Guest essay by Eric Worrall
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has warned President-elect Trump that he will not have the power to derail climate programmes, even climate programmes in the USA.
France, U.N. tell Trump action on climate change unstoppable
France and the United Nations on Tuesday stepped up warnings to U.S. President-elect Donald Trump about the risks of quitting a 2015 global plan to combat climate change, saying a historic shift from fossil fuels is unstoppable.
French President Francois Hollande, addressing almost 200 nations meeting in Morocco on ways to slow global warming, said that inaction would be “disastrous for future generations and it would be dangerous for peace”.
Both he and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called on Trump, who has called man-made global warming a hoax, to drop a campaign pledge to cancel the global 2015 Paris Agreement that aims to shift from fossil fuels to cleaner energies.
“The United States, the largest economic power in the world, the second largest greenhouse gas emitter, must respect the commitments it has undertaken,” Hollande said to applause. The agreement was “irreversible”, he said.
…
“What was once unthinkable has become unstoppable,” Ban said at a news conference of the landmark Paris deal, agreed by almost 200 governments last year after two decades of tortuous negotiations. The accord formally entered into force on Nov. 4 after a record swift ratification.
Ban said Trump, as a “very successful business person”, would understand that market forces were driving the world economy towards cleaner energies such as wind and solar power, which are becoming cheaper, away from fossil fuels.
“I am sure he (Trump) will make a fast and wise decision” on the Paris Agreement, Ban said, saying he had spoken to Trump by telephone after his victory and planned to meet him in person.
…
Ban said that companies including General Mills and Kellogg, states such as California and cities such as Nashville and Las Vegas were working to cut their greenhouse gas emissions.
…
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-accord-idUSKBN13A12Z
I suspect Ban Ki-moon is overestimating American support for climate measures. Climate barely registers as an issue to the general public. Climate didn’t receive airtime in the Presidential debates. As a public priority climate action consistently comes dead last, even when the UN conducts the poll.
But wasteful climate spending is an expensive thorn in the side of an incoming US administration which has prioritised trying to contain spiralling debt, and freeing up cash for programmes people actually care about, such as fixing America’s dilapidated roads and bridges.
It is also worth remembering that under President Obama, some atrocious abuses of power occurred, such as the IRS deliberately targeting and harassing political groups opposed to Obama policies.
Video of President Obama admitting groups were targeted by the IRS for political reasons.
I’m not suggesting all US businesses which advocated climate action did so out of fear, quite obviously some companies are managed by people who are as nuts about climate change as the outgoing President. But in my opinion there is a real possibility that many US businesses went with the flow, because they were frightened of appearing to be on the wrong side of the climate issue, and of course because they wanted access to generous tax credits available for climate programmes.
It will be interesting to see whether this alleged commitment to climate action continues, under an administration which does not care whether you are a climate champion.
A single honest announcement from NOAA admitting that there is no empirical evidence of human impact on climate, other than local, as in urban heat islands, is all that is needed to kill “UN action on climate change.” But Trump does not have to even bother about “UN action on climate change.” All he has to do is to leave “Paris” and similar agreements and stop paying billions into UN slash funds. Whether other countries follow or not is up to them. Why should we care? Britain, Australia, Poland, Russia, Japan are likely to follow right away. Once India sees that there is no more money down that alley, they’ll leave too.
Berkley Earth was skeptic funded to research the urban heat island effect on the surface temps and concluded there was no case to answer. Must we keep asking the question only to get the same answer?
I see that Griff still loves to trot out his disproven lies. Over and over and over again.
Maybe we can contact Soros and have him buy Griff a life.
“Berkley Earth” is not an oracle, the study is dated, the data is biased and incomplete and the methodology is shoddy. There are newer and better studies that find conclusive impact of urban heat islands, not only locally. See, for example, [1-8].
[1] doi:10.1021/es2030438 (Environmental Science and Technology 2012)
[2] doi:10.1007/s00704-011-0515-8 (Theoretical and Applied Climatology 2012)
[3] doi:10.1002/2016EF000352 (Earth’s Future 2016)
[4] doi:10.1038/nature13462 (Nature 2014)
[5] doi:10.1038/nclimate1803 (Nature Climate Change 2013)
[6] doi:10.1007/s10666-014-9429-z (Environmental Modeling and Assessment 2015)
[7] doi:10.1175/JAMC-D-14-0295.1 (Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology 2015)
[8] doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02521.x (Global Change Biology 2012)
This could be quite easy. Turning off the funding is like turning off the electricity to the microphone. *tap, tap, tap* “Anyone hear me?” (Oh, dang! What do I do now? My grant has expired.)
“market forces were driving the world economy towards cleaner energies such as wind and solar power, which are becoming cheaper,” If this is true, there would be no requirement for government or UN involvement in the process
Exactly. And President Trump would be the last person to stand in the way of market forces.
Donald Trump is the best antidote to climate change alarmism that we could possibly hope for.
Trump’s transition team is already exploring the fastest way to terminate our participation in the Paris Climate Agreement.
In Trump’s “Contract with the American Voter” that contains his agenda for the first 100 days in office he pledges…
“… cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America’s water and environmental infrastructure”
In the contract he made two other pledges:
“… lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward”
and
“… lift the restrictions on the production of $50 trillion dollars’ worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas and clean coal”
That doesn’t sound like a guy who will do what UN Secretary-General Ki-Moon wants.
Styvn David,
Don’t know if you or others like Ann Coulter or have seen this, but this is one of the best articles she has ever written.
http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2016/11/09/president-trumps-first-100-days-n2243615
The agreement was “irreversible”, he said.
==============
if it was, there would be no need to say so.
Please tell me I’m not the only person who immediately channeled:
“It’s irreversible!”
“Just like my raincoat!”
Ah, one more thing Trump can and should do: redirect US agencies (NOAA, NASA, etc.) to focus their research on natural causes of climate change, of which there are great many and which dominate climate dynamics. Until these are fully understood, human impact, if there is any at all, cannot possibly be disentangled from the observed changes, none of which divert from the natural variability range anyway.
How about NASA spend its money on space exploration and how to get an American astronaut in space without using 1960s Russian space taxis .
Well, NASA satellites are instrumental in providing us with the only trustworthy and global temperature data and data acquisition system, which, incidentally, do not confirm the false picture produced by “climate models” and alarmists. Also NASA satellite (OCO-2) is the only other than the Japanese GOSAT that actually looks at the atmospheric CO2, measuring where it comes from and where it goes.
“The United States, the largest economic power in the world, the second largest greenhouse gas emitter, must respect the commitments it has undertaken,” Hollande said to applause. The agreement was “irreversible”, he said.”
As many have posted, the United States did not make a commitment to this agreement. Barrack Obama did. He is going, going…. soon to be gone along with HIS commitment. Perhaps he should honor his commitment and donate all his government retirement to the “cause”. He is young enough to go out and find work to earn an income, and he can put his wife to work like so many couples have to do.
Forrest Gardener November 15, 2016 at 3:33 pm
UN Secretary General’s statements are public, thus they are not between the next President and the Secretary General but rather intended for the United States Public. His intent is to cause strife with in this country to the point that Mr Trump will have to acquiesce to the will of the U.N. To put it simply he is meddling in the United States’ internal affairs.
I normally would not presume to suggest the first act that Mr Trump should do After the swearing in ceremony, but perhaps it would be best to take the opportunity and set the tone to the rest of the world that we will not tolerate turning our citizens against one another or our elected officials for their own gain. At that moment declare Mr Moon “persona non grata” and give him 24 hrs to be out of the country.
michael
Tom,
“As many have posted, the United States did not make a commitment to this agreement.”
Of course not, and neither was “French President Francois Hollande, addressing almost 200 nations meeting in Morocco…”, he was addressing underlings/agents of the most powerful few in each of almost 200 Nations. This (extremely common) conflation is not accidental, I don’t believe, but a hallmark of the ongoing mass marketing of “elitism”.
I am Mr. Obama’s employer, not his subject or property. Boss, as are millions of others. I feel it is very important to not only avoid falling into the slavish mindtrap such lying by our mass media presstitutes generates over time, but to openly denounce it at every turn.
Forrest Gardener November 15, 2016 at 10:06 pm
Well the real issue is that right now we are trying to calm people down in this country and get them to take a deep breath and see the world is not coming to an end. This person is making pronouncements to our elected officials and population in general which will only inflame passions farther. To him it is of no matter if people here get hurt or die as a result of his posturing.
We have been lucky so far.
michael
I’m sure a President elected partly on the basis of ‘taking our country back’, reversing harmful globalisation and scrapping the Paris ‘climate change’ agreement is going to follow orders from the UN Secretary General!
The only thing ‘unstoppable’ and ‘unthinkable’ is that Trump would not throw the previous wasteful and expensive climate change executive decisions down the toilet and decide his own executive orders based on the mandate from the electorate.
They never learn.
The UK and USA have effectively given the UN the middle finger. They will come to grips with this soon enough.
UK hasn’t. The idiots still run the parliament.
French President Francois Hollande,… said that inaction would be “… dangerous for peace”.
==================
No doubt the survivors of Charlie Hebdo and the Bataclan will be comforted by France’s War on CO2.
The real advantage of CO2 is that politicians can safely wage war without fear of the enemy shooting back. Take zat, you naughty CO2, and zat. I fart in your general direction.
“FART!? Emerjunzee! Emerjunzee! Sequestzer ze methane!”
Suck it up . . alarmists ; )
Why don’t they attack helium, suck that up and speak strangely? Oh wait;
Even if he believes that, it is a manifestly unwise public position to take given that Trump has many times said he will “put America first”, especially considering how many pundits and experts confidently predicted that Trump didn’t have a chance.
Ban Ki-Moon is acting like he has the power to dictate what sovereign nations can do, which he does not, no matter how much he might wish.
He is of course welcome to request an opportunity to make the case for continuing various climate programs, but staking out the clearly false position that the US under Trump “can’t” change policy is a good way to lose that argument at the outset.
I haven’t read it, but I’m sure that somewhere in “The Art of the Deal” it cautions people that if they insist on getting everything they want, they are more likely to end up getting nothing.
Where are all the voices for “reasonable compromise” now?
This statement by Ban Moon UNDERSCORES the real goal of UN Climate policy – namely, UNDERMINING national sovereignty globally.
George Devries Klein, PhD, PG, FGSA
United Nations is becoming a dangerous beast consisting of unelected, megalomaniacal idiocrats.
“It can’t happen here” is always wrong: a dictatorship can happen anywhere.”
― Karl Popper, Unended Quest: An Intellectual Autobiography
I suggest splitting United Nations. Keep what is clearly in line with its charter – Article 1.1:
“To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;”
Everything else should be left to survive on its own – just like all other political, idealistic or activist non-governmental organisations. I guess we are better of by cooperation between groups of countries than by the monstrous United Nations.
«The primary, the fundamental, the essential purpose of the United Nations is to keep peace. Everything it does which helps prevent World War III is good. Everything which does not further that goal, either directly or indirectly, is at best superfluous.»
— Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr.
“The UN was not created to take mankind to heaven, but to save humanity from hell.”
— Dag Hammarskjöld, Secretary-General from 1953 to 1961
The statement made by The Moon is made against the a backdrop of the UN societal infantilisation image, designed to frame the lethal statement in non-threatening fuzzies. Carefully designed to convey warmth and childhood comfort, the UN have re-tasked the entire purpose of childhood – used in image generation, used for advertising and marketing, used in legal proceedings, pawns for and targets of brainwashing. There is nothing, absolutely nothing either benign, good or productive about anything emanating from the UN and the Maurice Strong Doctrine, particularly the UN Post 2015 Sustainability Agenda or the recent Quito, UN Urban Agenda.
If anything is likely to keep Trump to his pledges on climate change, Ban and Hollande hectoring him is one of the most likely to have him be intransigent.
+1M They have just grabbed the tiger’s tail. Here’s a man who answers to no one and has already proven he’s not a follow the leader type.
Until Arabs and Lefties sell (or lose) the media outlets they own, the attacks will be relentless on our incoming president.
This is like “Mr. Chips Goes To Washington” on steroids.
+1
Do what you promised. Pretty simple so lets not get caught in the sudden imaginary webs of complexity spun by the moon. We can and he will withdraw from an agreement not subjected to our democratic institutions.
We warned our political foes about building their green castle on the shifting sands of power.
It seems these days that the opposite of what politicians say is the truth. That means Trump can stop it.
I am sure that Team Trump/Cruz/Smith will arrange for the administrators of NOAA and NASA to be replaced by like minded people and real scientists/statisticians be empowered to scrutinize the NOAA and GISS US and global surface temperature records. Cruz and Smith will also hear intensified evidence about how the records were modified repeatedly and to what extend extra warming was added. The same should be carried out on sea levels with focus on U of C in Boulder. When this has been carried out and a review of quality assurance on the infamous models done, we will be in another ball game. Perhaps there will also be evidence of collusion between NOAA, GISS and organisations in other countries such as Canada, Australia NZ and UK to agree on how to produce man made global warming. I cannot wait for such actions to start at 12.01 on 20 January 2017. This will also have implications for the review of the science behind EPA’s endangerment finding on CO2 and the Clean Power Plan. To really rebut the Moon man and the likes of Hollande we need real scientific & statistical work without “homogenization”.
Agree. Let the scientists tell us the truth about global climate change. Government climate research grants should be passed out to scientists who agree to use the scientific method.
That would be novel.
TCE, for truth about the warnings of climate change from the perspective of the scientific method, see my recent talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THg6vGGRpvA
There isn’t a single climate model study, since at least 1987 (when Jim Hansen came on stage), that has any physical meaning. Climate modelers have spent their careers doing nonsense and decorating it with mathematics.
I love it. Decorating with mathematics. Nice presentation.
Ban Ki Moon, this is how many people now see you: 거짓말쟁이 (kujimadt jaengi)
Closest literal translation to English is: beggar talk honcho.
That’s what Koreans call a liar, especially a liar who tries to scam you for money.
For our many good friends not based in the USA. You have seen street demonstrations against the election results on your news. I’ve had to take phone calls from young people living in those places looking for a different perspective.To me it’s a good sign that they are self aware of living in a bubble.
In the US we riot in different ways. Election night was the quieter but more meaningful type of riot. It’s like watching a replay of the Brexit vote.
I believe the riots are not over yet. troe. Expect something violent planned to occur on and after 20 January 2017.
Pat,
I believe a more immediate “deadline” the globalists face, in any potential attempt to undermine the election results is December 28th, when the electoral college is to actually votes in Mr. Trump. If he were to meet an unfortunate end before that, the Party chiefs would decide who will be the next President . . with no limitations at all. I suggest Mr. Trump be very very careful till then (at which point he just be very careful ; )
Bullying again from the Left. Global control!!! No doubt Donald will have something to say on the matter. Go get them!!!
Forget about Donald Trump wining the presidency. Today he won a notable victory against the Aberdeenshire local council when the Scottish government ruled in his favour.
Mr. Trump is now allowed to fly Scottish flag on an 80 foot flagpole on his Aberdeenshire golf course
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/1088D/production/_92452776_hi036405367.jpg
@vukcevic
Too bling for me, but as 99.999% of Scotland won’t be able to see it at any given point in time, what’s the problem?
Mind you, it’s an awfy wee lookin’ clubhoose fir such a grand gouf course.
vukcevic,
Just curious. I knew he had a golf course in Scotland and I knew there were some issues with a potential off-shore wind farm, but I never heard anything about flying a Scottish flag in Scotland. what was the issue?
local council objected to the 80 ft height
Trump told us he would be winning so much that everyone was going to get sick of winning all the time. Keep on winning, Trump. Can’t get enough! It never gets old.
Trump has also allegedly harassed local residents who would not sell up to him, surrounding their properties with high fences and allegedly cutting off the water supply to a 92 year old grandmother.
His actions have made him hugely unpopular in Scotland…
References?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1394484/Donald-Trump-puts-barrier-trees-Scottish-neighbours-home.html
http://uk.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-bullied-a-90-year-old-woman-over-scottish-golf-course-2015-6?r=US&IR=T
and many more. Just google Trump Scotland harassment
That looks like a drive way to the property to me, look at the side the fence posts are on, Milne’s land. Both sides, both fences. Seems like Milne is suffering sour grapes, Trump just put up a fence to establish a boundary and as you know, the side the fence post is on is the owners responsibility.
“What was once unthinkable has become unstoppable,”
We also heard a decade ago that “The science is settled” and “The debate is over”
Such absolutes and high confidence statements were also made by many sources from one side……..the same side, regarding the expected outcome of the presidential election in the US.
The same side continues to use the same broken climate model projections, based on the same broken speculative theory. The same exaggerated descriptions of our current weather(which has been the best in the last 1,000 years for most life). The same twisting of facts on the beneficial gas, CO2 and the slight, mostly beneficial warming.
So this side has been wrong when making statements on this issue most of the time. They do have powerful, global political support. This has been led by the US president, who was counting on this and Obama Care as being the cornerstones of his legacy.
But the the future of this political realm in the US, was based entirely on the political assumption that our next president, Clinton would be on board.
Trump is not on board. The American people that elected Trump to represent them have expectations, most of which, are preferences for political policies that are different than Obama’s, including this one.
Half of the people that voted, did not vote for Trump and will never support anything that he does. Regardless of this, based on everything that we know about Trump tells us that he is never going to support the climate agreement.
What does that mean to the agreement?
Make your own guess but the support it was getting from the previous president, Obama, who was one of the biggest driving forces is going away……maybe entirely going away.
Why would any clear/objective thinking person come to any other conclusion?
I think you underestimate Trump’s power of persuasion. You should read Scott Adams blog http://blog.dilbert.com/post/153080448451/the-cognitive-dissonance-cluster-bomb Scott Adams has other blog posts to that elucidate and cast things in a totally different light (a different movie to quote Adams).
Readers are invited to identify the moron in that picture.
And which one they would prefer to slingshot at a piggy-filled cartoon castle.
Too bad Ban doesn’t understand that this vote was a massive call to end the outside (global) governance of America that has been Obama’s dream for years. I’ll pick up arms against it.