Yeah, this is why President Trump said
“We will cease honoring all non-binding agreements”, and “we will stop contributing to the green climate fund”.
“I can not in good conscience support a deal that harms the United States”.
“The bottom line is that the Paris Accord is very unfair to the United States”.
“This agreement is less about climate and more about other countries getting a financial advantage over the United States”.
The United States contributed $1 billion to the global Green Climate Fund, but the world’s top polluters contributed nothing, David Asman reported.
via Fox news here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The world DID love us, until Trump cut off the gravy train. I think maybe you can buy love!
Essentially then, the rest of the world, in particular the EU, are prostitutes !?
Maybe not buy it, but you can rent it for a while.
Nah! Prostitutes work for a living!
Yeah, the world loved us…riiigghhhttt!
Travel much?
We don’t need that kind of fake love. What we need is respect. But if we can’t get that (from the likes of North Korea, Iran, etc.), fear will do.
‘The world DID love us, until Trump cut off the gravy train.’
I disagree completely – the attitude was more like ‘I can’t believe you haven’t given us more… what a @ur momisugly#$%%!!’
I tried to explain Progressivism to a friend’s college-age kid. I had him give me $20 out of his wallet, and then I gave it to his sister, and said, “See? HE wasn’t going to give it to you! What a jerk!”
Then I turned to his sister and said, “You’re welcome.”
The contribution of China, Russia, India is even less than that of a trace gas!
China and India, as least, expected to be recipients of funds from the Green Climate Fund, along with at least 68 other nations in the Group of 70.
Too bad. So sad.
I doubt China — the world’s leading emitter of CO2 — ever expected to get a single yuan from the Climate Fund. I think they are mostly trying to deflect criticism for their contribution to rising CO2 levels for as long as possible. Given luck they may be able to get away with that for a couple of decades. By which time, they will be running out of coal and will be able to point to their then declining CO2 emissions (as a result of running out of stuff to burn) as a sign of their commitment to saving the planet.
Not a criticism of China or India BTW. I think they are doing what any sane national leadership who cared about their people would do given the enormous problems they face in increasing the standard of living of their vast and largely impoverished populations.
Concerning adaptation, the group focuses on the challenges that its members are facing in adapting to a changing climate and calls for support from the developed countries for loss and damage. G
-77 and China see financial support, technology transfer and capacity building
as important pillars of the international response to climate change.
“Concerning adaptation, the group focuses on the challenges that its members are facing in adapting to a changing climate and calls for support from the developed countries for loss and damage.”
Oh really! What challenges are those? What loss and damage can anyone attribute to ‘climate change’, much less ‘man-made climate change’? There is no change in the rate of sea level rise. There is no change in the frequency of severe weather of any kind. Growing seasons are slightly longer and the increased CO2 in the air is making the planet greener and increasing crop yields.
Making false damage claims to an insurance company is illegal and a form of theft. Sometimes, making false claims can be ridiculously funny.
Don K — China’s goals in the Paris Treaty are very clear. They want to embrace all of the industry which has to close down in the West so that they can export the products to the West without any ramifications in the treaty.
In other words, they want to be able to produce wind turbines at the lowest cost and sell them to any nations who are receiving money from the Green Climate fund.
When they have obligations under the Paris treaty, they will probably simply back out (or they will ignore it.) As long as they are in the treaty, they get to be the “good guys”, even though the goal of participation is to screw over the rest of the world.
List of expectant climate welfare recipients: https://www.greenclimate.fund/partners/countries/nda-directory
List of climate welfare contributors: https://www.greenclimate.fund/partners/contributors/resources-mobilized
China and India expect to receive welfare. Russia is on neither list.
Total pledges to date: $10 billion. The way contributions will be “enforced” is through peer pressure. Which means that those not living up to their “fair share” pledges will be publicly shamed.
No doubt the welfare spending will be accounted for in accordance with UN standards. In other words expect massive waste and corruption.
Well one of the problems of both of those countries can be seen quite visibly in Silicon Valley; particularly Sunnyvale. You seldom see younger women from those countries walking down the Streets of Sunnyvale, without a baby carriage, often with two occupants. They are quite commonly seen in pairs walking together. They of course are circumventing the intent of the H1B visa to provide a limited time work project in the USA, followed by a return to where they came from, after performing the job the company told the Feds, that they couldn’t fill with an American worker.
Well I can’t fault the individual for doing what is in their own self interest. They of course bring their parents and their grandparents, who then become Social Security recipients from a fund they never paid a dime into.
But the USA, and a lot of other countries are simply vast unpopulated areas for the continuation of the behaviors that have created poverty and misery in the third world to begin with.
Elimination of the H1B visa should be a trump goal as well.
I have no problem with replacing H1B visas, that are given to companies; NOT individuals, with a regular green card immigration visa that is given to the individual, so they are not working as indentured slaves, afraid to complain they cannot afford to live in Silicon Valley.
G
China, with Mongolia next door, is not going to run out of coal for a few centuries.
But what are the contributions to date of the EU countries? Canada? Japan? Australia? New Zealand?
I’d be particularly interested in the contributions of Germany, France and Italy.
Here http://www.greenclimate.fund/partners/contributors/resources-mobilized
I see that the US has pledged $3B of which $.5B has been paid. The remaining $2.5B is “subject to the availability of funds”. Has Trump reneged on this amount or does he intend to pay it?
No. Trump hasn’t reneged on anything.
OBAMA pledged that amount
Send him the bill.
I’m sure the Clinton Foundation will be more than happy to cover what he reneges on.
It seems NZ paid 57cents per capita. Cheap but wise I would say. However if I was PM I would demand a refund.
Mind you I understand the the New Zealand government used to contribute to the Clinton Foundation! 🙁
Cheers
Roger
http://www.thedemiseofchristchurch.com
scraft1,
To be clear, the US will not contribute the remaining 2.5 billion dollars that was ‘pledged’ by the previous President. The Paris Climate Agreement is just that; a ‘handshake agreement’, with photo op and press release (!), that has no weight in law. For this agreement to be considered a ‘treaty’ with the force of law, the US Congress would have to ratify it as such and that did not happen. This also means that any suggestion that the US is restricted from withdrawing for 3 (or 5) years are false. We can walk away at will and apparently just did.
Scraft … “Has Trump reneged on this amount or does he intend to pay it?”
Well my guess would be that you already have your answer.
Amount pledged is a lot different than actually give. In fact, it’s typical to get a small fraction of what was actually pledged. Scraft, Trump is under no obligation to give anything as it wasn’t a treaty under American law. In fact, Obama had to legally defend his actions in giving that first group, as it was of questionable legality.
scraft1 June 3, 2017 at 2:42 pm
I see that the US has pledged $3B of which $.5B has been paid.
My reading is that a second tranche of $0.5B was paid a few days before Obama finally left office.
Sort of furtively.
Geoff.
This is a more up to date list of contributions.
Obama managed to slip them a cool $500 million on January 17th 2017.
https://www.greenclimate.fund/documents/20182/24868/Status_of_Pledges.pdf/eef538d3-2987-4659-8c7c-5566ed6afd19
” Has Trump reneged on this amount or does he intend to pay it?”
A guy’s wife signs an agreement with her lovers pledging to give them so much money per year, and actually does give them a huge amount out of the couple’s joint bank account. The husband finds out and divorces her.
Is it clear yet?
Australia has paid $7.97 per head or $187m
The contribution of New Zealand, would of course include providing food towards those impoverished third world countries so that they don’t have to address their basic problem, which is over population.
And NZ is a net carbon sink; not a source. So is the USA. So NYET on Paris Swilling.
G
Where is the contribution from the EU?
Ammo for Trump administration – Greenhouse gas effect not valid
file:///C:/Users/Shawn/Downloads/New-Insights-on-the-Physical-Nature-of-the-Atmospheric-Greenhouse-Effect-Deduced-from-an-Empirical-Planetary-Temperature-Model.pdf
Even a well known trace gas
A graph is worth a thousand words! Trumps most signuficant accomplishment to date
Not only signuficant, it’s covfefe — ’nuff said!
And America’s billion bucks was borrowed from China!
And given to the UN without the approval of Congress.
Yep, it’s even worse than Trump portrayed it. As far as I can tell, the scam is that the U.S. borrows the money from China, sends the money to Europe, they skim money off for “administrative services”, and use the rest to build solar panels –bought from China– in Africa for electricity to be sold back to Europe. Sounds like a win, win, win for China, a win, win for Europe, a win for Africa, and a loss, loss, loss for the U.S.
How 44 got away with this is the perplexing part.
“And given to the UN without the approval of Congress.”
And now you see the similarities of Brexit and the new POTUS.
The EU is just the testbed for The UN. Both now formally rejected by ‘The Anglosphere’.
Africa-produced electricity sent to Europe? I don’t think so…
$500 million of the US $1 billion was illegal. It violated PL 103-236 passed in 1994, because the UNFCCC (Green Climate Fund is under UNFCCC) recognized Palestine as a member state in April 2016.
…which is why we should (must?) withdraw from the UNFCCC.
Withdrawing from UNFCCC on one years notice is the only way to exit the GCF as Trump promised. GCF is under UNFCCC separate from Paris (Korean HQ was set up in 2010). And Article 25 section three, as well as Paris Article 28 section three, both make clear that UNFCCC exit is automatically also Paris exit. One year from written notice to UNFCCC. Not the near four years of Paris Article 28 sections 1 and 2.
The president has suggested that ‘Paris accord’ could be renegotiated in order that the USA economy is not penalised unfairly and out of all proportions .
On the other hand the President may not wish to blatantly break off from an international agreement entered into by the previous democratically elected president.
One way out of this could be:
a) Make it known that it is up to the U.S. Department of Energy, as it sees fit, to ‘follow’ the CO2 reduction directive for the period of the notice (one year?)
b) Immediately defer any future payments to various related funds until the new agreement is reached.
Europe & China said they are not interested in renegotiating the ‘Paris accord’ and that is fine by the President.
If renegotiations are opened at some future date it might take years to come to any agreement, by then Trump may well be into his second term. It will be up to the (very sensible) current vice president Pence to conclude and implement any new accord, if elected to the office in 2024, that is.
Is the U.S. required to pay into the Green Climate Fund, or is that voluntary?
Why withdraw from one UN scam, why not withdraw from all of them? We could send them packing and give the building to Trump so he could turn it into condos.
TA, good question. The answer lies in UNFCCC Article 4(3), pursuant to which the GCF was set up at the Copenhagen COP. 4(3) says that Annex 2 countries SHALL provide new and additional funding to cover developing country climate change costs (google UNFCCC text and you can download the text in several languages including English). So funding is mandatory under international law, in a convention approved by US congress. So Tuvalu and Kiribati can sue the US in federal court to demand money.
Now this section does not say how the Annex 2 countries split up the ‘bill’, but it does say the developing countries can present one that has to be paid. And Paris Accord, while not mandatory, says the bill is supposed to be $100 billion/yr by 2020. And US as largest Annex 2 economy by far, would undoubtedly mean footing the by far largest portion of the bill. Trump’s team undoubtedly knows this. Which is why he pulls us out. The mechanism has to be exiting UNFCCC.
“The mechanism has to be exiting UNFCCC.”
Well, now you have me thinking you are right. It’s looks like the U.S. could at the least be hauled into court over this and probably be found liable. We don’t need any of that stuff. We’ve had enough bad experiences with courts in the past.
This will be interesting. I want to see how Trump juggles the GCF and the Palestinian issue.
Ristvan. “So funding is mandatory under international law, in a convention approved by US congress.” What convention is that? Is it separate from the Copenhagen and Paris mechanism?
In any event, I assume payment can be avoided by exiting UNFCCC. That’s the whole point of Trump’s action.
If there’s a formal mechanism for exiting and thus avoiding legal responsibility for payment, then we shouldn’t feel morally obligated to do anything. But are we “morally” responsible for $2.5B?
Scraft1, the UNFCCC convention to which the US is a signatory was ratified by Congress as a Congressional Pact under Bill Clinton on 24 March 1994. Google is your friend. Those facts took about 30 seconds to research. And the internet is why warmunists cannot win in the end.
Separately, the 4(3) provision says SHALL. That is a legally binding obligation under both international and US law. See explaining comments just a bit upthread in this comment stream for details. Please learn this stuff, skeptics. I get tired of repeatedly teaching facts with references.
As for being hauled into court by Tuvalu, if we formally exited an arrangement that was never be ratified by Congress, I don’t see how we can be legally responsible after we exit.
I’m still stuck on Ristvan’s comment that we owe money under an approved convention. I assume that doesn’t apply if we exit UNFCCC.
“..As for being hauled into court by Tuvalu, if we formally exited an arrangement that was never be ratified by Congress…”
Never ratified – correct.
But formally entered into:
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2016/09/03/president-obama-united-states-formally-enters-paris-agreement
For the US, it came into force 4 Nov 2016:
http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9444.php
Scraft1. If we remain, we owe. If we exit, we do not. Reason is, UNFCCC WAS approved by Congress under Clinton. So yes, the only legal avoidance mechanism is to exit UNFCCC. Which will send warmunists even more apoplexic than just exiting Paris. Trump was very clear and precise once you understand the specific legal background. Most do not, yet. They will, hehe.
“Please learn this stuff, skeptics.” I dunno, Ristvan, I like having you as my lawyer. And you’re doing a good job.
But seriously, folks, the “shall pay” obligation would appear to apply only to the remaining $2.5B U.S. pledge, and that would be limited to the “funds available” language of the pledge. I would expect that we will consider these funds “unavailable”.
“For the US, it came into force 4 Nov 2016:”
Only as an excuse for the sitting president to direct funds to it through various mechanisms. That IMO is why the EU is so cheesed that Trump refused to sign it. If was already in force, why would the sitting president need to sign it?
Notice that the day “of force” is Nov 4, which is the day the US elects its president. Why they didn’t choose inauguration day when a new president assumes power, I don’t know.
Also, notice that the accord (supposedly) remains in force for exactly 4 years, the term of a US president.
Sorry, not correct. US presidential elections are not fixed to Nov 4.
Well the democratically elected President, who made this deal without the Congress, was replaced by an equally democratically elected President, who was given a mandate to undo all of the Scorched earth policies of his predecessor.
Check the USA red/blue map colored by COUNTIES.
G
Which is Obama should be sent the bill.
Cleanest is to demand the money back. Next cleanest is withhold $500 million from rest of UN 2017 funding and let UN sort it out amongst themselves.
I like that approach best, ristvan. Meanwhile, I believe the Trump administration is evaluating all other deals in which the UN is holding a knife to our collective throats.
Any way Obama could be made personally responsible for this? Clearly inappropriate, personal spending of public money!
I am not an American and don’t live in US, but I happen to own a small part of your wonderful country, and I have on and off made substantial investments in the IRS, and to me his latest payment appears absolutely reckless!
RPT, dunno cor sure. Have not researched it, but pro Sitting presidents are immune save for impeachment (Arricle 2 section 4 of Constitution) and at the time he was sitting president. Too late for impeachment as a high crime or misdemeanor, even tho ‘stealing’ $500 million probably qualifies.
Ristvan, but Obama is no longer a sitting President and what he agreed to bind the nation to was never presented to the Nation’s elected reprsentatives for approval.
The present President has said “Nuts” to it.
Same Executive Branch “authority” Obama which has been abused for scores of years to “just say ‘NO!'”
PS it would be nice if Trump used the abuse by the Executive Branch of the “Balance of Powers” to right the balance then closed the loopholes that allowed it to happen in the first place.
PPS Most think there are 3 branches that are to rule the US Government. There are really 4, the 4th being the original Bill of Rights.
Wow. Messed up this sentence.
How about:
“Same Executive Branch “authority” Obama used, which has been abused for scores of years, Trump used to “just say ‘NO!’”
Way to go Mr. Watts! I can say how thrilled I am at some kick-ass behavior by our president. Got myself yelled at as a “Republican propagandist” for even mentioning a win for science…by a Brit lefty!!!… told her “HARD SCIENCE IS HARD SCIENCE” no matter what you call me, it’s not ‘consensus’, and sent her the link to Michael Crichton’s 2003 talk, AND posted your site pages on this topic. She will never will read it.
Wet snow in Moscow June 2nd… completely in line with what global warming scientists predicted because they only said it would become a rare and exciting event in winter…
http://www.interfax.com/newsinf.asp?id=757898
I’m sure there must be a “Moscow” somewhere in the Southern Hemisphere.
(If not, time for an adjustment to the records!)
The global warming scientists have a terrible record with predictions, but occasionally they will be right, much as a broken clock is right twice a day.
Thanks….I read it and passed it on to others.
Hey kokoda, when did you get picked as most deplorable? There’s a bunch of us that were hoping to get that tattooed on our derrieres.
probably an Aussie with that handle…..they are pretty deplorable, you will need to dig deep 🙂
President Trump will go down in History as the most significant,Successful President In History.
Thank you Mr President Sir.
The measure of success depends upon what your aims were.
Aim:
Exiting the Paris Accord.
(The little box has been checked)
Next issue…
Trump’s Aims:
Anti-terrorist, anti-Communist, anti-Progressive, anti-Leftist, anti-Globalist.
Those 5 items will Make America Great Again, although the list could be expanded greatly.
(Let’s just say just about everything Obama did will be countermanded, including denigration of our police force.)
“President Trump will go down in History as the most significant,Successful President In History.
Thank you Mr President Sir.”
ROTFLMAO…here in reality it will be closer to the exact opposite.
One trillion of the four trillion-dollar US federal budget is deficit spending or borrowed. Congress and administrations have shirked their duty, ie passing balanced budgets instead of continuing resolutions, Taxpayers would never have voted for four trillion dollar budgets, so our out of control central regime merely made up the “money” out of thin air, or borrowed it. This is robbery of the citizens elected officials are supposed to serve.
It’s why the federal debt doubled under Obama to a staggering $20 trillion. Thus federal spending must be cut by a trillion dollars a year, taxes raised by that amount, or some of each.
We can start by ending subsidies for “renewables” as well as the good first step of pulling out of the Paris accord.
Gabro, you hit the nail on the head. Our debt/deficit is the number one problem facing America. Yet the national discussion focuses on irrelevancies like Russian hookers, Russian interference, and transgender bathrooms. Responsible adults need to take over management of our nation. Trump is off to a good start. Hopefully, while the media is off chasing rainbows and Russians, that Trump can actually get his agenda through.
And how in the world does it make any sense for American to borrow more money from China, just to give it back to China under some misguided climate agreement?
Yup, the insanity has to stop. And it will, one way or another. Pay me now or later. Either we start getting our fiscal house in order with minimal pain now or suffer crash and devaluation later.
As the world’s reserve currency, the dollar’s collapse will drag everyone else down with it. We’ve held up better than some other currencies during the race to debase only because we’re slightly less indebted than some and because of our reserve status.
Gabro, Simple pass a law that taxes Congressmen and Senators at 100% on all earnings if they fail to pass a balanced budget when required, until such time as they pass a balanced budget. It puts some ‘skin in the game’.
Ian,
That would be the civilized way to go. Better than shooting them if they fail to do so, I guess.
Agree Gab/Koz. And it’s interesting the two communist countries with the largest armies–China and Russia–are getting a bye amid the big fleece This Paris cluster is all about impoverishing America and using the nation’s dollars to do it. You know, an insider’s joke to titillate the boys behind the curtain. The City, who owns/controls the fed and the UN (and another 150 other fed’s located in resource-rich countries around the world that print the same kind of paper-whatever’s for those countries) and their banker-controlled dollars to convert the U.S. from a capitalist country to a communist country. Figaro or whatever her name is that was in charge of the UN’s climate something said it outright. Meanwhile everyone continues to separate fly specs from pepper, sand from salt ARGUING ABOUT A SCAM. Soros Inc., dearly departed David R., THE GOLDMAN SACH’S, Chase’s, et al are foot soldiers for the London Bankers who own the feds, D.C., the UN, and the Vatican, and who, it’s estimated, control two-thirds of the world’s wealth. Struck me odd that Goldman went down and covered communist Venezuela’s bonds? And how/why Castro stayed in power so long with billion or so in walking around money? But maybe Fidel caught a break when the mission to take his six plane (or whatever) Cuban air force out a day or so before the ex-pats hit his beach that left them and their supply ships with no air cover was cancelled, thanks to “an unintended decision” from the bowels in Washington.
President Trump knows the tracks are being removed. Getting the train stopped in time will be a tougher and greater achievement than any other president ever faced, IMO. He has millions supporting him that are plugged into the bigger picture now, Anthony, thanks to you and the readers at this site.
UNEP
‘Feed-in Tariffs as a Policy Instrument for Promoting Renewable Energies and Green Economies in Developing Countries’
PTC vs. Feed-in Tariffs as methods of accomplishing the transition to green economies.
The U.S. adopted the PTC/Production Tax Credit as means of accomplishing this goal and Ontario adopted the Feed-in Tariff to accomplish this.
Document has a history of Feed-in-Tariffs along with an explanation of what the PTC is.
122 pages at:
http://unfccc.int/files/documentation/submissions_from_parties/adp/application/pdf/unep_us___ws2.pdf
@ur momisugly Gabro “One trillion of the four trillion-dollar US federal budget is deficit spending or borrowed. Congress and administrations have shirked their duty, ie passing balanced budgets instead of continuing resolutions, Taxpayers would never have voted for four trillion dollar budgets, so our out of control central regime merely made up the “money” out of thin air, or borrowed it. This is robbery of the citizens elected officials are supposed to serve.
It’s why the federal debt doubled under Obama to a staggering $20 trillion. Thus federal spending must be cut by a trillion dollars a year, taxes raised by that amount, or some of each.”
Actually it’s not why the national debt increased under Obama that was a direct result from the economic downturn in 2008 which then turned into a global recession. Had you actually studied global financial crisis history you would have learned that countries that experience major financial crisis see an increase in the national debt on average by 50% in the years following the event. It’s not an anomaly but a economic fact and has been documented and witnessed in EVERY SINGLE country in the world that has experienced such. And if you think that reducing federal spending during the deleveraging process is a good idea there’s no hope for you.
That being the case the increase in the debt would have occurred regardless who or what party has control of the WH or Congress as it’s not a function of policy in terms of over-spending. From 2001 to 2009 the unfunded liabilities exploded from over $60T to over $220T.
How much have Britian, France and Germany paid in, I wonder.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/02/climate/trump-paris-green-climate-fund.html?_r=0
That is what they are EXPECTED to pay, not what they have paid ! YUUUGE difference…
Oh but what is the actual number?
The per person figure is disengenuous. It attempts to claim that the US is not actually paying our fair share . Only look at the population of Sweden, Luxembourg, and Norway. Those three counties have tiny populations and that means the actual amount each country pays is not that much.
I would like to see the times post a graph showing actual dollar amount contributed.
If the Germans fully funded their military would they have $420 million to donate?
that is if the Germans had not cost shifted the burden of the maintenance of NATO to the U.S. would they have anything left over to virtue signal with?
Who cares about the per-person numbers? We’re “donating” twice what the next largest “donor” is giving.
And how the heck did Obama manage to ALREADY send them $1 billion? That ain’t chump change. How did he get the money?
Mike, Obama borrowed it from China and gave it to the UN….
But how much has each of those countries actually paid in to date?
LAMONT
As a Norwegian I am thrilled to see confirmation that the Swedes are as always the even bigger fool (marginally though!), but as I also pay tax in US, from a personal perspective I feel even more stupid.
http://geographical.co.uk/images/articles/geopolitics/2015/Green_climate_fund_May/green-climate-fund_May22-UPDATE.jpg
They’re down about $4 1/2 billion now,,,which is about half of what they wanted
Graphic is dated. US delivered $1 billion in Obama’s last year, half of that illegally.
Thanks Gabro for providing the above “Gullibility Graph”, I see here in the UK we’re the 5th most gullible nation! The main thing that worries me – is there an audit trail? Where has the money gone and who has received it? You will probably find that a “Gullibility Graph” of nations for the Nigerian prince email scam would probably produce the same results with the money going to similar recipients!
How has the Green Climate Fund monies been spent? What are their internal budget numbers? How much are their executives and consultants paid? How much money is the Fund “donating” to NGOs?
Translated, “Follow the money?”
This agency is ripe for either a GAO audit (assuming that that the GAO still has the capability of doing an independent audit after 8 years of the previous administration) or some solid investigative reporting. The problem with the latter point is that the MSM is sorely lacking in the will to do serious reporting and and are staffed by opinion writers masquerading as journalists.
How have the funds been spent? Mercedes sales have increased dramatically in many African recipient nations.
Hot under Collar, google GCF and then go into GCF details. As of now, of the about $7 billion actually given GCF, about $6 billion has been spent estabishing the GCF, offices, and staffing up, and about nothing yet has been spent on climate mitigation. You cannot make this stuff up. Google GCF and check it out yourself. Its all on their website if you dig deep enough.
Do your back of the envelop math for that graph. US population is ~323 million, at $9.41/per person it come out to 3 billion. The numbers are not adding up.
Darrin,
It’s the amount pledged, not delivered to date. US pledge was for three billion USD. Obama actually gave one third of that total.
“As of now, of the about $7 billion actually given GCF, about $6 billion has been spent estabishing the GCF, offices, and staffing up, and about nothing yet has been spent on climate mitigation. ”
Incredible. They are almost as good as Oxfam at deviating funds.
Bureaucracy at its best.
Look what happens in Sweden!
We are so good and generous -and still we could benefit a lot of warmer climate.
But we have received a lot more sun lately. Thanks to climate change!
https://www.smhi.se/klimat/klimatet-da-och-nu/klimatindikatorer/stralning-1.17841
Ristvan , I cant see any breakdown of budget on the GCF site, although the number of conferences, symposiums and workshops is mind boggling as the the description in some of the recruiting. It is a full on snouts in the trough fest.
Americans are stingy warmongers, while the Swedes are peace-loving, generous and really care about the environment, huh? WRONG!
This graphic is fake news. Sweden can only afford to put $59/person into this environmental bucket because they have always refused to put their share into the defense bucket, and the United States picks up the slack for them and almost every other EU country, and many other countries around the world.
I ran the numbers from a set of data between 2001-2012 and found that Sweden ran an average annual defense deficit of 0.575%.* In just those years, Sweden shorted the defense fund by over $61 billion, or about $6,000 per person. THAT’S OVER 100 TIMES WHAT THEY DONATED TO THIS ENVIRONMENTAL FUND!
And that just represents 12 years of theft. We Americans have been footing the bills for Sweden and almost all other European country for many generations. And it’s high time we stopped.
*Source: militarybudget website
Oops! I was unclear.
When I said that Sweden ran a defense deficit of 0.575%, what I meant was that they should have paid 2% of their GDP but only paid 1.425%. Sweden shorts their defense obligations by about 29% every year.
Here’s another way to look at how “generous” Sweden is. In just the next 6 weeks, they will short their defense obligations by more money than the total amount they paid into this environmental fund.
IS IT ANY WONDER THAT EUROPEAN LEADERS WERE CURSING AT TRUMP FOR SAYING THAT AMERICA NEEDED TO STOP PAYING THEIR BILLS?
They dare not say. Bastards
“Gabro June 3, 2017 at 11:10 am”
Based on per-capita figures are misleading given the fact there are only ~65 million people in Britain and ~350 million in the USA.
I know. But you can multiply to get the whole amount.
Or look at the link I posted later as to various nation’s pledges.
Graphics are almost always biased. While true, it would be more informative to note other contributors, not second world economies. Data is not information. Information is not knowledge. Knowledge is not Wisdom. Seek wisdom.
Models, however, are never to be questioned!
Here’s where the extorted bucks are supposed to go:
Note the craziness. Peru, Bolivia and Argentina are natural gas-rich. Nigeria is oil-rich. India is a major CO2 producer.
Zany.
a list of the 146 NDA countries is much clearer to see who may receive funds under whatever agreement they make-
https://www.greenclimate.fund/documents/20182/318991/NDA_and_Focal_Point_nominations_for_the_Green_Climate_Fund.pdf/eeace75b-aa59-489c-8914-c0940debe01f
China, Saudi Arabia, Singapore etc
I don’t think that map is complete. Obama sent something like $50 million to Asia right before he left office, to fix CAGW there.
TA it was $500 million and it went to Korea because that is where the GCF is headquartered. And as noted above he did it in violation of a longstanding 1994 US law prohibiting it after April 2016 when UNFCCC recognized Palestine as a full member of the Convention.
The $500 million is a different expediture, Rud.
Here is the expenditure I was referring to:
http://www.wnd.com/2016/12/millions-more-for-global-climate-change-in-obamas-final-months/
“The Obama administration is attempting to slip in another pricey climate-change initiative before Donald Trump takes office, potentially costing U.S. taxpayers another $90 million if it survives its unveiling – in Asia – next month.
And that’s just the newest attempted infusion of cash to climate-related programs, several of which hang in the balance as the administration continues to review industry bids on separate projects launched in recent months.
The U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, on Dec. 13 released a draft document governing the latest proposed program, which aims to help the region to “mitigate, adapt to, and recover from shocks and stresses caused by climate-induced events.”
USAID Resilient Cities Asia, as the initiative is known, would add yet another layer to the many dozens of U.S.-funded climate-related programs already under way in nearly 50 nations.”
end excerpt
I don’t know if any money was actually spent on these projects or if Trump managed to stop the spending. Will have to look a little deeper.
TA, had not known about that extra dip. Thanks for the education. Sincerely.
Obama also gave to his birth country.
“Obama also gave to his birth country.”
I didn’t know that Obama gave to Hawaii.
Is there any reason why a private citizen couldn’t contribute to the Green Fund? If not, what is stopping our rich alarmists?
Like all socialists, they prefer spending other people’s money.
http://www.climatefundsupdate.org/listing/green-climate-fund
Also shows national pledges: US $3 Bln, Japan $1.5 Bln, UK $1.211 Bln, etc.
Let china Russia th U.K. And the rest of Europe take over supporting it for a few years.
Try reading.
UK France and Germany alone have pledged as much as US. Europe ( EU ) is currently 28 countries.
If Trump DOES actually pull out, hopefully the whole thing will fall apart. It will become pointless for EU to go it alone with the economic masochism.
Bloomberg Promises $15 Million To Help Make Up For U.S. Withdrawal From Climate Deal
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/06/02/531238185/bloomberg-promises-15-million-to-help-make-up-for-u-s-withdrawal-from-climate-de
When half of the Indian population has to ‘go’ in the fields it would seem obvious that climate is the least of their worries.
“Just building toilets is not going to solve the problem, because open defecation is a practice acquired from the time you learn how to walk. When you grow up in an environment where everyone does it, even if later in life you have access to proper sanitation, you will revert back to it,” says Sue Coates, chief of Wash (water, sanitation and hygiene) at Unicef.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-27775327
Bad habits abound.
Your link is from June 2014. A lot has happened since then …
But giving people access to toilets isn’t enough. You also have to persuade them to use the toilets. That’s the second key to Clean India, and in some ways it is even harder than the first. People can be reluctant to change old habits.
Clean India has ingenious ways of tackling that problem. In some communities, groups of children band together to call out people who are defecating in the open and encourage them to use public toilets instead. In a pilot project that will be expanded next year, the government worked with Google so users in 11 cities could search online for the nearest public toilets, get directions, and read reviews by other users. On streets throughout the country, billboards remind passers-by of the mission. Stars from Bollywood films and cricket teams speak out on TV and radio. Even India’s currency features the Swachh Bharat logo.
The hard work is paying off. Today more than 30 percent of Indian villages have been declared free of open defecation, up from 8 percent in 2015. (You can track the progress on this handy dashboard.) http://sbm.gov.in/sbmdashboard/Default.aspx
https://www.gatesnotes.com/Development/Indias-War-on-Human-Waste
This video says it all.
https://youtu.be/uubpV5vVErA
buy toilet stocks
They’re using U.S. currency for toilet paper because it keeps arriving by the boat load!
I remember a cultural adjustment seminar where we were briefed on cultural sensitivity of visiting Indians (outsourcing deal) with specific mention of toilet habits. One attendee asked if the Indians were getting cultural sensitivity training as well……crickets
“In some communities, groups of children band together to call out people who are defecating in the open and encourage them to use public toilets instead.”
So one of the “ingenious ways to tackl[e] that problem” is having children form gangs and publicly shame their neighbors. Sounds a bit like bullying to me…
In all seriousness, I do think that open defecation is a problem for a multitude of reasons. I am not sure that public shaming of individuals is a good way to get the masses on board. I suspect actual education that addresses people’s concerns would be more effective. (I have read that one reason people resist using toilets/latrines is a belief that it is unsanitary to have so much human waste in one confined place.) If no one bothers explaining why public toilets are a better option and the negative effects of open defecation, people are not going to change their habits. “Because I said so” generally only works for parents, and even they do not always win.
Any country where the prevailing religion worships a cow and the government proclaims it to be a crime to butcher one for food, the people should go hungry and live without modern western sanitary facilities. Otherwise change the government or religion.
Any country where the prevailing government allows the practitioners of a religion to drink the blood (vampire) of their god and eat the body of their god (cannibalism) should be abolished. Otherwise change the government or religion.
The Pope and the Church of CACA both favor child sacrifice. They are the enemies of humanity, with the blood of millions, if not tens of millions, on their filthy hands.
eyesonu, in India you can see numerous cows in the cities literally eating garbage. Believe me, you would not want to eat the meat from such an animal.
As usual, follow the money. No wonder there’s so much hootin’ and hollerin’ from the green side.
There is a poll here. Feel free to vote 🙂
https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-story-198614-11-.htm#198614
As with most “dogooder” programs, a considerable portion of the funds involved are sure to stick to the advocates and administrators of the programs.
Might more appropriately be spelled “dog odor” programs, Tom. But you are right. As with all contributions to the U.N. and other foreign programs and charities, you can count on the first 75% to 80% (if you’re lucky) being skimmed off the top.
“The United States contributed $1 billion to the global Green Climate Fund, but the world’s top polluters contributed nothing, David Asman reported.”
The world’s top polluters? Someone tell him that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant.
Well they are still the top polluters…
In this new world, if you are alive, whether human, animal, plant, insect, bird or fish, you are a polluter. Basically if you poop, pee, and breath, you must wallow in the shame of being a polluter.
I love it when you talk dirty.
Can I pay money to ease my shame? ;-(
Great fodder for leftist bs. I love it! Reposted on Facebook.
I get a kick out of the cities that say they are committed to remain in the Paris Agreement
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pittsburgh-mayor-pledges-to-adhere-to-paris-agreement/article/2624732
So if Pittsburgh wants to carry on its commitment what would that be? Well the US, through Obama, pledged $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund and to date the US has paid $1 billion so that leaves $2 billion remaining.
If we allocate the remaining portion to individual cities then Pittsburgh’s obligation based on their population would be, according to 2016 census data, $1.9 million. (305K Pitts to 322M US) They can make their check payable to the Green Climate Fund. I’m sure the voters will appreciate it.
The city must also make its best efforts to close all the coal mines it can. That should go over well too.
Under the Constitution, Article I, Section 10 specifically prohibits States from entering into foreign treaties. Because States do not have that power, it seems logical that cities which receive their charters from their respective State, do not have that power either. However, as the Constitution no longer means what it says, it appears that cities can do whatever they please these days.
Jim
Wow, what a stark example of progressives mendaciously overvaluing intentions.
The US contribution balances with the China, Russia and India intentions?
Progressive math.
China and Russia have failed to pay up breaching the Agreement . The USA tax payers are owed a full refund and then shut down the Green Climate Fund globalization slush fund . Who is siphoning off that fund now . Lets see there audited books. The Obama bandits spied on USA citizens then stole $1 Billion dollars of tax payers money to support a massive fraud .
Sue the Green Climate Fund if they don’t return the money immediately . By the way where is that cash anyway ?
Singapore ? South Korea ? Who has authority over it ? The Tax payers rights have been ripped off by this fraudulent scheme and the culprits need to be charges for wire fraud .
It’s funny how if you go around giving away money, everyone thinks you are a great guy and a great leader. If you don’t, well then you are a bum. Go figure.
You mean “giving away” OTHER PEOPLES money !!
It’s redistribution of wealth. The Pope says it’s good.
Take money from poor people in rich countries and “redistribute” it to rich people in poor countries.
If you are against wealth distribution then you are a r@cist.
Got it?
China is making its contribution outside the GCF. The amount is larger than the US pledge:
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/09/china-climate-change-finance-obama-xi-pledge
EU wants India to contribute(India hasn’t yet)
http://www.livemint.com/Politics/Nb1BnGE06tuW2E4FMjjzPN/EU-wants-India-to-contribute-to-the-UN-Green-Climate-Fund.html
Russia is on the board of the GCF and has said it will contribute(hasn’t yet)
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2012/cop18/rus/05r.pdf
https://sputniknews.com/environment/201412151015878709/
Here are GCF’s pledges and contributions:
http://www.greenclimate.fund/documents/20182/24868/Status_of_Pledges.pdf/eef538d3-2987-4659-8c7c-5566ed6afd19
Total disbursement to GCF to date is about $85B. Japan’s is particularly large – about $77B of that.
the link you show is in their own currency – 77B is in JPY
there are pledged, signed and disbursed, the amounts are all based over the years of the agreement
eg- http://www.greenclimate.fund/documents/20182/29917/Contribution_arrangement_-_Japan.pdf/477bdae3-3714-4088-bd58-06200d8e7514
2 lots of 28B JPY
sorry, 38B JPY
Quite right – thanks for the correction. So 77B yen is about US $7B.
Sorry – $77B yen is about $700 million US. I’ll get this right yet.
Thanks for the posting. I was wondering what that whiny sound emanating from Western Europe was, and now I know: it was the medieval double-reeded, hurdy-gurdy-like instrument called the “sanctimonium” – the one popularized by itinerant jongleurs and acrobats who performed standing on their heads to draw a crowd before the shoeless black friars would stand up and orate upon the people’s heretical undercurrents.
Indulgences sold on admission; redemptions sold at the exit.
Thanks for your unintelligent contribution to this discussion.
JohnMacdonell June 3, 2017 at 10:45 pm
I wasn’t sure if you understood the content of your own post or I would have spoken more to the point of Japan’s contribution (i.e. $77 B? / 7 B? / 700 M?), still outsized by any measure.
Yeah, I goofed on Japan’s contribution – but I have it right now.
I agree Japan’s contribution is pretty big given its size/population.
Apparently the newly-formed US Climate Alliance intends to fight “climate change” on their own. Talk about ultra virtue-signalling and Greenie delusions of grandeur. They really have gone down the rabbit hole.
“Apparently the newly-formed US Climate Alliance intends to fight “climate change” on their own.”
************
The most potentially dangerous and costly thing about being in a religious cult is not realizing that you are in one. The genetic wiring or programming of one’s brain and lack of wisdom would preclude one from coming to this realization.
In the face of President Trump’s announcement, these states and cities reaffirm their faith in climate alarmism with this “Climate Alliance” they have created. It causes me to keep thinking back to that deadly day back in November of 1978 in Jonestown, Guyana. From what I have learned about him, Jones seemed to preach an ideology which was as much socialist or communist as it was anything else. This was in spite of him passing himself off as a clergyman. He made an audio recording in the final moments of that deadly day, and it is still haunting to listen to today.
Cults have always been and will probably always be the antithesis of science. Those who are reinforcing this observation are the ones who ignore, suppress or attack the scientific issues with the CAGW theory that make it dubious.
We will continue to give aid, but I hate bills like this that now give an expectation that other countries can free load off of us.