Trump To Steer UN Global Warming Funds To Coal, Gas Projects

Photo of Michael BastaschMichael Bastasch 12:39 PM 07/14/2017

From The Daily Caller

2015-05-21T224312Z_1_LYNXMPEB4K1BT_RTROPTP_4_CHINA-POLLUTION-COSTS-e1447269800104

A girl makes her way to her house which locates next to chimneys of coal-fired power plant in Shijiazhuang, Hebei province, China, January 28, 2015. REUTERS/Kim Kyung-Hoon

The Trump administration will use its position as a donor to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) to steer money towards coal-fired power plants and natural gas infrastructure, according to an unnamed White House official.

President Donald Trump will do his best to use the Obama administration’s $1 billion donation to the GCF to “advance American-energy interests globally,” the official told Bloomberg.

Trump will build on his G20 pledge to “work closely with other countries to help them access and use fossil fuels more cleanly and efficiently,” and has already begun rolling back Obama-era restrictions on international financing of coal plants.

Trump pledged to eliminate funding for UN global warming programs, but his administration still has a seat at the negotiating table, thanks to the $1 billion the Obama administration handed the GCF before leaving office.

The GCF was set up in 2010 for rich countries to deposit money that would be used to fund green energy and global warming mitigation projects in poor countries. President Barack Obama pledged $3 billion to the fund, but only gave $1 billion.

The GCF became a major focus in the negotiations of the Paris climate accord, and would play a role in the $100 billion per year pledge for climate funding rich countries made to poor ones.

Trump announced that he would withdraw from the Paris accord in early June, but his administration will work to make sure that taxpayer dollars already handed over to the UN help advance U.S. interests.

Environmentalists were outraged at the news, and the Sierra Club’s John Coequyt said that Trump’s plan is like “taking the fire department’s budget and using it to pour gasoline on the blaze.”

Trump’s energy policy centers around U.S. “energy dominance,” rather than fighting global warming. The president called the Paris accord a plan to redistribute wealth from the U.S. to economic competitors, like China, who would not be bound to reduce emissions and could get money from the UN.

“This agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States,” Trump said in early June when announcing his intention to withdraw from the agreement.

“The agreement doesn’t eliminate coal jobs, it just transfers those jobs out of America and ships them to other countries,” Trump said.

Follow Michael on Facebook and Twitter

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Advertisements

81 thoughts on “Trump To Steer UN Global Warming Funds To Coal, Gas Projects

  1. So environmentalists are angry because Trumps intends to help developing nations develop with the most reliable and modern energy infrastructure available, so that they can then tackle issues such as poverty, hunger, family planning, environmental protection, democracy and corruption free governance. What will he stoop to next?

    • There is a quite simple solution for the environmentalists to resolve this issue. Simply buy back the $1billion USD seat that President Trump has by paying back the monies paid by Obama. They can then feel free to spend the remainder of the funds how they see fit…How much is that again??

      • Why is the author showing us a fake photograph with white smoke coming out of the cooling towers ??

        All of us skeptics already know that cooling towers emit black smoke; not white smoke, so we are already wise to that.

        Other than that , thanks for the heads up Michael; we need to keep on top of who’s looking out for us.

        g & G

      • To George e.smith, you are right to be skeptical but the white “smoke” coming out of the cooling towers is steam and water vapour. If you go for a walk around a power station you will find that it is far from injurious to the surrounding habitat, it is all lovely and green and plenty of life. If you go fishing in the nearby waters you will find masses of fish of an excellent size and in great health…we are at record low Co2 levels at 400ppm. Life finds 400ppm difficult, plants and animals have evolved to thrive on 2,000ppm and more, even above 8,000ppm. Which Earth has been at for the majority of its existence, and no runaway global warming then….
        Power stations give life, windmills take it away, we all know that, because we think.

    • “use fossil fuels more cleanly and efficiently”

      Who can disagree with that aim. Much of the problem is old, cheaply built coal burning stations which produce tons of REAL POLLUTION as well a wasting resources by being inefficient.

      China has a massive problem with coal burning power plant but it is NOT the CO2 that is the problem.

      A more efficient coal plant is one which will produce less CO2 per kWh. Surely any bedwetting alarmist would be in favour of that.

      • OK let’s turn off Fossil Fuel produced energy to the Pacific NW States on August 21st and see just how viable solar really is. Or just look at the turmoil in South Australia… Solar and wind work really good except when they don’t

      • Bryan

        It makes sense to go for renewables when creating new capacity or replacing an individual plant.

        but no one is going to just switch everything off and solar might not be the best solution everywhere.

        (though it does fine in Germany and Scotland which are both northerly and gloomy)

        south Australia’s problems are due to incompetence, not renewables. If they had set the trip on their wind plants same as Germans have been doing since 2008 they would not have gone offline…

        If they had had a grid storage battery its micro second response might have held the grid up when the powerlines went.

      • To me, it makes very little sense to create new capacity that takes hundreds of times more land space per MWh than Nuclear takes. To me, Wind and Solar will be viable when either can produce 2200MW in a 12 acre space

      • Griff,

        In Germany we need the complete fossil capacity, bc. somtimes there is no wind in whole Europe.

        You can check it here, how renewables anre working:
        ZIGZAG.
        https://www.agora-energiewende.de/de/themen/-agothem-/Produkt/produkt/76/Agorameter/

        If you click at “ganzes Jahr” you see the whole last Year in one graph. You can also insert any other dates to get a lenght of time you like to watch closer.

        If we hadn’t our neigbours around, working a s buffer for us, we had the same Problems like in SA.

      • I was having my morning coffee and burrito, at the local McD’s, with almost nobody else around, and in drives a very nice looking Toyota sedan painted a very nice non metallic somewhat bright sky blue with some carefully placed black trim. Looked like a brand new model I hadn’t seen before.
        So I went outside to see what it was and immediately spotted the Privilege Lane sticker on it, but it wasn’t one of those Pius things; much more stylish than those things, but it had a zero emissions badge on it, so I figured it was some sort of electric.

        Well it was and I asked the apparent owner what the hey it was.

        It’s a Hydrogen Fuel Cell car (his wife’s). He says there’s a bunch of places in California where he can fill it up with Hydrogen. It does have a small battery.

        So pretty soon California is going to be loaded with cars spewing Greeen House gases out all over the place.

        I didn’t have the gall, to ask the chap what such a beast might cost. This was not any economy car; very sweet looking. And I am one who thinks that the current models of Toyota Lexii are just butt ugly cars. Whoever thought that cheesy monster grill was attractive has no taste whatsoever.

        This Watermobile is a different animal; probably coal fired when it comes down to it.

        G

  2. Trump is apparently keeping the main arguments against Paris on economics and trade, not “global warming” as such. As the economics is even more indefensible than the “science”, that could be effective tactics, especially as it is easier to explain.

    • This is my take on it as well. Even an uncompromising warmest can’t deny the economic insanity of the Paris accords relative to US interests. I only hope that behind the scenes serious steps are being taken to correct the pseudo science developed by the IPCC to justify climate reparations as the vehicle to achieve the UN’s perpetual goal of repressive Robin Hood economics which basically rewards countries for inept leadership while penalizing those that succeed.

      • CO2 …. wow, don’t you ever read Griff’s posts? Economic insanity is his speciality!

      • It’s not repressive Robin Hood economics, it’s just plain good old “we get the most votes if we give to the poor, and then we can become the world government and REALLY have what we want – less people.” Why do people fall for the “smoke screens” of saving the planet and wealth redistribution? Neither is what the war on energy is all about.

      • Really Stewart?

        The world outside the Us has no problem with rolling out renewables.

        Nor do major US corporations (who save a great deal of money in the process)

      • “The world outside the Us has no problem with rolling out renewables.”

        Really Griff?

        Maybe they have no problems rolling them out (due to fear driven ignorance), but have significant problems once the roll out has reached critical mass.

        Are you aware of what’s going on with electricity prices and availability in South Australia, Germany and other countries that have foolishly succumbed to the green monster? I would not say that this is ‘no problem’.

        The problem is large subsidies for renewables which artificially makes them less expensive, but they are still far from being competitive with hydrocarbons. This leads to a lack of innovation to drive renewables to become more competitive as it significantly decreases the reliability of the grid and increases energy costs.

        This insanity is being driven by the sloppiest science I’ve ever seen which universally assumes that the well known first principles laws of physics must be violated. Specifically, Conservation of Energy, the Stefan-Boltzmann Law and the rest of the thermodynamic laws.

        But there is light at the end of the tunnel and it looks like the Trump administration is well on its way to put the science back in climate science. Once this happens, the impetus to deploy renewables will completely disappear.

      • Griff, our retail prices for electricity have tripled compared to 2000. It is now 30 €ct/kwhr. In neighbouring France they pay halv of it.

        France is No 1 in Climate ranking (CO2 per capita), Germany is No 26, behind India which is No 20.

        Guess why?

    • A pragmatist.

      Although, I don’t necessarily see economics as easier to explain, especially considering that those numbers are probably fudged even more than temperature data by people who are even better at fudging.

      Although using one to illustrate the other couldn’t hurt – for example, if you own only a small fraction of stock, how much influence do you have over company policy?

      • So economic numbers are fudged more than temperatures. Well call the temperatures what you want and they wont make more harm, however, extracting trillions from the west is certainly quantifiable harm. From your perspective, no amount should asked for, just wait for the damage bill and we will then pay – I like it!

    • the only thing that matters is MUH MONEYS – not YOUR FEELS, so yeah- that’s the way to win any argument
      debating science was always a ruse.

    • Tom Halla

      Years of sceptical science have failed to stop the march of the socialist green blob.

      But as all the socialist green blob wants to do is be wealthy, at the public’s expense, an economic campaign is eminently sensible.

  3. Am I the first to point out that the photo is of cooling towers, not “chimneys” as the caption says?

    • Yeah, I thought flue gases from these stacks were mostly steam. Okay, there’s CO2 in there too, but it’s INVISIBLE.

      Based on the illustration accompanying the article, this article should be about the evils of steam. … typical visual mistake, as you said.

      • “Yeah, I thought flue gases from these stacks were mostly steam. Okay, there’s CO2 in there too, but it’s INVISIBLE.”

        There is no CO2 whatsoever in the efflux of cooling towers.

    • Yeah. We haul them over the coals when they do it. Inexcusable. The CO2-emissions stack is usually completely invisible to the human eye in modern power stations.

  4. Hitting them where it hurts the most. The “other people’s money” pocket book control.

    • How outrageous – not being able to spend other people’s money the way they choose.
      What an infringement on their freedoms.

  5. If Trump can use the Billion $ to build LNG terminals in places like Eastern Europe and South East Asia, it might give a boost to US exports of LNG and harm Russia’s ability to use NG as leverage for its geopolitical goals.

  6. The second $500 million tranche Obama sent 17 Jan 2017 broke a longstanding 1994 US law, because in April 2016 UNFCCC recognized Palestine as a full member state. Trump should demand the money back.

  7. Global Warming Funds = Foreign Aid

    There is a lot of opinion that foreign aid does a lot more harm than good. link It results in:
    Increased Corruption
    Increased Bureaucracy
    Increased Debt
    Decreased Democracy
    Growing Dependence
    Local Farming and Business Bankruptcy
    Less Trade and Wealth Creation
    Increased War
    White Elephants
    Imperialism

    One wit says: Foreign aid is stealing from poor people in rich countries and giving to rich people in poor countries.

    Foreign aid usually demonstrates the following truth:

    For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.

    H. L. Mencken

    • CommbieBob, add to your list: The UN has also acted as a massive disease vector. Transmitting HIV to SE Asia (Cambodia) w African “peacekeepers”, giving the gift of cholera to Haiti from Nepalese “peacekeepers.” Not to mention demand for drugs, child prostitution etc that inevitably arrives in their wake.

    • Bob,

      the Chinese do it more clever. They sell coal power stations togheter with the credits. The need no foreign aid, the just make business with valuable technology.

      And the new one they are making are quite good. Low emission and efficient.

    • stopping payment on a check is really easy … stopping payment of an electronic funds transfer, not so much

  8. China is the infrastructure king.
    It is building Pakistan’s coal fired power.
    https://www.dawn.com/news/1330812

    It has now opened up the world’s biggest desert highway to link the two countries
    https://en.dailypakistan.com.pk/world/worlds-largest-desert-highway-opens-to-traffic-in-china/
    BEIJING – Authorities in China have opened the last three sections of the world’s largest desert highway to traffic.

    The Beijing-Urumqi Expressway, with a total length of 2,450 kilometers, stretches from Beijing to Urumqi, the capital of northwest China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region.
    There are no rules that stop China and Pakistan building coal fired power.
    So they just do it.

    • China is buying up natural resources wholesale in Africa in return for infrastructure built by Chinese companies.

      Time that the US and the West generally woke up to what is going on and what this will mean 20-30 years down the line and beyond.

    • China is also building the largest container ship terminal all man-made artificial islands it really is remarkable.

  9. While thousands and thousands of turbines destroy scenic vistas and solar plants fry desert endangered species, all with the endorsement of Congress. Wind turbines and solar plants are there forever, just like entitlements. All the oil and coal in the world will not help. Environmentalists will destroy thousands of acres of land and kill millions of birds and bats all the while oil and gas is vilified. We will have turbines because NO ONE in power wants them gone. The donor class owns them. Next election, the donor class will be hitting oil and coal again. With all the new wind plants, they are going to point out how much the industry has grown and stupid people will buy into the fantasy. More destruction will occur. The country is run by billionaires who act with impunity. Oil and gas don’t rake in the kudos that wind and solar do. The billionaire donor class wants their cut of the taxpayer moneys and they will get them. One way or another. Probably should have called the fire department before the building burned down, right?

      • Except the plants are now getting built without subsidy.. contracts just set for Germany’s first offshore no subsidy wind farm…

        UK building no subsidy solar farms…

        India cost of new solar much lower than new coal…

      • In the USA, ALL these are being build because of the subsidies. The builders have stated this and no new ones went in until the turncoat representatives of Wyoming sold out the state, probably due to their intense feelings of love and attachment to Barack Obama. Or they’re just greedy shysters. Or both. The subsidies do not end until 2020, if then. There will be thousands of acres of landscape torn to shreds (98,000 in one, more than 200,000 in another, I believe). Roads ripped into the prairies. Concrete poured by the thousands of tons. One stroke of luck for wind—sage grouse can be killed with impunity since the feds did not list them. Between the internet sold subdivisions and the billionaire’s turbines, by the time anyone wakes up, there will be nothing to protect. A species gone extinct because of climate change. Who cares, of course? As long as it’s not oil or gas it’s find to rip the crap out of the landscape, destroy the flora and fauna, and maybe cause a species extinction or two. Deaths and destruction by enviros are GOOD and necessary. Go on, kill those grouse and eagles, rip up hunt areas, destroy open spaces. The greens are all for it. And they CARE.

      • Griff, as always only the half info. No subisdy for wind farms, but the quite expensive power transmission lines through the sea has to be built from the electricity net provider, and is payed by us poor folks.

    • They fixed the ‘bird frying’ problem at the one solar CSP plant which had it.

      Millions of birds and bats are NOT getting killed.

      That’s an entirely bogus figure.

  10. What a neat twist to the story! I thought that $1 billion Obama gave the GCF was lost to us, but Trump has found a way to benefit Americans with it! That is so delicious!

    • Environmentalists at the U.N. are outraged that Trump will
      use ‘tax payer dollars already handed over to the U.N to
      advance U.S. interests.’

      ‘Oh say can you see, by the dawn’s early light,
      What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming,
      Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,
      O’er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming?
      And the rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
      Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there;
      O say does that star-spangled banner yet wave’

      Yep!

    • I wonder if having access to this $1 billion in the GCF is a reason why Trump did not immediately withdraw the U.S. from the UNFCCC.

  11. Michael Bastasch digs deep in Fake News for his own salvation at the NYT!

    Sniffy Sniffy, Teary Teary, Whimper Whimper.

    Hahahahahah
    Jajajajajajajajaja

  12. I hate the photos meant to look like pollution!
    Those are cooling towers a type of heat exchanger with evaporating water to cool the water to return it to the heat so it can expand again and do the work of generating electricity.

    They are no smoke stacks.

  13. where is the US going to find anywhere which wants new coal plants?

    The very few planned outside India/China/Japan are already financed (often by the Chinese).

    solar is markedly cheaper in India than coal and would be the same through most of Africa/Asia.

    • All 1600 new plants one the way, griff., and more as the crazy CO2-hatred subsides.

      Plenty of room for US money.

      And PLENTY of extra CO2 for the world’s plant life for many, many decades to come. :-)

      And there is nothing you and your fellow AGW trollettes can do about it. :-)

      Chin up, little petal !!

      • I think you need to keep up to date on India and China – both have effectively halted new coal plant permits and have cancelled approved and building projects.

      • Griff,

        But still China will buid 100 new ones. As written by NYT.
        And India? they will shurey not use solar for their heavy industry and big cities. Coal power can be produced by 2ct / kwhr. In Germany. Even at night…

      • naturb – will they?

        Things are changing in China.

        They do have a ban on new plant in most regions and they already have over capacity in coal plant…

  14. IIRC, Indonesia not long ago used a grant from the UN’s GCF to have a Japanese company build a multi-billion dollar coal fired power plant – with the latest scrubbing technology. Indonesia has about 117 new coal-fired plants in the works, Singapore and Japanese banks doing much of the financing.

  15. Renewable Energy is completely unreliable. Natural Gas, Coal and Oil are absolutely necessary for our Economy.

  16. Please President Trump, get our never congressionally authorized billion dollars back from the UN climate fund.

Comments are closed.