Saudi Arabia Vows to Adhere to Paris Climate Pledges

King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud inherited power in 2015
King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud inherited power in 2015. By Secretary of Defense –, Public Domain, Link

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

In the wake of the Trump victory, Saudi Arabia, by far the world’s largest oil exporter, has vowed to adhere to its Paris Climate Pledges.

Saudi Arabia will stick to Paris accord climate change pledges

Vow comes amid fears president-elect Donald Trump will pull US out of global deal

Saudi Arabia says it will press ahead with pledges it made under the Paris climate change accord, even if president-elect Donald Trump pulls the US out of the global deal after he is sworn in.

In an indication of how isolated the US may be if it abandons the climate agreement that virtually every country in the world struck last December, the world’s largest oil exporter said the commitment of other big economies such as China underlined the accord’s strength.

“The US is very important for the climate process there is no doubt,” a Saudi delegate told the FT at UN climate talks in the Moroccan city of Marrakesh, the first since the deal was adopted in Paris.

“But at the same time we need to recognise that the climate issue is a global issue. At the end of the day, this process is resilient enough to move forward and China’s comments are an example of that.”

Chinese negotiators in Marrakesh warned on Friday that there was a clear consensus among the “whole global society” to back the Paris deal and any shift in the US position would not derail Beijing’s efforts to shift to a greener economy.

The Saudi delegate, who declined to be named, said the fact that so many countries had rushed to ratify the Paris deal that it came into force in record time was “a very nice surprise” that amounted to the icing on the cake.

We need to recognise that the climate issue is a global issue. At the end of the day, this process is resilient enough to move forward

”The US election means you have to eat it fast,” he said, adding fossil fuel-rich Saudi Arabia had “no intention of watering down” its commitments to the deal.

Saudi Arabia, for example, has pledged to install more solar panels and other renewable energy systems, as long as its economy keeps growing, while the US has said it will cut its emissions by at least 26 per cent from 2005 levels over the next nine years, partly by reducing coal power plant pollution.

Read more:

It is understandable that Saudi Arabia, whose government according to Julian Assange of Wikileaks is a major financier of anti-American Islamic terror and the Clinton Foundation, thinks their joke commitment to watch America self destruct is worth maintaining.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 13, 2016 2:55 pm

97% of the countries that signed the deal, did so ONLY because they expected to receive money from the U.S. gravy train…

Reply to  Marcus
November 13, 2016 7:31 pm

Of course the Saudi are for the climate deal. They are selling oil, not coal. Coal is the target of the climate deal, to get it out of the market, so that Oil and Gas have a world wide monopoly on energy production.

Reply to  ferdberple
November 13, 2016 9:29 pm

…and they’ll change their approach in a nano-second when that target is expanded to include oil and gas. Such are the self-serving dealings of those stupid enough to get snared in their subterfuge.

Reply to  ferdberple
November 13, 2016 10:09 pm

That’s right Fred, but the Saudis have forgotten this FACT…
Official Policy from President Elect Trump :
“We will end the war on coal, and rescind the coal mining lease moratorium, the excessive Interior Department stream rule, and conduct a top-down review of all anti-coal regulations issued by the Obama Administration. We will eliminate the highly invasive “Waters of the US” rule, and scrap the $5 trillion dollar Obama-Clinton Climate Action Plan and the Clean Power Plan and prevent these unilateral plans from increasing monthly electric bills by double-digits without any measurable effect on Earth’s climate. ”
Read more at His *NEW* Website
Note to Greenwashing Oil Oligarchs :
Trump will not forget how you financed
Hillary and Bill in their illegal schemes !

Robert from oz
Reply to  ferdberple
November 13, 2016 10:35 pm

The Saudi govt had a big day I see they also have elevated women to the same status of camel and goat , no longer mere possessions !

Reply to  ferdberple
November 14, 2016 2:57 am

According to the Executive Summary of their Pledges, they will do all the things they have pledged to do so long as doing so doesn’t make them poorer in the long run.
Or that is how I read it, anyway.

J McClure
Reply to  ferdberple
November 14, 2016 1:30 pm

Wake uP!
The entire Middle East is defined by oil production. They require 70% return on the effort or their cities and regions fail.
This is the issue!

Reply to  Marcus
November 14, 2016 5:15 am

Sauds seem to be in a “bit of bother” financially due to low oil prices
unpaid contractors to the tune of mega millions etc
so the gravy train handouts might be needed?
Hope the Donald cuts it ALL off soon as he can

Barbara Skolaut
Reply to  Marcus
November 14, 2016 2:02 pm


November 13, 2016 2:56 pm

Good, let them. We (USA) need to get out of the Paris agreement as quickly as we can and not dump any more money down the AGW money pit.

Reply to  TeeWee
November 13, 2016 4:05 pm

The Saudi’s are running out of light oil. They have plenty of heavy oil and most of the US refineries can now take heavy oil because of tar sand oil suppliers from Canada. Heavy oil refining does leave mountains of refining “coke” in the US.
They intend to “float” their light refineries via ARAMCo. Finance for the “float” will be “accelerated” via US Treasuries held by Saudi Arabia. They are basically selling something they will soon not need via US banksters backed by Saudi US Treasuries, sold to US superannuants at unsustainable prices. They will then buy up distressed US energy assets using US float profits with connivance of US Democratic politicians.
Financing a war in Syria and Iraq not only deflects major competition from Iran but uses up more oil. A major input from NATO, Russia and the US would be ideal for energy and arms suppliers.
Iran must feel very threatened by all this and must see a nuclear deterrent as their only option despite the Israeli security need.
This Clinton/Obama thought bubble is not going to end well.
As Saudi Arabia did not expect to see a Trump presidency, they must now get the world to gang up on the US via Plan B, Climate Change.
No doubt many weak brained politicians will help if paid appropriately.

Reply to  Geoff
November 13, 2016 4:30 pm

If they develop an excess of heavy oil, they’ll be even more crackers!

Reply to  Geoff
November 13, 2016 5:48 pm

…damn good post Geoff and spot on

Reply to  Geoff
November 14, 2016 9:25 am

They seem to be aware of that and see solar energy as one way they can keep going post oil…
They are massively investing in it and solar energy firms.

November 13, 2016 2:57 pm

Of course they are going to install more solar, their situation is almost perfect for it.
And that leaves them more oil to sell everyone else. They aren’t doing anyone any favors.

Reply to  ClimateOtter
November 13, 2016 3:08 pm

Yup. Taking long chain hydrocarbons and turning them into CO2 is a waste anyway if you can avoid it. Oil is nice because it is high energy, portable, stable, and a lot of other stuff when you need it for those purposes, but for stationary plants, coal and ng make a lot more sense.

Reply to  ShrNfr
November 13, 2016 3:22 pm

solar powered desalination plant is an obvious solution for the Saudis. Now they obviously want to be part of a system where some sucker is going to be paying them “carbon credits” for doing so and probably paying the cost of the silicon they are installing.

Reply to  ShrNfr
November 13, 2016 3:45 pm

When Saudi Arabia breaks-ranks with OPEC, and aligns with parties advocating the minimization of oil consumption, this is of Richter proportions. However, they’re not stupid.  There’s more to this. 
ShrNfr says:          Taking long chain hydrocarbons and turning them into CO2 is a waste anyway if you can avoid it. Oil is nice because it is high energy, portable, stable, and a lot of other stuff when you need it for those purposes, but for stationary plants, coal and ng make a lot more sense.”
I’m an engineer, not a Chemist, but it makes at least intuitive sense that there’s entropic advantage accruing to crude oil as compared with coal & n.g. in a straight combustion context.  I wonder if the Saudis have a DCF analysis that reflects the entropic advantage in $ terms? 
This wd imply a rationale, by *their* reckoning, for optimal, national economic advantage by keeping it in the ground.  By backing the Green agenda, they’re promoting a massive global rise in the cost of energy consumption, which can only redound to their advantage in the long-run, and — follow the money! — why they are flip-flopping. (Try selling this concept to the Venezuelans!!!)
In the meantime, the Saudis are ideally suited for solar-power, and can hoard their precious oil reserves pending NPV-maximization.

Greg Woods
Reply to  ClimateOtter
November 13, 2016 4:02 pm

I wonder how those panels will hold up when the sand storms hit – and they will hit – been there, seen that…

george e. smith
Reply to  Greg Woods
November 13, 2016 8:50 pm

Well at least the Saudis have plenty of sand to make new solar panels. So they can afford to grind them up now and then; and when they do finally run out of oil they can always go and pound sand.

Tom Halla
November 13, 2016 3:02 pm

The Saudis just had a major investment in the Clinton Foundation go bad, and do not have similar financial ties to the new Trump administration. Not really understanding foreign politics is not just an American fault.

Reply to  Tom Halla
November 13, 2016 3:23 pm

Why did it go bad ? They got the arms deal authorised didn’t they?

Tom Halla
Reply to  Greg
November 13, 2016 3:35 pm

My presumption was a matter of pre-paying for influence.

Reply to  Greg
November 13, 2016 4:05 pm

What’s a few million between friends…

November 13, 2016 3:04 pm

When the US pulls out the other countries will follow like falling dominoes

November 13, 2016 3:10 pm

if one guy doesn’t get in a sack he’ll leave everyone in the dust just by walking…lol
will trump get the usa out of this global suicide pact?

Reply to  gnomish
November 13, 2016 3:26 pm

Yeah, suicide pack: you can commit suicide right now, and I promise to follow no later than 2030. Promise !!

November 13, 2016 3:10 pm

said the commitment of other big economies such as China underlined the accord’s strength.

Yeah, China has agreed to carry on growing and producing more CO2 , whilst becoming more efficient. India has said it will make cuts if it gets technology at a knocked down price and get given 2.5 TRILLION dollars to pay for the changes.
The other “nearly 200” countries are also rans who are irrelevant.
The Saudis are not saying they will produce less oil ( the dreaded “carbon” ) but will install some solar. WTF? Wow, huge commitment, glad your going plough ahead with that. Major planet saving move there. That will definitely offset you 1.5 miilion barrels per day of “carbon”.

Reply to  Greg
November 13, 2016 3:27 pm

Plus China gets to sell all those solar panels to the rest of the world. They’re really on a win-win here.

Reply to  Greg
November 13, 2016 4:08 pm

It’s only American CO2 that will kill you…
Amazing isn’t it….and people actually fall for this crap

Reply to  Latitude
November 13, 2016 4:46 pm

Well, if you accept the initial premise, then the rest is a no-brainer. Almost literally.
“Just the tip, I promise!”

November 13, 2016 3:11 pm

It should not be taken literally, the Arabs do not like to disappoint by being negative. Therefore, they say God willing we will do this or that and often that is the end of it.

Reply to  vukcevic
November 13, 2016 4:53 pm

Dear Vukcevic:
“In sh’Allah!” (Allah-willing!)
From years of experience working out there, “In sh’Allah!” is the ultimate AND INFALLIBLE cop-out. What Muslims agree today, In sh’Allah!, is not necessarily what Allah thinks tomorrow — or any time in the future!
There are books ceiling-high about “dealing” with Muslims, and Lesson No.1 is that you can’t trust anything they say, ‘cos Allah is the ultimate determinant.
Our western perspective leans to a (wo)man’s word and/or handshake being a bond of trust that can be depended upon. Not so with Arabs/Muslims (unless you are “blood”).
The chasm between the western model and the Muslim ‘In sh’Allah!’ philosophy is a fundamental (and unbridgeable?) gulf between the cultures.

Reply to  Ross King
November 13, 2016 7:27 pm

Agreed…ha,ha,ha . Inshallah is the ultimate copout. I worked in SA w/S. Aramco for 23+ yrs… in fact I worked with the current Saudi oil minister… Khalid Al Falah…. “Inshallah” means that its not the individuals responsibility to insure that a promise or agreement will happen but only if allah wills it to happen.. but…. un fortunately we’ll never, never, will know what allah wills, so that agreement that was made may not happen at all.

george e. smith
Reply to  Ross King
November 13, 2016 8:54 pm

Sounds like this “In sh’Allah!” is a translation from the Japanese; ” That will be very difficult to do. ”

Russ Wood
Reply to  Ross King
November 15, 2016 7:32 am

I’ve also heard that “In sh’Allah” is a bit like the Mexican ‘Manana’, only without the sense of urgency…

November 13, 2016 3:15 pm

Correct me if I get this a bit wrong but wasn’t the $22M contribution to the Clinton Foundation shortly before Sec. of state Clinton had to decide on whether to issue a permit for $2.5bn worth of arms exports which they will use bomb civilians and hospitals in Yemen?
Now I know the Saudis have a bit of a rep for bribery but of course I’m sure such donations to a charitable non-profit like the Clinton Foundation are totally legit. I mean she’s a lawyer, right? She’d know not to do anything illegal.

Reply to  Greg
November 13, 2016 4:05 pm

Is Clinton loyalty really so strong that people are going to argue with a straight face that the reason the Saudi, Qatari, Kuwaiti and Emirates regimes donated large amounts of money to the Clinton Foundation is because those regimes simply want to help the foundation achieve its magnanimous goals? link

Two things occur to me:
1 – “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion”. link
2 – They’re tone deaf

Bill Illis
Reply to  Greg
November 13, 2016 4:33 pm

The Saudi’s do not need to invest in a Clinton Foundation to do some good with their money. They can give it to any charity or spend it directly. (Like all the money they sunk into Wahabi religious schools). It was strictly money for influence.
Something never mentioned about the Clinton Foundation is that basically none of the money is going into charitable projects.
In 2014, the Foundation raised $250 million in contributions and spent $248 million. But only $34 million of that $248 million was actually spent on charitable projects (which includes a Resort Hotel in Haiti for some reason when they were pretending to be re-building housing in Haiti). $214 million went into conferences and consultants and training and meetings and salaries and whole bunch of other things that sound like people got paid for doing things for them.
It doesn’t take long looking at the Clinton Foundation to realize that Hillary should never be President. Ever watch “House of Cards”. They are the Clintons.

Reply to  Bill Illis
November 13, 2016 10:33 pm

Something never mentioned about the Clinton Foundation is that basically none of the money is going into charitable projects

The 2014 IRS filing at shows somewhat lower numbers than in Bill Illis’s quote above, but it doesn’t look like much of the money went to other charitable organizations.
Wikipedia says:
“Charitable grants are not a major focus of the Clinton Foundation, which instead keeps most of its money in house and hires staff to carry out its own humanitarian programs. In September 2016, the charity watchdog group Charity Navigator gave it its highest possible rating, four out of four stars, after its customary review of the Foundation’s financial records and tax statements.”
See for information on the connections between Charity Navigator and the Clinton foundation.

Reply to  Bill Illis
November 14, 2016 4:22 am

Go to Note 9 on page 18. Not really a charity but something else.

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  Greg
November 13, 2016 6:52 pm

Didn’t Canada agree to sell them $27 bn in weaponry recently?

Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
November 13, 2016 11:56 pm

No Crisp that was the US. where in the heck would you find 27 bn worth of weapons in Canada? Tim Hortons? hey maybe sell the Arabs donuts and coffee to bombard ISIS 🙂

Reply to  asybot
November 14, 2016 12:11 am

Canada did indeed contract (under the last gov’t) to supply a pile of advanced mobile weaponry to Saudi Arabia.
The current gov’t (in opposition at the time) squealed all the way, but — on ascendancy to power — is turning itself inside-out to justify endorsing the contract. We have an ex-P.M., Dion, who is now Cabinet Minister I/c the file, and he is the ultimate piece of putty. So much for principle & probity, but that’s our Liberal Party.

Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
November 14, 2016 12:18 am

Asybot ….. Tim Hortons donuts are quite good ammo (esp’lly a day-old) but their so-called coffee being — in my opinion — the worst in the World, is Canada’s stealth-weapon for lobbing over the battlements to induce insta-surrender.

Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
November 14, 2016 1:54 am

Ross, I used to say that Timmy’s grounds were from yesterday’s golden arches coffeemakers. But the arches’ coffee is now quite good, with no improvement in Timmy’s, so I must have been wrong.

Steve from Rockwood
Reply to  Crispin in Waterloo
November 14, 2016 6:40 am

$14.8 billion worth of light armoured vehicles – not “weaponry”. It was Canada’s single largest export of military equipment by dollar value (and was signed in 2013).

November 13, 2016 3:23 pm

Can’t wait for the Saudi’s to cap the oil wells.

Reply to  Peter
November 13, 2016 6:50 pm

Holding back production while waiting for prices to rise could be a disaster if new technology develops an emission-free form of energy. Most of that oil may indeed stay in the ground if we are talking decades.

george e. smith
Reply to  R2Dtoo
November 13, 2016 9:01 pm

So what would this ” new technology be ??
Where I come from it has been a tradition that before you develop a technology, you develop the science that says it isn’t impossible, and you investigate the economics of known ways to achieve the result. After that, you work on the technology to reduce it to safe routine normal practice.
So what new science do you know about that we already don’t know about ??

November 13, 2016 3:27 pm

They’ve been foot dragging right up to this moment and using crude oil to make electricity all along. They were about to be passed by Jordan and already have been by much smaller Gulf states.

November 13, 2016 3:27 pm

“Saudi Arabia, for example, has pledged to install more solar panels and other renewable energy systems, as long as its economy keeps growing”
So basically their pledge is to do nothing. If their economy DOESN’T keep growing they don’t have to do anything. And if it does keep growing then they install solar, which being near the equator and getting very little rain their country is perfect for.
In fact I bet they install more solar no matter what their economy does because for their specific situation solar makes sense, unlike in much (if not most) of the rest of the world.

Hans Erren
Reply to  ddpalmer
November 13, 2016 3:42 pm

The BP energy outlook lets Saudi Arabia fuel the in Paris agreed growth of CO2 emissions of China and India. So Saudi can increase oil exports AND find green sponsors for solar powered desalinisation plants. Win-win for the Saudis!

Reply to  ddpalmer
November 13, 2016 10:03 pm

I’ve seen solar panels mounted on Iraqi street-
light poles that are so dusty they can’t have produced more then 10% of their rated value. Solar is not a good technology for regions that have regular sandstorms.

Walter Sobchak
November 13, 2016 3:33 pm

The Saudis are running out of money. If oil stays around $50/bbl. They won’t be doing anything.
Riyadh Is Reeling From Bargain Oil Prices
” … the Saudis fiscal deficit is now equivalent to a whopping 20 percent of the country’s GDP …
“For now and the foreseeable future, Saudi Arabia is going to continue to run an enormous budget deficit, and will be forced to dig deeper into its rainy day funds in order to cope with today’s new oil market reality …”

Bill P.
November 13, 2016 3:42 pm

“…amid fears president-elect Donald Trump will pull US out of global deal.”
The US is not IN the deal. That’s a Barack Obama hobby. The Senate never ratified the agreement as the Constitution requires. In fact, Obama never even submitted it to the Senate, knowing it would be rejected and would expose the lie that “the US is in the deal.”
The Left despises the Comstitution. So often it manages to thwart their unpopular policies.

Reply to  Bill P.
November 13, 2016 9:34 pm

Strange how Obama has been leading a shadow government for 8 years; shine enough light on the subject and it’s very obvious. His part of the swamp won’t be missed.

Bruce Cobb
November 13, 2016 3:49 pm

They know how to play the “climate” game. It’s all about keeping up appearances, and positioning yourself to your own self-advantage. Nothing to do with “climate change” (which they couldn’t care less about) whatsoever.

November 13, 2016 3:57 pm

Saudi Arabia had planned on moving away from oil and gas because their demand for power was increasing, but their supplies decreasing. This was before the Paris agreements and therefore those agreements meant nothing to the Saudis, had little choice in the matter and who were planning 17 Gw of nuclear over the next 20 years. Apparently they have scaled back their original goal of 50% solar to 10% solar. About half of their electricity is produced by oil (not very economical) and half by gas. They also have to power desalinization plants in additiion to provide electricity for their 30 million population. Their plans for the period up to 2040 strike me as pretty silly, as they don’t take into acount the new nuclear power technologies.

November 13, 2016 4:03 pm

It’s only the sandman, got that covered.

David S
November 13, 2016 4:15 pm

If the Saudis were serious they would stop exporting oil . That way they would have some global impact. In Australia we are doing our bit by preventing the development of the Adaami coal mine and banning exploration for gas in Victoria. Why should we be the only idiots in the world who actually believe that rather than play lip service to the global warming gods you actually have to make human sacrifices of our current standards of living.

Reply to  David S
November 13, 2016 5:46 pm

and if the aussies were serious they wouldn’t be the world’s largest exporter of coal, is that the message?

Reply to  David S
November 13, 2016 5:47 pm

i think you may actually believe that.

Reply to  David S
November 13, 2016 5:53 pm

Then vote. Elections have their consequences….

Steve from Rockwood
Reply to  David S
November 14, 2016 6:50 am

Australians and Canadians are idiots for the same reason. Both countries are willing to dismantle their resource industry in the name of global warming without requiring that the developing countries take part, resulting in a transfer of benefit to other countries but with no overall reduction in pollution or CO2 emissions.
But the facts show both countries are pretty hopeless at actually shutting down their resources. In Alberta, for example, the left-wing government wants to shut down coal, switch to solar and wind AND expand their oil exports via pipelines. A total contradiction but necessary to both appease the voters AND earn enough revenue to fulfil their promises. This, of course, has no effect on total emissions and so a carbon tax is imposed, further raising money for the government with complete approval from the voting masses but with little expected benefit to the environment.
Looking at iron ore and coal exports from Australia shows a similar story.

Reply to  Steve from Rockwood
November 14, 2016 7:42 pm

Steve: I think only left brained folks in Australia and Canada are idiots – but who knows. Some right brained folks are fighting the “Carbon” silliness though they will fail until the Notehead NDP get defeated in 3/7 years???

November 13, 2016 4:20 pm

A giant cat needs to cover the Saudi R oyals in their giant sandbox. Whats the saying. .. with friends like these. That and climate virtue signalling has long been a thing for otherwise repulsive regimes.

November 13, 2016 4:27 pm

Ah yes, the old “you will be the only one in the world not doing the right thing and will be isolated” or is that ostracized?
I remember Australia being threatened with that too.
Then Brexit happened and now a bunch of countries want out of the EU. People are turning away from the meme in droves. I don’t think America has to worry about the rest of the world. It’s the socialists and alarmists who have to worry about the rest of the world.

November 13, 2016 4:33 pm

“Repulsive” is a strong word. Let me flip your comment: they probab’ly think you, troe, are repulsive ‘cos you’re an infidel. Where does that get us in the debate? Nowhere, except into fisticuffs.
They run their regime paternalistically & feudally & religiously as is their custom. How *they* do it is none of *our* business, except by moral suasion as to their methods as compared with other (perhaps more compassionate, open-minded, accommodative) societies.
I’m not a shill for Arabs (most *certainly* not after working there for a few years) but it’s *their* country, like it or not. Much as I might share yr views, it behoves us to try to accommodate (hold-nose!) theirs.

Reply to  Ross King
November 13, 2016 8:19 pm

Who the ef are you to be lecturing anyone about not speaking freely, Ross?
The SJW BS is old, sir.

Reply to  JohnKnight
November 14, 2016 12:25 am

Uhhhh? what does “SJW” mean?
“BS” I take as “BullShit”.
Troe is speaking freely; I am speaking freely in response. My hang-up was the use of the word “repulsive”.
What’s YOUR problem?

Reply to  JohnKnight
November 14, 2016 12:52 am

“Uhhhh? what does “SJW” mean?”
You don’t know how to search that ? . . I don’t believe it.
“Troe is speaking freely; I am speaking freely in response. My hang-up was the use of the word “repulsive”.”
Which is to me an attempt to stifle honest discussion. We have free speech, and it’s not just for saying things ruling elites will be comfortable with us disusing. I couldn’t a been more than ten when that became clear to me, sir.

Reply to  JohnKnight
November 14, 2016 1:05 am

The essence of communication is clarity. If you don’t understand that, you’re lost already.
I have no intention of searching out what your baffledegab means, esp’lly when you cd have translated it in 1/2 the time it took for you to respond to this.
You clearly are more interested in picking a personal fight than any meaningful dialog on much more important issues.

Reply to  JohnKnight
November 14, 2016 12:58 am

PS ~ “they probab’ly think you, troe, are repulsive ‘cos you’re an infidel.”
Pretty repulsive stuff, no?

Reply to  JohnKnight
November 14, 2016 1:07 am

“The essence of communication is clarity.”
I don’t trust you. Clear?

Reply to  JohnKnight
November 14, 2016 1:14 am

You replied:
“I don’t trust you. Clear?”
Uhhh???? Clear as mud. What’s that supposed to mean in this context?
You’re beginning to sound like a pathetic waste of time & space.

Reply to  JohnKnight
November 14, 2016 1:19 am

PS ~ “they probab’ly think you, troe, are repulsive ‘cos you’re an infidel.”
Pretty repulsive stuff, no?

November 13, 2016 4:35 pm

So they plan on raising the price of oil so less will be sold? They are going to stop flooding the market with cheap fossil fuels? What? I didn’t think so…..They are not really serious at all then. When they cut oil production back by say 50% as part of the “keep it in the ground” strategy, then they can claim to be participating.
As for “the US will be the only one not participating”, the US will be the only country not lying about what they intend to do and trying to fake out the world that they care while they continue business as usual. Seems a fine place to be in to me.

Bruce Cobb
November 13, 2016 4:57 pm

“…the fact that so many countries had rushed to ratify the Paris deal that it came into force in record time was “a very nice surprise” that amounted to the icing on the cake.”
Would this be the same cake they get to have, and eat too?

November 13, 2016 5:06 pm

Trump’s election has well and truly allowed the dissenting genie out of the climate bottle. He’s going to prove an extremely difficult genie for environmentalists to put back!

Dave Fair
Reply to  CheshireRed
November 13, 2016 7:08 pm

The climate scam could never be sustainable under a system where alternative viewpoints are widely published. With President The Donald, people will now see competing ideas brought forward through his bully pulpit.
Honest cost/benefit analyses should be forthcoming from revamped Executive Branch agencies. The wheels will soon be coming off the bandwagon.

November 13, 2016 5:19 pm

The USA already sold out to Saudi 40 years ago. This is why they are the ‘untouchables’.

Reply to  Duncan
November 13, 2016 5:42 pm

While everyone here is fighting over solar panels and dust storms, the US government knows the Saudi’s are helping ISIS, yet nothing is done. They have the USA by the cohones. ‘We’ fight their wars while women are being beheaded on their streets. The Saudi’s are much better chess players than the USA. The Saudi’s have no intention of looking after anyone else but themselves, climate change included. Don’t look behind the curtain.

November 13, 2016 5:29 pm

tit for tat
USA does no support Saudis in Syria, Saudi pushes “Global Warming” to destroy US oil industry.
Let’s see if Trump open 911 files and start to screw the Saudis.

Reply to  AlexS
November 13, 2016 5:31 pm

The next would be: enter the Chinese. And we have a Chinese-Pakistan-Saudi Axis

Reply to  AlexS
November 13, 2016 5:39 pm

Politics & Diplomacy make the strangest of bed-fellows! It’s analogous to a French-Farce with people hopping in and out of bed in different rooms according to the exigencies of the moment!
Don’t forget the French invented the language of Diplomacy … maybe French-Farce & French Diplomacy are synonymous, which makes the World the mess it’s in today!

November 13, 2016 5:30 pm

The FT journo mumbles about Saudi’s commitment to solar panels and windmills, avoiding making things clear. Saudi’s Paris pledge has their emissions up in 2030 in the range 70-110%. Some pledge.

November 13, 2016 5:41 pm

I sure hope Trump “sticks to his guns” on this issue.
“Saudi Arabia Vows to Adhere to Paris Climate Pledges”…good for them, I hope they do it.
We are “out-of-there”…jpp

November 13, 2016 6:48 pm

Well those Saudis are a trustworthy bunch. Religion of Peace and all that. Never a lie among that crowd. No sir.

November 13, 2016 6:57 pm

According to the Paris Agreenent the rich nations, like Saudi Arabia, are suppose to help the poor nations. like the USA which has a huge national debt, huge annual federal deficits, and huge annual trade deficits. I want Saudi Arabia to buy me an all electric car and a solar power system to change the batteries so as to reduce my so called carbon foot print. Since the climate change we are experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans and there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate, reducing my carbon footprint will not affect global climate one iota but I wuuld like to have the free stuff.

November 13, 2016 7:03 pm

Saudi-led OPEC and the various ministers know they are long-term F%€£ed with Trump promising to open up Federal lands to oil and gas exploration and development. Plus the relaxation of fracking rules, the relenting on coal restrictions. That was Obama’s gift to his Muslim friends.
US coal power plants can remain online longer, freeing up shale gas and oil for export.
Thus The US can export LNG and oil long-ter and directly to Europe thus competing with OPEC.

November 13, 2016 7:06 pm

I don’t know that I would trust this article about Saudi Arabia’s vows to the Paris climate pledges. It sounds to me like propaganda aimed at people’s fears of being left out so people will stand up and push Trump to stick to the Paris agreement. I’m one that has been freed from religious bondage so I am very sensitive to this kind of subtle manipulation. I don’t trust anything I read. But I read anyway just to see what people are pushing.

November 13, 2016 7:23 pm

Since Gore sold his TV network to Qatari interests… We all know Saudis are human rights champions and wonderful environmentalists… LOL

November 13, 2016 7:42 pm

The Paris climate agreement – it’s a “do what you can, when you can, if you can” agreement. It is not legally binding and it is less effective than the Kyoto agreement that was binding and set targets.
Anyway, it doesn’t matter any longer. The Paris agreement will be obsolete after January 20, 2017.

Ian W
November 13, 2016 7:54 pm

If the Trump administration removes all restraints on drilling, fracking, mining etc., then the price of oil and energy worldwide will plummet. This is not what Saudi or any OPEC country wants to see happen. Hence their road to Damascus like conversion. The entire power play made by OPEC is Trumped (sic) their one card trick is called and bust. The entire power structure of energy management is about to be upended

November 13, 2016 9:06 pm
November 14, 2016 12:02 am

Saudi Arabia’s meager commitment in the Paris Agreement only happens if their economy is growing. Why didn’t Obama put a similar caveat in his commitment? Apparently, he knew his unrealistic goals would likely shrink our economy, and he didn’t want that to be a factor. He only cares about his globalist agenda. What happens to the U.S. because of that agenda is of little importance to him.

November 14, 2016 1:08 am

The Trump win gives a lot of countries room to be self -righteous and a reason to do absolutely nothing while blaming the USA . The whole thing is a massive scam but countries see $$ signs so they keep hoping people will fall for the lies and buck up cash . $$Trillions are involved so they will not go quietly away to count their cash , they want more . But alas the jig is being Trumped and will fold fast . Besides, any global warming we do get as we exit an ice age will be overall much better than global cooling and as even Al Gore knows climate changes .

Robert of Ottawa
November 14, 2016 3:58 am

But they certainly hope their customers won’t.

November 14, 2016 4:44 am

Never mind about Trump and the USA. Since borders don’t matter in our new global community, I suggest that the UN, IPCC etc direct all their requests for money to “the globe”. Or maybe to G. Soros.

November 14, 2016 5:16 am

My Maple trees have been working overtime to stop climate change. I just had to haul their year’s catch of CO2 out to the curb. Good job, guys!

Ed Zuiderwijk
November 14, 2016 8:03 am

Saudi Arabia will become increasingly marginalised. With lowish oil prices the kingdom is in a death spiral of massive budget deficits. The population is underskilled and won’t be able to keep itself afloat. A sclerotic political system shows only one way foreward: into the buffers of revolution. Don’t be surprised if it doesn’t exist in 5 years time.

Joel Snider
November 14, 2016 1:53 pm

Frankly, the only thing that I’m concerned with as far as the Saudi’s go is a VERY close look at their involvement in 911.

November 15, 2016 11:33 am

Solar panels in the Arabian Desert
Where do they get the fresh water to clean them

%d bloggers like this: