by step process.
So it is EXACTLY THE SAME as the USA the president signs the agreement but it must be ratified by a parliamentary process and if it hasn’t been so he can quite rightly ignore the previous presidents signature.
That is it is pretty much the same position as the USA has with entering a treaty.

Michael 2
Reply to  commieBob
July 20, 2016 7:37 am

“Think what would happen if every country could abnegate all its treaties every time the government changed.”
Pretty much anything and everything. What exactly prevents any nation from ignoring its treaties? Only fear of consequences. What are the consequences of the Philippines ignoring this treaty? You have suggested bankers unwilling to make loans to Philippines. Perhaps they are better off without all that foreign debt.
“Just saying ‘I didn’t sign that’ isn’t how to do it.”
I find it refreshingly honest. I mean, how exactly did one person bind the entire multicultural nation in the first place? The Philippines is barely a nation!

Reply to  commieBob
July 20, 2016 7:52 am

COP21 was agreed to, but not signed. Countries must ‘sign’, and it goes into feeble voluntary effect when countries representing (IIRC) 55% of global emissions sign. Duterte can just walk away, as India has said it will unless it gets lots of GCF money ‘bribes’ also.

Reply to  commieBob
July 20, 2016 8:02 am

Its not a treaty. I’m not sure what its legal status is but we were told that it is not a treaty or our executive would not have authority to sign it without Senate approval. It is to be enforced by shaming the dawdlers. The drafters agree it will have no real effect on the climate so if the Philippines authorities don’t want part of that party they can just back out.

Michael Jankowski
Reply to  commieBob
July 20, 2016 9:29 am

That isn’t/wasn’t a treaty though…at least not by US standards.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  commieBob
July 20, 2016 9:33 am

“Think what would happen if every country could abnegate all its treaties every time the government changed.”
You would be living in the real world as we know it. There is no useful non violent means of enforcing treaties. Treaties work when there are sufficient positive incentives for both sides to abide by treaty terms, or when non compliance will cause a fleet of battleships to appear in Manila Harbor.
“I expect that someone in the international community will apply a clue stick to Rodrigo Duterte before too long.”
Who would that be? John Kerry? ROTFLMAO
“If I were a banker holding Philippine debt, I would be nervous.”
As well you would be. Sovereign debt is a very tough business. But, a creditors incentive is to ensure that the Philippines has money. And there is no money in meekly obeying the diktats of the climate treaty. If Duterte’s stick up works, that is an advantage to the Philippines’ creditors.
“I suggest that President Duterte should speak with his equivalent in Venezuela.”
Who would tell him what? “Avoid Socialism”. That is what the Venezuelans should say. undoubtedly they wouldn’t.
” The international outlaw thing is highly overrated.”
On the world scale of outlawry, climate treaty disobedience is about like jaywalking.
“There is a way to leave the Paris Accord in a diplomatic, legal manner.”
No one cares but the stripey pants set, and no cares about them but their mothers. And their mothers could be jiving them too.

Reply to  Walter Sobchak
July 20, 2016 4:22 pm

“The international outlaw thing is highly overrated.”
No country fits that description better than the USA

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
July 21, 2016 5:09 pm

Sadly, that is not true.

Mickey Reno
Reply to  commieBob
July 20, 2016 11:36 am

Neither the UN or its UNFCCC agency has the authority to punish anyone for violating the Paris climate agreement. They like to say that the Paris accord is “universal and legally binding” but this is sort of collectivist fiction, not unlike Kyoto. The real enforcement mechanism is “name and shame.” Everything outlined in Paris is voluntary.
Of course President Obama wants to bind the US to this agreement, because he’s a tacit world government Communist. But the US Constitution limits Obama. He cannot enter into the Paris compact as a binding treaty without Senate consent. He knows he will never get this, so he pretends to that authority by issuing an executive order. The next President can simply sign a new executive order saying the Executive branch is NOT bound by Obama’s previous executive order. I’m not familiar with the legal forms in the Phillipines, but I would bet the President there has wide latitude to ignore previous temporary Presidential commitments.
If I were a banker holding Philippine debt, I’d do back flips if they decided to build out their electrical generation capacity with modern coal fired plants. That would be the truest signal that they were serious about expanding their economy, and not limiting themselves with the fiction and expense of wind and solar power. This type of decision would make it more likely they’d be able to service their debts.

flyover bob
Reply to  commieBob
July 21, 2016 4:49 pm

The Paris Accord is not a treaty! The Congress of the US did not ratify the agreement nor did the Philippines.

July 20, 2016 5:17 am

There’s a part of me that really likes this guy….

Mark from the Midwest
Reply to  Latitude
July 20, 2016 5:58 am

My response, above, notwithstanding, I agree

Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
July 20, 2016 10:31 am

You should hear the Philippina girls who keep London working mothers going praise him.
‘We used to be afraid to go out because of the drug pushers, now it’s the drug pushers who are afraid to go out!’ They are convinced that their families, whom they support with money sent back home, are safer, and they love him for it.

Reply to  Latitude
July 20, 2016 9:22 am

this is the guy who has put open season on drug dealers to show his STRENGTH. that’s anything he calls a drug, mind.
now he’s being mr strongman again and trying to extort the big bucks from the USA.
did you like chavez? mugabe? idi amin?

Paul Westhaver
July 20, 2016 5:18 am

Rodrigo Duterte is right in a sense. It is financially crushing to use solar, wind etc power. So if he is to meet the requirements imposed on him by agreement with the UN then pay we must!! The IPCC was ALWAYS about wealth transfer, Rodrigo Duterte is just being explicitly honest about it.
The UN is the problem.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
July 20, 2016 8:59 am

… until the [United Nations] voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury.

The origin of the quote notwithstanding, the fundamental problem has been understood for a long time.

Reply to  Paul Westhaver
July 20, 2016 9:34 am

Bingo! “You got yours…can’t we get ours too?”

July 20, 2016 5:23 am

Climate agreement blackmail or extortion. I am surprised it took so long. Other countries will undoubtedly follow, saying they cannot meet goals unless the UN forks over billions. Holding the world hostage for money to fight an invisible, non-existent enemy. That’s creative.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Reality check
July 20, 2016 5:55 am

The UN cannot fork over billionsof what it doesn’t have, it has no money!

Science or Fiction
Reply to  Reality check
July 20, 2016 6:56 am

One of the many defects with United Nations is that the majority of countries, determining, the course of actions by United Nations sits in the receiving end of climate funding. I guess these countries didn’t really care if the science was sound or not.

Reply to  Science or Fiction
July 20, 2016 9:04 am

True. That’s the underlying problem. See my comment above.

Reply to  Science or Fiction
July 20, 2016 9:25 am

That’s the same problem every democracy has.

Reply to  Science or Fiction
July 20, 2016 9:26 am

Give me free money for something I have no intention of doing. Sounds good to me.

Eugene WR Gallun
Reply to  Reality check
July 20, 2016 10:12 am

Reality check
This is not an extortion attempt. Duterte knows perfectly well he will never get a cent. He is just giving the Greenies the finger.
Put up or shut up? Duterte knows he is dealing with people who will never put up AND WILL NEVER SHUT UP. Basically he is just telling them to go to helll.
Eugene WR Gallun

Terry Warner
July 20, 2016 5:31 am

A clear illustration that developing countries cannot afford the luxury of environmental choices without sacrificing other critical services – water, sanitation, health, education, housing etc. Only developed economies have the financial capacity to make these choices.
IPCC must persuade signatories that there needs to be cash to support less well endowed economies to make the “right” energy choices. Without this all they can get is the warm feeling of the righteous without materially changing anything.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  Terry Warner
July 20, 2016 10:54 am

Translation: The UN must get some sucker(s) to pay lots of money in order to “convince” developing countries to make really stupid energy choices that will cripple their existing/actual economies, or prevent them from developing to begin with (probably the real goal, since the “big government will save us from the Boogyman” crowd wants everybody freezing to death and starving to death in the dark). Time for the U.S. to defund the UN and kick it the he!l out of that nice piece of NYC real estate.

Richard M
July 20, 2016 5:53 am

The only reason non-developed countries even bothered to show up in Paris was the promise of free money. This was obvious to anyone who paid attention. Clearly, this person does not think there is any problem that will threaten his nation which is composed of 7500 islands and would be one of the most impacted by significant sea level rise.

Reply to  Richard M
July 20, 2016 6:51 am

Richard, I live in the Philippines. I would be impacted by sea level rise, but I would prefer to move than to watch the world suffer another glacial period of the current Ice Age. Temperature can go one of two different directions, and warming is the far more preferred direction. We live too dangerously close to dangerous cold than to dangerous heat. Melt the damned polar ice and then help people move to higher ground. The Philippines might lose 20-30% of its land, unless they get creative and build a dike around the archipelago. That would be a cool idea. Moving is less painful than watching 7 billion of your fellow humans die from the cold, starvation or food wars when the Holocene does finally end. And it’s already 500-6,000 years past the average length of an interglacial in our current Ice Age.

July 20, 2016 5:55 am

I would suggest taking it from each American’s pay check and identify it on the check stub. That would do the trick.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Resourceguy
July 20, 2016 7:33 am

Most people do not look at pay stubs any longer. As long as the direct deposit is in the bank at the expected amount the dummies are happy.

Reply to  Tom in Florida
July 20, 2016 8:30 am

Okay, take it from their refund as a named extraction.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Tom in Florida
July 21, 2016 2:17 pm

Now that could work.

Mike Sigman
July 20, 2016 5:59 am

The Philippines always has their hand out. They want us to fight off China for them, but they want money on the side, too.

Jim Sweet
July 20, 2016 6:08 am

I wouldn’t be claiming Duterte as a partner or friend of climate skeptics. He’s plainly a thug.

Reply to  Jim Sweet
July 20, 2016 6:40 am

Really? A thug? I don’t like his policy of throwing out due process on drug lords and other criminals. Too many opportunities for abuse. On the other hand, his fearlessness is refreshing. Living in the Philippines, I’m concerned, but I think he may have more going for him in the plus column. We’ll see.

Jim Sweet
Reply to  Rod Martin Jr
July 20, 2016 8:43 am

My suggestion is to keep your passport and bags handy. You may need them in a hurry.

Reply to  Rod Martin Jr
July 20, 2016 9:25 am

yes, really. a thug.
maybe you have to learn the danny pearl way.

Reply to  Jim Sweet
July 20, 2016 9:30 am

It is not at all clear he is a thug.
He is demanding the rule of law, and he is not kow towing to a dubious issue like climate.
He is in office to represent and advance Philippine interests, not the green mafia’s demands.
His biggest challenge is China and their decision to claim ownership of international waters.
Not climate hype from Paris.

Reply to  hunter
July 20, 2016 9:48 am

yes, hunter, it is totally clear that he’s a thug.
all you have done is demonstrate that you know little more than what this one article tells you and you missed the boat on that because of prejudice.
read more extensively than one blog or that will be your lot.

July 20, 2016 6:15 am

And just why aren’t they using the Zero CO2 emitting nuclear power plant that was 95% done when they scraped it?

July 20, 2016 6:23 am

he is a smart man and he is not falling for all that high sounding but vacuous UN bureaucratize song and dance.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  chaamjamal
July 20, 2016 7:37 am

Yes, putting the interests of your country ahead of the “world community” is refreshing.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  Tom in Florida
July 20, 2016 11:01 am

Well, in this case putting the interests of your country ahead of the Eco-Fascists, which is a good thing, not a bad one.
Let’s stop equating the interests of the Eco-Fascists with those of the “world community,” when the Eco-Fascists are mainly rich (and looking to get richer), politically connected scumbags who hardly have humanitarian interests at heart.

July 20, 2016 6:31 am

They (the Philippines) should be more concerned about losing their share (including coastal reefs) of the South China Sea to China; unless they are prepared to fight for it of course.

July 20, 2016 6:37 am

As an American living in the Philippines, I’m starting to like Duterte’s style (some of the time). Saying, in effect, “hell no” to climate stranglehold is a really good thing. Besides, more CO2 is a good thing — greening the Earth, and giving us more distance from carbon dioxide starvation levels.

Bruce Cobb
July 20, 2016 6:44 am

Trouble in Climate Land?

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
July 20, 2016 6:46 am


July 20, 2016 6:53 am

Well, this is a welcome twist. The targets are demanding that the mobsters pay protection money. It didn’t start with the Philippines, but it has progressed with them, and is further evidence of a catastrophic anthropogenic climate change.

July 20, 2016 6:56 am

Brexit, Venezuela, Britain and Germany rolling back on greens, EU falling apart, Trump scaring all the right people, BLM, Nation of Islam, etc showing their true colors, Turkey cranking down, and Duterte blackmailing the UN, and on and on and on……….
Not a good time to be a liberal/progressive

July 20, 2016 7:00 am

The Bait and Switch is already on at the Green Climate Fund. The 100 billion a year has quietly become 100 billion (in total). But of course they are having trouble collecting the 100 billion, as the EU and US are drowning in a sea of debt. Most of the fund is quietly being used to pay salaries and bonuses to the fund managers, with next to nothing going to countries like PI. Don’t expect that to change anytime soon, as the 100 billion is simply the carrot on the stick, held out to get donkey’s like PI to sign their future away. Sign here and we promise to give you money someday. Not sure when, but we promise it will be a lot when it arrives. You will be so rich you won’t need to industrialize.

Reply to  ferdberple
July 20, 2016 7:05 am


July 20, 2016 7:13 am

Sign here and we promise to give you someone else’s money someday.

July 20, 2016 7:25 am

Sign here and you will receive a free photo op and autograph of an ex president direct from his seaside compound.

Pop Piasa
July 20, 2016 7:31 am

You go, Rodrigo! Build the kind of plants that provide the most bang per buck for your country. I would recommend using any money you get from the UN to invest in fortifying your grid against solar magnetic shocks or EMP weapons so your country can be one of the leaders, instead of a follower.

July 20, 2016 7:31 am

….97% of the countries that attended The Paris Flop were there only to get their share of the imaginary green pie !

July 20, 2016 7:34 am

I first thought great. This world needs to start sticking it to the UN and CAGW. But then I remebered the UN is a government, and they have ZERO money of their own. So who may the Phillipino’s? Why,the WEST ,of course.

July 20, 2016 7:35 am

Whoops. Should be “will pay”. More caffeine!!

Killer Marmot
July 20, 2016 7:39 am

Nice little planet ya got here. Pity if something were to happen to it.

James Francisco
Reply to  Killer Marmot
July 20, 2016 9:00 am

It wasn’t so nice for people when they sat in cold caves and had to throw sticks and rocks to get something to eat. Are you implying that people are going to cause something bad to happen to the planet buy burning things?

Killer Marmot
Reply to  James Francisco
July 20, 2016 9:11 am

1. Get a sense of humour. They’re selling for $50 a piece on e-bay.
2. Cool off that hair-trigger sensitivity.

Reply to  Killer Marmot
July 20, 2016 9:30 am

your comment and your reply- moar please!
wry humor just takes a brain to appreciate – but it’s also useful for distinguishing those who lack one.
and being dense is not sufficient punishment. they should be made to squirm so they are at least entertaining.
moar risque & wry!

Wayne Delbeke
Reply to  Killer Marmot
July 20, 2016 9:24 pm

Like a third of the land being covered in ice?

July 20, 2016 7:44 am

Let’s review those exoplanets again shall we.

July 20, 2016 7:45 am

United States forests to grow 30-50% less due to global warming ( ? ! )
The most dramatic changes in projected forest growth rates were found in the interior West of the North American continent, with up to 75 percent slower growth projected for trees in the southwestern U.S., along the Rockies, through interior Canada and Alaska. Increases in growth were seen only along certain coastal areas, mostly in the Pacific Northwest, Northeastern Quebec and the Maritime Provinces and the Florida panhandle.
Another computer simulation or reality?

Reply to  vukcevic
July 20, 2016 8:38 am

More wack a mole. Climate models have no regional skill, so can say nothing about temperature and rainfall as indicated on this map. Nasa just published 29 years of Landsat on July 2 showing that Alaska forests are greening, contrary to the PR you linked. That study was also noted at Tipping point in 2050–typical unverifiable alarm.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  vukcevic
July 20, 2016 8:57 am

Scientists at the University of Arizona in Tucson, combined climate projections for North America developed by the International Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) with historic tree-ring records – in short
“Scientists combined climate projections developed by the International Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) with historic tree-ring records . ”
That reminds on something. SOP.

Eugene WR Gallun
Reply to  vukcevic
July 20, 2016 10:53 am

Their “science” works like this.
If you believe in evil carbon then terrible things will happen. You project what those terrible things will be and call it “data”. Then that “data” you plug into your computer model. You call the terrifying results “science”.
Fantasy in, fantasy out. That’s how climate science is done.
Eugene WR Gallun

Science or Fiction
Reply to  vukcevic
July 20, 2016 3:56 pm

I guess the tree-rings will show cooling when they grow less due to global warming.

Wayne Delbeke
Reply to  vukcevic
July 20, 2016 9:27 pm

Curious. My forestry friends tell me forest growth rates have been increasing and silvaculturists are developing more and more fast growing strains. Problem with that is, for structural timber, you want stronger, slower growing wood but with modern technology, is less and less an issue.

July 20, 2016 8:03 am

Can somebody organize a betting pool for the ambassador’s identity? I bet 10 thousand Venezuelan bolivars it was the French ambassador.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  fernandoleanme
July 20, 2016 10:11 am

What’s that in Euros?

Reply to  Pop Piasa
July 20, 2016 1:43 pm

About zilch.
The Great Leader {Chavez, ex-paratrooper, which may not be relevant] has pretty much done for Venezuela, and his Mao-minded successor ‘No mas-Nicholas’, will be left to tamp down the grave.
If ther is a spade left in the country . . . .
Such a pity – lovely people, although I haven’t been there since about 2007.

July 20, 2016 8:21 am

Duterte seems to be operating on pragmatism, and delivering real results, not promises. Of course, he is new to office.

Reply to  Tom Halla
July 20, 2016 8:29 am

But he’s not new to politics….he was the mayor of Davao City for 22 years
This is exactly the way he governed then.
…and it’s exactly why he was elected president

Bruce Cobb
July 20, 2016 8:45 am

Funny how so many “believe” in “climate change”, as long as they either don’t have to pay for it or stand to gain from it.

July 20, 2016 8:52 am

I like the people of the Philippines. I worked with a lot of them in Vietnam. They are good people, and natural allies of the U.S.
The Philippines would be crazy to hamper their economic development based on CAGW. The contribution of the Philippines to atmospheric CO2 must be miniscule. So there is no hurry for them to do anything, even if they actually believed in CAGW.

July 20, 2016 9:36 am
mean green land stealing machine. courtesy gov’t of the phillipines.

July 20, 2016 9:47 am

I like this guy Duterte. He’s right to not honor the Paris Climate Commitments. The developed nations should refuse to pay the Philippines’ way on this agreement and Duterte should follow through on using whatever energy source is both cheapest and strategically accessible for a resource-restricted country.
My wife comes from a remote island in the Philippines where people are quite poor, and we were appalled to see Duterte’s predecessor outlaw incandescent light bulbs in favor of the energy-efficient LED bulbs that cost a great deal more. This simple act meant that poor people would not be able to afford light at night. Now, I’ve got to admit, I haven’t followed through and found whether that was repealed, whether there is some government assistance to afford LED bulbs, etc…, to mitigate the impact on the poor. Regardless, it imposed a burden on a relatively poor nation for no reason.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  john
July 20, 2016 10:36 am

Mmm… organized crime –

July 20, 2016 11:35 am

“The Filipinos I know are strong willed and proud. Nobody pushes them around.”
First, what does that have to do with a binding, legal agreement signed by his country? Or are you saying that any incoming leader of a country is free to ignore any treaties and agreements signed by his/her predecessors in office if they don’t agree with them?
Second, the Philippines are being pushed around right now by China in the South China Sea. Filipinos are wonderful people, but their country is very weak militarily.

Reply to  Chris
July 20, 2016 4:05 pm

First, what does that have to do with a binding, legal agreement signed by his country?

There is no “binding, legal agreement” in force (ha-ha) at his time.

Reply to  clipe
July 20, 2016 4:06 pm

at this time

Reply to  clipe
July 20, 2016 6:30 pm

It becomes binding once a threshhold is reached, either 55 or 60%. Then it becomes binding.

Reply to  Chris
July 20, 2016 4:42 pm

I hate to break it to you but no country will follow through on this. No western people would ever put up with the reality of much of the Philippines outside of the Manila area. Daily blackouts due to lack of power.
Which begs the question, why do white westerners demand the Philippines stay down?
Final note. Having moved here a few months ago, I must say how refreshing it is to live under a President who actually loves his country.

Reply to  Todd
July 20, 2016 6:28 pm

” No western people would ever put up with the reality of much of the Philippines outside of the Manila area. Daily blackouts due to lack of power.”
The blackouts have nothing to do with green lobbying, they are caused by government bureaucracy, as well as unfriendly terms for foreign investors. The Philippines has lagged behind the rest of ASEAN in FDI and economic progress for 30 years.
“Which begs the question, why do white westerners demand the Philippines stay down?”
Why are you turning this into something racial? Poland, which is predominately white, is being asked to reduce its coal use and move to less CO2 producing sources of power. And in any case, as I noted above, the issue is not white westerners. Unlike you, I have lived in SE Asia for 20 years, and have been traveling to and working with companies in the Philippines since the late 1990s. The Philippines’ economic problems are primarily self inflicted.
“Having moved here a few months ago, I must say how refreshing it is to live under a President who actually loves his country.”
Welcome to extrajudicial killings. Even my Filipino friends are deeply concerned about this.

Reply to  Todd
July 21, 2016 1:34 am

More “refreshing” news: Being a strong leader is one thing, encouraging pure vigilantism is something entirely different.

Reply to  Todd
July 21, 2016 3:25 pm

Why is it racial? Because I see a never ending parade of white people flying their private jets into places like the Philippines and India, demanding they stay down.
The blackouts do have much to do with green lobbying (as well as the foreign ownership rules Duterte promises to do away with). I once read an article about how the people of a remote island were protesting against the building of a power plant that would finally bring them into the 20th century. In a place where no English is spoken, the people somehow came up with perfectly manufactured signs, in English. It was only towards the end of the article we met the organizers of the protest. Two very white, very rich European students who arrived on a yacht.
There is very much an element of keeping of “those people” in their place.
About the Filipino people and Duterte? His trust rating (think approval rating in the US) is 92-0.2, with 8% undecided. Your friends may have a problem with him, but the overwhelming majority are embracing him.

Reply to  Todd
July 22, 2016 12:36 pm

I see, so your evidence is a couple anecdotes (not supported by links) about rich white people coming to the Philippines to hold them down. Let’s see what the conservative, not friendly to green energy Wall Street Journal says on this matter: Gee, that’s odd, no mention whatsoever of green protests or lobbying as being a primary factor in the power shortage.

Reply to  Chris
July 20, 2016 7:12 pm

Sorry Chris, It’s non-binding now and will be non-binding for ever after.

Reply to  Chris
July 20, 2016 11:23 pm

I have commented above it also depends if the Philippines government has ratified the process, the President can sign a treaty but he can not ratify it that requires a formal process in parliament much like USA.

July 20, 2016 1:28 pm

Duarte should just ask for the same deal that China got – do nothing till 2030, then “think about it.”
Sending money to countries for the purpose of combating climate change is a risky business. How do you know they are going to use it “wisely?” Sometime in the early 80s the IMF or World Bank sent a major boatload of concrete to Laos so they could build a modern airport in Vientiane, the capital, thus spurring economic growth. Instead they used it to build this:comment image?dl=0

Reply to  markopanama
July 20, 2016 1:46 pm

But it’s rather pleasant. Not beautiful.
But not bad.

Reply to  Auto
July 20, 2016 3:04 pm

Yes, in a heavy handed soviet sort of way. All of the grand buildings in Vientiane belong to the communist government, while the people go across the Mekong to shop in Thailand where there are actually things to buy.
And yes, I know it is Duterte. If I was him (fat chance), I’d say, “Dudes – you want me to do something about climate change? Send me some damn nukes!” Oh…oh…oh… but we didn’t mean THAT. It might be effective. DIdn’t you read the Paris agreement? We all pledged to do nothing effective about climate change and giving you nukes would violate our principles. Can’t we just ship you some bales of money so you can build a new seaside villa and buy a bigger jet?

July 20, 2016 3:02 pm

Much as I like him walking away, screw the Philippines. They had a Cat 4 typhoon hit them. Well if you don’t like typhoons, don’t live on the equator! We had the spectacle of their climate loon literally crying! Blaming CAGW, DEMANDING Da Climate Justice!
Now they’re not a country well suited to a national grid, and actually do use a bit of unconventional power because on a small island it makes some sense to have in situ generation. They wanted us to pay; they wanted a legally binding treaty to FORCE the same transfer of wealth from developed countries to emerging markets that always follows the corrupt UN activities. “We want Uganda’s deal” they said – unlimited carbon credits. And Du-irty Harry is just doing the usual.

July 20, 2016 8:02 pm

No doubt our dear friends at George Mason University and the U.S. States Attorneys Generals with beloved Al Gore have a hind in the money pocket of our Philippines Dictator And Chief.
Ha ha

July 20, 2016 11:35 pm

So I checked the UN website and there are actually only 17 Countries that have ratified the Paris agreement and they are correctly listed on the wiki entry
So 177 signatures are on the agreement but only 17 ratifications as of today.
Philippines has not ratified the agreement as it hasn’t passed thru their system, so the President can indeed just revoke the agreement as he has that power as the head of state.

July 20, 2016 11:54 pm

Looking at local Philippines papers it does appear indeed that Drilon is indeed going to just block the ratifying process in the senate which is entirely legal and would be the same as a block on a treaty in USA
He obviously controls the senate via his party.
So we need to get off the illegal idea he is not seeking to break a ratified agreement he is threatening to not allow the agreement to be ratified under Philippines law which is entirely legal and would have no impact on their international standing.

July 21, 2016 5:14 am

Duterte is right in junking the Paris agreement. Philippines accounts for 0.2% of world energy consumption. Its contribution to global warming is an order of magnitude smaller than the statistical error in global temperature anomaly. If a giant asteroid hit Philippines and obliterated it from the face of the Earth, the global temperature anomaly would not even notice the country is gone

J Solters
July 21, 2016 8:20 am

The “Paris Agreement” binds no one country to anything.; now or in the future. There are no penalties; there are no enforcement provisions. It is nothing but a statement of goals; a political document of intentions. I’m surprised many commenters here don’t seem to understand what the “Agreement” actually represents.

%d bloggers like this: