Standing up to the G-7 Climate Bully! Part Deux: The Bully Backs Down

Guest post by David Middleton

This is a sequel to: Standing up to the G-7 Climate Bully!

In our last episode President Trump had just punched the G-7 Climate Bully in the nose.  When she tried to rally the rest of the G-7 to gang up on Mr. Trump, Canada, the UK and Japan said, “Thanks, but no thanks,” and the G-7 Climate Bully folded like a lawn chair…

Germany ‘massively weakened’ draft G20 climate plan to appease Trump

Published on 29/06/2017, 5:41pm
Latest draft of German plan for next week’s Hamburg meeting contains major concessions to US and opens door for coal projects to be defined as “clean”

By Arthur Neslen in Brussels

Germany’s G20 presidency dramatically weakened a climate action plan, gutting it of ambitious language and defining gas, and potentially even some coal power, as “clean technologies”, in an attempt to appeal to US president Donald Trump.

The action plan was intended to be agreed at next week’s Hamburg G20 summit. Climate Home has seen two versions, drafted in March and May of this year. The latter shows the degree to which the German presidency has bent to the will of the Trump White House.

Several elements that have been removed in the May draft are:

  • A 2025 deadline for the end of fossil fuel subsidies
  • References to the risk of “stranded assets”
  • A call for “the alignment of public expenditure and infrastructure planning with the goals of the Paris Agreement”
  • A push for carbon pricing
  • A commitment to publish mid-century decarbonisation blueprints by next year
  • A pledge to develop a “profound” climate plan for multilateral development banks
  • Seven references to the UN’s 2018 review of nationally-determined contributions
  • 11 references to the 2050 mid-century pathway for net zero emission
  • 16 mentions of infrastructure decarbonisation

“The US massively weakened the language in the energy part of the action plan,” one source with knowledge of the negotiations said. “It pushed for references to so-called ‘clean’ fossil fuels and made it less explicit that the energy transition has to be built on energy efficiency and renewables.”

[…]

Climate Home

Featured Image

Advertisements

148 thoughts on “Standing up to the G-7 Climate Bully! Part Deux: The Bully Backs Down

  1. Great news, thanks! Amazing how they have folded. Now wait for the howls of despair from the green lobby.

    • Maxine Waters is now saying that Trump should be impeached and exiled because of his mean tweets.

      • She has consistently done nothing for her constituency, pushes a race platform, and been a source of embarrassment.

      • Maxine Waters is now saying that Trump should be impeached and exiled because of his mean tweets.

        Maxine Waters doesn’t know the difference between Crimea and Korea. With enemies like her, who needs friends?

      • ‘Maxine Waters is now saying that Trump should be impeached and exiled because of his mean tweets.’

        You’d almost think Maxine – or practically anyone on the Progressive Left – had NEVER said anything remotely insulting, inflammatory, bullying, prejudicial, or hate-based – instead of twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, through all available outlets.

        The hypocrisy is absolute and without fail.
        But it is proof of how real bullies can’t take getting hit.

      • Exiled? So she believes that people whose value system is fundamentally different to and incompatible with US values should not be allowed to reside in the US? Interesting theory – I wonder if there are any other applications of it?

      • If I was her, I would be worrying about getting held accountable for my own criminal acts, rather than pointing my finger at someone else.

        Not that I am endorsing, that particular tinkle message from the President; but I do think he should sling the CNN faked NEWS mud right back in their lying faces.

        They have hardly mentioned any legislative actions of the President, while they still harp on about a non event, that is simply made up phantasy; The President was correct in calling it a hoax. Better than ANY April First caper. And continuing to belch that smoke, simply begs the question of the previous President of the United States, on whose watch the non event is alleged to have occurred or not; yet he didn’t lift a finger to address, what leaker Maxine tries to lay at the new White house door step.

        That baby is yours Maxine.

        G

      • bet she thinks its spelled xiled … racist and ignorant is not way to go thru life you fool …

      • In the UK we have our own version of Maxine. She’s called Diane Abbott and her grasp on facts is so full of holes it would put a sive to shame.

      • “I’m pretty sure “being mean” does not count as a high crime or misdemeanor.”

        No, but it does count as being an idiotic teenager. Why doesn’t he just stop? It’s embarrassing.

      • George E Smith: “They have hardly mentioned any legislative actions of the President”

        That’s because there aren’t any.

        PS, the president doesn’t “legislate”

      • Jeff Alberts: “Why doesn’t he just stop?”

        Patience Jeff, it’s going to take a while before Melania’s program to stop cyber-bullying to kicks in. It’s pretty clear who her first target is going to be.

      • Jeff, bet you know what Trump said but not what he was replying to. Why don’t the media just stop? Clinton called Paula Jones trailer park trash, yet no uproar in mainstream media. At least Trump says it himself instead getting others to do it for him. I think this is hilarious republicans elect a president who acts like all the democrats before him and the media and the dems go bonkers.

    • What the heck are fossil fuel subsidies ??

      The US Treasury is THE largest beneficiary of the fossil fuel industries. They are way ahead in collecting the profits of those enterprises, before the shareholders or bond holders.

      The Treasury doesn’t pay a dime of subsidies to fossil fuel companies.

      G

      • I am sure that the fossil fuel industrial companies, would be most happy to be allowed to expense ALL of their COSTS, in the tax period in which those costs are incurred; rather than having to depreciate a deteriorating asset over some totally unknown supposed life span.

        Those business costs are incurred in today’s dollars; who wouldn’t rather recoup those losses in today’s dollars, instead of some future inflated dollar.

        G

      • Yep… ExxonMobil pays out more in total taxes than the entire industry receives in imaginary subsidies.

      • Yep. The “subsidies” almost totally consist of the methods of writing off expenses.

      • A tax write-off is what all businesses have…a deduction, the cost of doing business is written off. Of course Maxine is void of all business concepts as she lives off the taxpayer dime.

  2. We must kick them while they are down – they wouldn’t hesitate to do it to ‘us’.

    We must NEVER forget who the bullies really are in this instance.

      • Jeff, if someone punches you in the nose do you just stand there and let them punch you again?

      • Again, Doug, playground analogies don’t really work well for adults. Unless you’re Trump, I suppose.

        To answer your question, i’d fight back, and have the guy arrested. But you’re talking about a physical attack, not just namecalling. So, bad analogy.

      • Jeff, I’m sorry to tell you this but there is not much difference between politics and the playground, especially international politics. Think about it. I learned on the play ground that if you don’t stand up to the bullies words it just gets worse and then they think they can get physical. Some people are friendly and you can be friendly and expect to be treated in kind; others you have to let know you are also willing to treat them in kind.

  3. …”contains major concessions to US”….
    I thought China and the EU was forging an alliance to take a leading role in tackling climate change. What happened? Are they running out of money already?

    • OPM shortage writ large…

      There will be a net loss in climate finance support
      To recall, many developing countries had clearly indicated what they can achieve with domestic efforts alone, and how much of their ambition was conditional on international climate finance support by developed countries, when they first submitted their Intended Nationally Designated Contributions (INDCs) in the lead-up to the Paris climate summit. For example, just to implement the INDCs of the 48 poorest developing countries could cost as much as US$93 billion per year, with a significant share to pay for their implementation expected to come from international sources.

      And a key country like India has made all of its INDC implementation costs, a reported US$2.5 trillion over 15 years, fully conditional on international finance support. Thus, the United States’ refusal under Trump to fulfill financial obligations under the UNFCCC toward the agreed US$ 100 billion per year by 2020, the financial baseline under which climate finance support was to be ratcheted up under the Paris Agreement, will undoubtedly have a cooling effect on the ability of developing country Parties to raise their emission reduction commitments in the next few years.

      http://www.germanclimatefinance.de/2017/06/23/america-first-trumps-rollback-climate-finance/

      • Do I remember correctly that the US share was about $25B? If so, the rest of the contributors can accomplish 75% of their “good deeds”. How many will, or ever intended to pay, remains a big question. All the “baby birds”, however, will always have their beaks open!

      • David,

        Perhaps in the future such expenditure projections should be noted
        first in Euros, then parenthetically in US Dollars.

        Take the world-wide discussion of climate cash off the dollar standard.

        Give the mainstream media a collective headache trying to find the
        conversion from US to European keyboard settings for their computers.

    • Um … I think China & the EU were both planning on spending ours (US). The best-laid plans …

  4. It won’t do to just dilute the planning, if the thinking and the weird ideas remain the same. The ignorants will try a re-run to re-establish their kinky thinky.

  5. Hoping that President Trump will see it as his mission to put Merkel back into the box. What about how many tanks have you got? Answer 250 ready. I have got 8000. That settles it. Find you place and keep quiet.
    If I were Trump, I would meet up with heads of all German heavy industries and car manufacturers and invite them to move to USA to enjoy cheap and reliable energy as they are forced to move out of Germany because of rocketing energy prices mixed with energy outages as coal and nuclear power stations are shut down.

    • France gets our climate “scientists.”

      We get Germany’s heavy and automobile industries.

      The UNFCC gets to go to hell.

      Win-win-win!

      • BMW just announced another massive expansion in Spartanburg SC.

        Clemson’s ICAR – (International Center for Automotive Research) is growing by leaps and bounds.
        http://cuicar.com/campus/

        Nicki Haley’s strategy (and her personal efforts overseas) for SC to be an automotive center of excellence has paid off.

    • M-Benz is putting more production capacity in the U.S., the S.C. plant is well-on in its construction, The biggest problem is that most of the M-B production process is built around a highly-skilled German apprenticeship model, but Trump is already addressing that too.

      • SC has had a network of technical/vocational schools since the ’60s that addresses the needs of industry for skilled (and high tech) labor. It has been a major (and successful) factor in SC’s marketing the state to industry.

    • @ John Peters: German automakers are already producing in US and other locations in order to avoid costs for transport and taxes.

    • but the German economy has been consistently growing even as it rolled out more renewables…

      and Germany has the world’s most reliable grid. It doesn’t have outages – even on the days when 85% of its electricity came from renewables.

      • It doesn’t have outages because it is interconnected with France’s nukes and Poland’s coal plants. And their neighbors get pissed off when they over generate when the wind is blowing, spilling over into their grids and destabilizing them.

      • Griff, Griff, Griff. I know that this has been explained to you many times. But on the off chance that this time it will stick.
        It’s not when wind is producing that it is a problem. It’s when it stops producing suddenly that the problems occur.

      • no way no how has Germany ever gotten 85% of its electricity from renewables for even a single 24 hour day … pure BS

    • They already manufacture in the USA, but more is better. Any country that would attack Stalingrad during WWII would shut down the best energy source yet – nuclear.

  6. British politicians could learn a thing or two from their German counterparts.

    The Germans may erect lots of obscenely subsidized windfarms, close nuclear power stations, and beat their breasts loudly about carbon dioxide and global warming, but they still go ahead and find a way to build more brown-coal-fired power stations. Someone should should whisper in the UK politicans’ ears that “You’re not actually supposed to BELIEVE all that global warming end of the world twaddle.”

      • Griff,

        Germany still has a lot of capacity in coal and other “conventional” sources. Coal and browncoal capacity is large enough to provide all electricity in Germany all year, even in winter. The same for “nameplate” capacity of wind and solar combined. The problem with the latter is that the nameplate capacity is only delivered a small part of the time: in reality average around 15% (solar), 25% (wind on land) and 35% (wind on sea).

        That is a profound problem with intermittent renewables: they deliver when you don’t need it and they don’t when you need them. For “conventional” plants a 10% backup and a 10% connection with the neighbours in general is sufficient to prevent blackouts during maintenance of a plant and/or an unscheduled shutdown of one large plant. In the case of intermittent renewables you always need 100% backup, even if the renewables suppress their output (and profit) with average 20-35% per year…

        The costs of the backup are never attributed to these renewables, which always have priority on the net and not the slightest obligation to regulate the network. That cost is completely on the “conventional” plants, which therefore often work at a loss…

      • In Griff’s world, if renewables produce 30% of Germany’s power for one minute, once a year, that qualifies as producing 30% of Germany’s electric power.

      • Ferdinand, Griff hss been told this a dozen times. Willfully Griff is thick as a brick.

      • Don’t believe everything you read. Countries have been know to change their minds very quickly when the pressure is on.

    • Yep. Apparently they hate nuclear more than they hate coal. link If I go this right, they are building more NEW coal than there is all solar plus all wind. (where all=new+existing)

      • They burned a little more when the gas price was high and after they shut down half their nukes overnight in 2011 – but they finished their building programme and are now starting to shut down coal plant…

      • What is always absent from any of these graphs/charts is how much of the renewable energy generated was actually used. It’s because they don’t know.

    • They must have the additional brown-coal-fired power stations to be able to pay subsidies for their ever-growing number of subsidized wind farms. Contrary to what appears to have become “conventional wisdom” beliefs on the part of some, the ECB nor any other central bank actually has a magic hole in the air from which they can magically conjure on-demand magic money which can be used to subsidize non-viable “renewable” energy production.

      Real money is generated by real economic endeavors who must be powered by sources of real, self-supporting energy. That’s fossil fuels, nuclear and hydro.

      And fortunately for all of us, it is the sun is the primary control knob for the climate of the planet which may make good politics for the silly politicians but which does nothing to validate making carbon the “key” to our future climate. CO2 doesn’t even have as much control effect as the typical vernier knob.

      • The Sun being the driver of climate is the only sure thing out there. Of course the far-left loons will figure out a way of saying humans are affecting the Sun…and some of the mental midgets will believe it.

  7. Germany needs to redefine coal as ‘clean’ given the increasing reliance it has to place on coal after closures of nuclear and the unreliability of renewables.

    • It doesn’t and won’t….

      Over 32% of German electricity from renewables in 2016 and they have set several records this year…

      This spring half the 8 remaining reactors were offline at once for various reasons, no impact on supply…

      There’s a list of coal plants slated for closure, the latest auctions for new renewables were oversubscribed…

    • The German government has already reduced the building of new wind and solar plants. Subsidies have been significantly reduced. This is to reduce the rise in energy prices

      • No, it changed the way that they are funded from FITs to auctions and temporarily cut back on solar and onshore wind in favour of offshore wind, until the new north/south grid upgrade comes online.

        It still has its 80% renewable electricity in 2050 target: it expects to meet its 35% in 2020 target (perhaps early: its at 32% now)

      • And then Germany’s electric prices will only be 10 times the U.S.’s, Griffie, with massively increased energy poverty. All you are talking about is the fact that if one throws enough money at something physical, one might be able to achieve stupidity squared.

      • But Dave check out German bills and household consumption versus the US. German households have lower bills as they use less electricity…

        and note UK bills have gone down in comparison to 2008 when we passed the climate act

      • The average German home is half the size of the average American home…

        If my house was half as big as it is, my electricity bill would shrink without the rate going down.

        In addition to American houses being twice the size of German and UK houses, we actually use air conditioning…

        The weather in Washington, D.C., and Berlin, Germany, has been pretty similar recently. There is one striking difference between the two capitals, though: Whereas many Americans would probably never consider living or working in buildings without air conditioning, many Germans think that life without climate control is far superior.

        The divide isn’t limited to Berlin and D.C.: In fact, many Europeans visiting the U.S. frequently complain about the “freezing cold” temperatures inside buses or hotels. American tourists on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean, however, have been left stunned by Europeans’ ability to cope with heat, even at work spaces or in their private homes.

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/07/22/europe-to-america-your-love-of-air-conditioning-is-stupid/?utm_term=.9618f7a6eab0

        We use it a lot in Texas… 7-9 months of the year.

        Germany can keep its 1,100 sq ft homes and it can especially keep its $0.35/kWh electricity rates

      • Electricity costs a lot, so they use less.
        According to Griff, this is something to be proud of.
        Next he’ll tell us that widespread starvation is proof that there are no problems in agriculture.

      • David, if most American’s lived as far north as the average German, we’d use a lot less AC as well.

      • “David Middleton June 30, 2017 at 11:46 am”

        Don’t know how old the data is in the graph for Australia, but from July 1st energy costs just got ~20% dearer. Before this we had morons Turnbull (Who re-activated a carbon tax July 1st 2016) and more recently Finkle talking of energy security/supply, cheaper energy costs plus more renewables and reduced emissions.

      • Of course not…

        A deal on Nord Stream 2, a gas pipeline that will link the Ust-Luga area west of St. Petersburg directly with Germany, was signed by Russian energy giant Gazprom in late April. If completed, the pipeline would give Russia more than fifty percent of the Germany gas market and potentially increase its share of markets throughout Central and Western Europe. The pipeline is set to be completed in 2019 and is supported by joint-funding from five European energy companies, including Royal Dutch/Shell, Uniper and ENGIE.

        The line will run under the Baltic Sea, and if completed will eventually concentrate seventy-percent of Russian gas exports to Europe into a single route. This will render existing pipelines, several of which run through Ukraine, obsolete.

        http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Russias-Pipeline-Play-Has-Eastern-Europe-On-Edge.html

  8. You guys have seen Merkel’s statements in advance of the G20, yes?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-40441143

    “German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said this year’s G20 summit will focus on furthering the aims of the Paris climate deal – putting her on a direct collision course with the US president.
    Mrs Merkel said she knew the topic may be difficult following Donald Trump’s decision to pull the US out the accord.
    However, she said, tackling climate change remained a priority for Europe.
    She was backed by other European leaders who said they would speak with “one voice” in Hamburg.”

    • That, from my many decades of decoding political speak, translates into “We are screwed, but can’t let anyone see that, or we loose the little credibility we had left.”

    • The Griff-bot obviously doesn’t know the difference between “reden” (to talk) and (aus)sagen (to make a meaningful statement). When Merkel talks, she doesn’t mean what she says, but wants to put the listener to sleep, so that he doesn’t ask any questions. She has taken so many political U-turns that the (now) late Chancellor Kohl remarked, that she must have lost her compass”.
      Griff, who seems to be quite young and poor in general knowledge, didn’t even notice the contradiction of this and the beginning of this article.

  9. It’s not enough. Reject it again. Save science process as an agenda item and defend science policy fact checkers.

  10. Watching the MSM this morning and the news coverage is all tweets all the time instead of the massive shift in energy policy. This is not the first time, nor do I think it is the last that Trump plays the MSM with the ol’ switcheroo.

  11. G20 to the USA:
    “Ok, Ok, we’ll call it ‘Global Cooling’ and ‘Climate Stasis’, anything.
    Just don’t stop sending us MONEY.”

  12. Did Trump make actual steps to get out of Paris Agreement, or is it all talk so far?

    • He doesn’t have to. Treaties must be approved by the Senate. Without that, it’s just an Obama pinky-swear that Trump has no obligation to honor.

      • The US can not be bound by non treaties. Keep dreaming. If we simply ignore it as it was not ratified, it has no impact in US law. However, there is some question about whether the former president had the authority to actually send that money from the US treasury to the UN. Be interesting if someone pursued criminal charges.

  13. You are mis interpreting this. The Paris climate agreement was weak to begin with. These concessions make it completely pointless in all but one regard, get everyone on board. This is nothing more than the global government structure camel sticking its nose back in the tent.

    • sean2829

      Get everyone onboard about what?

      When “everyone” fully understands THERE REALLY IS NO MONEY, “Paris” will return to being a tourist haven and place where US climate scientists & the Tour de France end up.

      But seriously, does anybody heard of a single US climate scientists planning to accepted Macron’s 1M euro offer?

  14. It’s time we get out of environmentally unfriendly dirty solar and bird chopper wind power renewables.
    (Using the same Rules For Radicals rhetoric as our opposition…..
    “Pick the target. Freeze it. Personalize it. Polarize it.”)

    • All Trump has to do is order Zinke to fine the wind and solar projects the same value per bird as charged to fossil fuel “accidents”. Game set match! Now for putting a value on those bats.

  15. There must be some type of Voodoo spell that is removing people’s ability to think independently, concerning anything related to CAGW/AGW.

    Oh, I forgot, if anyone speaks the truth, they are deniers.

    Ignoring the fact that the entire (100%, every issue), scientific basic of the IPCC report, is incorrect, the Paris Accord is a super duper, stinking bad deal for the US and the EU.

    http://notrickszone.com/2017/06/11/trump-correct-to-reject-founder-of-german-environmental-movement-calls-paris-accord-a-bad-deal/#sthash.LVZeTk2H.dpbs

    We can be happy that the American President Trump has seen this anachronism, and what on earth moved his predecessor (William: And all of the other developing country sheep politicians, to sign such) a disadvantageous agreement?

    In 2030 Europeans would have to lower their emissions to 4 tonnes per capita, while China’s would be allowed to rise to 14 tonnes per capita and the USA would have to fall to 10 tonnes per capita. One has to ask, who signed, cheered and celebrated such an agreement and welcome it with tears of joy?

    Vahrenholt describes an agreement that is totally in favor of China, a country that plans to construct 368 coal power plants by 2020 while India plans to build 370. In his view the Paris Accord is a free ride for China.

    Overall the Paris Accord will hardly have any effect on total emissions, but will result in the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs, in addition to doubling/tripling of electrical prices.

    • WA

      I doubt any Paris PooH-Bah really gives a crap about lowering anything; there is (or was) an incredible amount of enthusiasm for spending USA money.

      Undoubtedly, the enthusiasm is still there, but the money isn’t.

  16. It’s been 21 years since a statistically significant global warming trend has been observed, and with the AMO 30-yr cool cycle starting in about 1~2 years, and near zero sunspot activity for the next 50~100 years starting in about 1~2 years, there is a very high probability global temp trends could start show a flat to falling global temp trends from mid-1996 in about 3~4 years, at which point the CAGW hypothesis must be declared officially dead.

    A number of pro-CAGW “scientists” (aka rent seekers) and Leftist political hacks have to know what’s coming…

    Just as the Russia/Trump/Bigfoot ho@x is imploding due a complete lack of evidence, so too, the CAGW sc@m is quickly becoming an embarrassment to the Left, though few will few publicly admit this.

    Trump’s trashing the Paris “Accord” was a brilliant move. It’s going to be so delightful when Leftists around the globe will finally have to admit Trump was rightful along in espousing CAGW was a complete ho@x… well…to be honest, the Left will eventually say it was all one big “misunderstanding”….yeah, right…

  17. Trump is like Toto….pulling back the curtain…….“Pay No Attention to that Man Behind the Curtain!”

  18. Uh-oh, spaghettios; Now, according to Christiana Figueres, the price tag for “climate action” has to be 1.3 $trillion by 2020. That’s on top of investing more in “clean” energy and doing away with fossil fuels, especially coal. Geez, now where on earth are they going to get all that money? Especially since Uncle Sam/Daddy Warbucks is now saying, “you’re on your own now, sweetikins”.

  19. The USA should simply have nothing to do with these watermelons – just act as if they do not exist. They are destroying their own economies and killing their elderly and their poor with high energy prices.

    Reprise from April 2017 and June 2015:

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/04/18/white-house-cancels-meeting-on-considering-paris-climate-accord-action/#comment-2479880

    To Donald, Ivanka, Jared and Rex:

    Donald was correct – time to dump the Paris Climate nonsense!
    _________________

    COLE’S NOTES for all the TRUMPs and Rex Tillerson – from 2015:

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/06/13/presentation-of-evidence-suggesting-temperature-drives-atmospheric-co2-more-than-co2-drives-temperature/

    Observations and Conclusions:

    1. Temperature, among other factors, drives atmospheric CO2 much more than CO2 drives temperature. The rate of change dCO2/dt is closely correlated with temperature and thus atmospheric CO2 LAGS temperature by ~9 months in the modern data record

    2. CO2 also lags temperature by ~~800 years in the ice core record, on a longer time scale.

    3. Atmospheric CO2 lags temperature at all measured time scales.

    4. CO2 is the feedstock for carbon-based life on Earth, and Earth’s atmosphere and oceans are clearly CO2-deficient. CO2 abatement and sequestration schemes are nonsense.

    5. Based on the evidence, Earth’s climate is insensitive to increased atmospheric CO2 – there is no global warming crisis.

    6. Recent global warming was natural and irregularly cyclical – the next climate phase following the ~20 year pause will probably be global cooling, starting by ~2020 or sooner.

    7. Adaptation is clearly the best approach to deal with the moderate global warming and cooling experienced in recent centuries.

    8. Cool and cold weather kills many more people than warm or hot weather, even in warm climates. There are about 100,000 Excess Winter Deaths every year in the USA and about 10,000 in Canada.

    9. Green energy schemes have needlessly driven up energy costs, reduced electrical grid reliability and contributed to increased winter mortality, which especially targets the elderly and the poor.

    10. Cheap, abundant, reliable energy is the lifeblood of modern society. When politicians fool with energy systems, real people suffer and die. That is the tragic legacy of false global warming alarmism.

    Allan MacRae, P.Eng. Calgary, June 12, 2015

    Post Script for Rex Tillerson:

    Hi Rex,

    I have two engineering degrees, have worked in the energy business on six continents since 1984 and have made very significant contributions to the Canadian oilsands and the conventional oil and gas industry – this includes personally initiating the move to new royalty and tax terms and major cost reductions that revitalized the Alberta oilsands industry. Exxon was a 25% owner in three of our joint ventures.

    I suggest that few individuals have made more money for Exxon through their own initiatives than I have, and I did not even work for you. So please put on your engineering hat, study the above post, and forget about the alleged global warming crisis – it does not exist.

    Regards, Allan

    • would you like to comment then on the just published MAJOR revision to the RSS data?

      https://www.carbonbrief.org/major-correction-to-satellite-data-shows-140-faster-warming-since-1998

      “A new paper published in the Journal of Climate reveals that the lower part of the Earth’s atmosphere has warmed much faster since 1979 than scientists relying on satellite data had previously thought.
      Researchers from Remote Sensing Systems (RSS), based in California, have released a substantially revised version of their lower tropospheric temperature record.

      After correcting for problems caused by the decaying orbit of satellites, as well as other factors, they have produced a new record showing 36% faster warming since 1979 and nearly 140% faster (i.e. 2.4 times larger) warming since 1998. This is in comparison to the previous version 3 of the lower tropospheric temperature (TLT) data published in 2009.

      Climate sceptics have long claimed that satellite data shows global warming to be less pronounced than observational data collected on the Earth’s surface. This new correction to the RSS data substantially undermines that argument. The new data actually shows more warming than has been observed on the surface, though still slightly less than projected in most climate models.”

      [RSS datakeeper Carl Mears made it abundantly clear he wasn’t happy with his data because it didn’t show warming the way he wanted to…so he came up with a “correction”. It’s just politics, and since you cite the execrable “carbon brief” IT’S CLEAR YOU HAVE SWALLOWED THIS PLOY HOOK, LINE, AND SINKER.

      Mears said:

      Recently, a number of articles in the mainstream press have pointed out that there appears to have been little or no change in globally averaged temperature over the last two decades. Because of this, we are getting a lot of questions along the lines of “I saw this plot on a denialist web site. Is this really your data?” While some of these reports have “cherry-picked” their end points to make their evidence seem even stronger, there is not much doubt that the rate of warming since the late 1990’s is less than that predicted by most of the IPCC AR5 simulations of historical climate. This can be seen in the RSS data, as well as most other temperature datasets. For example, the figure below is a plot of the temperature anomaly (departure from normal) of the lower troposphere over the past 35 years from the RSS “Temperature Lower Troposphere” (TLT) dataset. For this plot we have averaged over almost the entire globe, from 80S to 80N, and used the entire TLT dataset, starting from 1979. (The denialists really like to fit trends starting in 1997, so that the huge 1997-98 ENSO event is at the start of their time series, resulting in a linear fit with the smallest possible slope.)

      Mears simply got tired of his dataset being used to support something he didn’t believe…so he changed it; he added an “adjustment” using statistics.

      Griff aka Ed “with too much time on his hands” doesn’t seem to get it. Warming due to adjustments is just smoke and mirrors. But he’s a birder, not a scientist, so he doesn’t look at these things objectively.

      If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment. – Ernest Rutherford

      -Anthony]

      • Well… We are living in the Adjustocene… Where Mann-made climate change has run amok.

      • I assume that real statisticians like McIntyre, and Drs. Christy and Spencer will look into the revised RSS TLT methodology. Too bad the time lag will allow the warmistas to run around like they did with Karlization before the truth comes out.

      • Isn’t the claimed difference in that paper smaller than the margin of error in the measurements? — hence, statistically equivalent to zero? — hence of zero consequence?

      • I thought you were on holiday?
        How’s it going?!

        Well when you are back, I think that a major adjustment to half of the satellite data warrants a bit more than ‘he doesn’t get it’

        for years this site has been trotting out RSS data in support of the skeptic viewpoint… now all that was wrong because they adjusted it? Or were the original figures right and you’ll be sticking to them, even though their owners have abandoned them?

        and honestly, when was this site going to put up an article if I hadn’t raised this?

        [I’m off next week. The Carbon Brief is an activist site, i.e. so I don’t reference them. I don’t see a press release from RSS or in Eurkealert, so it looks like they entirely made this themselves. If RSS had issued a press release: http://www.remss.com/measurements/upper-air-temperature – I’d be right on top of it. But when an activist site makes one where the primary researcher did not, I tend ignore junk like that. RSS issued press releases in 2016 for changes, and oddly none here. It suggests to me that the Carbon Brief and its morally questionable editor Leo Hickman have jumped the gun for clickbait.

        Tough noogies if I don’t post things on your schedule. And while we are at it Ed, you need to slow down your rate of commenting…you are dangerously close to thread-bombing – Anthony]

      • Griff actually does his best work attacking women.

        He’s done a number of drive-bys on Dr Crockford & Dr Curry.

        Griff’s logic & science? Not so much.

      • RSS has a note about the revision on their website. But, last I checked, all of the graphics were unchanged.

      • Well I have seen years of advocacy of the skeptic position based on RSS data.

        and now it seems it is all invalid?

        so it must have been invalid all along?

  20. The EU can’t even balance their checkbook without deceiving their populace. UN’s foothold into One World Government is flailing and failing and they can attribute it to the AGW scam coming undone. The world is outing their lies. Uncouth may be too weak a word to describe Trump but style and personality aren’t the basis for good government.

  21. The UN has been working on setting up the U.S. to provide a free bank account for the rest of the world for decades. They almost succeeded with the false climate change issue, but thank God for Trump.

  22. Ok, so now the Climate Bully makes “concessions” to Trump & America with fanfare for the G20 Summit:

    “Several elements REMOVED in the May draft are:

    – A 2025 deadline for the end of fossil fuel subsidies
    – References to the risk of “stranded assets”
    – A call for “the alignment of public expenditure and infrastructure planning with Paris Agreement goals
    – A push for carbon pricing
    – A commitment to publish mid-century de-carbonization blueprints by next year
    – A pledge to develop a “profound” climate plan for multilateral development banks
    – Seven references to the UN’s 2018 review of nationally-determined contributions
    – 11 references to the 2050 mid-century pathway for net zero emission
    – 16 mentions of infrastructure de-carbonization. . . ”

    Hmmm… Any chance this is a Trojan horse intended to suck Trump & America back into the Paris Accord?

    I can see the headlines now – “Trump Declares Huge Victory Renegotiating New Paris Climate Deal.” But once we’re lured back into the CAGW tent, beware. Don’t go there.

  23. I am surprised that Griff did not quote Thomas Karl’s adjusted sea surface temperature data, that Obama bandied around at the Paris Climate accord meeting, to prove that the pause in global warming was a data measure error. Just a heads up Griff, Karl was lying.

  24. These politicians are worried that their own citizens are realizing its a scam and start asking why they have been stealing their tax money. Until now, all politicians said it was the worst thing ever, many countries just paid off to come on board……..Trump has said not only does the emperor have no clothes but that magic snake oil is just corn oil which isnt even healthy anyway…

Comments are closed.