Guest essay by Eric Worrall
French Climate Ambassador Laurence Tubiana has insisted that hollow promises will have no place at this year’s anniversary Paris climate “gimme the money” fly-in.
The climate change fight returns to Paris
Monday 11 December 2017
European Climate Foundation chief and former French climate ambassador Laurence Tubiana calls for higher ambition from the global community in order to meet the goals and targets of the Paris Agreement.
Nearly two years have passed since France’s then-foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, struck his gavel and declared: “The Paris agreement for the climate is accepted.” This week, President Emmanuel Macron and the French government will host world leaders and non-state actors for the One Planet Summit.
The purpose of this gathering is to celebrate climate gains made since 2015, and to boost political and economic support for meeting the goals and targets of the Paris agreement.
…
The diplomatic success of the Paris accord is worthy of praise in its own right; it was a remarkable leap forward in the fight against climate change. But we must not rest on our laurels. With the United States, the world’s largest historical emitter of greenhouse gases, dismissive of the accord, the rest of the global community must reaffirm its commitment to reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Dramatic, meaningful, and immediate steps must be taken.
…
Solutions start with money, and a main objective of the One Planet Summit is to mobilize public and private financing to fund projects that can reduce climate-changing pollution today. During the summit’s “Climate Finance Day,” companies, banks, investors, and countries will announce new initiatives to help fund the costly transition to a carbon-free future.
Hollow promises will have no place at this gathering; only real commitments of real money for tangible projects will be discussed. As a result, we hope to see hundreds of millions of dollars committed by governments to fund solutions across all fronts of the climate-change battle.
…
Read more: http://www.eco-business.com/opinion/the-climate-change-fight-returns-to-paris/
One thing is abundantly clear from sifting through this article and other similar flights of green fantasy; everyone in the climate community expected the USA to foot the bill.
Despite a few friendly overtures, China has not yet stepped in to fill the breach left by the departure of all that US cash.
Until the climate community finds someone willing to pay for their endless expenses paid global conferences, and money pit climate projects, hollow promises are all hopeful green NGOs are likely to receive.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It seems obvious to me that France is totally committed itself to the climate alarmist narrative and the Paris Accord for whatever reason(s). That there is science that casts doubt on CAGW and the need for the Paris Accord is beside the point for the French. It is a matter of national pride and saving face. Failure of the CAGW narrative and the PA is not an option for them, science or no science. Hence, we see their hostility to Trump and his position on the Paris Accord.
The French govt is full-fledged member of the CAGW cult, and there is no backing away from it. As they say however, pride goeth before the fall.
Consider how seriously the Germans take C-AGW preparedness training. Every winter, they arrive in great numbers to Miami to learn how to survive in the future climate. The adversity of their training includes exposing 100% body surface to achieve maximum natural cooling effect. Then, they lower their heart rate by laying the horizontal position for minimum body heat generation during the hottest hours of the day, eschewing air conditioned buildings nearby.
They do this for many days until they are visibly affected before returning home to their (for the time being) more comfortable climate. It is one thing for men who have gone through military training to do this. But even their (young) women do this. I was so fascinated, that I spent several days photographically documenting this activity.
I have read the auto biography of world champion triathlete Chrissy Wellington. Before entering the sport that made her famous, Chrissy worked as a senior civil servant. She describes how she attended global conferences where world leaders would meet to discuss the subject of world poverty. She then goes on to tell of her utter disillusionment as she witnessed nothing but massively expensive junkets that produced nothing but hot air and mountains of paper.
If the things that you love are global travel and expensive dining, you need to find a seemingly intractable problem that you can convince moderately affluent westerners is really important to solve. Climate change is brilliant because, even if it was a problem, and even if you could solve it, it doesn’t matter. you can just keep on claiming that it is a problem that needs solving and carry on freeloading. The tragedy is that there are a lot of things that could be done to relieve global poverty but they would tend to derail the gravy train.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Life-Without-Limits-Chrissie-Wellington/dp/1780338716/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1513020429&sr=1-1&keywords=a+life+without+limits+chrissie+wellington
Real money. What a laugh.
On a side note, I wrote a short bitcoin post you might be interested in.
HAS BITCOIN REACHED PEAK STUPIDITY?
http://www.maxphoton.com/bitcoin-reached-peak-stupidity/
Hollow promises are all that the Paris Accord Crowd deserve for their Hollow Ideas.
LOL. I’m not sure they’ll have very much to discuss. I see plenty of people holding out their hands but the checkbooks will likely remain out of sight 🙂
“With the United States, the world’s largest historical emitter of greenhouse gases”
Is this factually correct if the whole EU is considered? Or, to use the Greenblob’s methods, is it true per capita?
Not that it matters in reality but it does matter for the political rhetoric.
Did I not read here on this excellent site a few times in the past that the net CO2 emissions in the USA are negative? Has it not been calculated that our forests, fields, and crops absorb more CO2 than our combustion of hydrocarbons generates?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/12/theresa-may-uk-green-economy
It’s Britain’s duty to help nations hit by climate change
Theresa May
Sweet lets send all the bills to the UK and Griff.
There is only a couple of problems with that, LdB: 1) There has been no climate change. and 2) There has been no nation hit by the nonexistent change.
So far, impacts of a minor global warming from the Little Ice Age has been positive.
I have not the slightest doubt that in Paris many governments and their surprisingly accommodating financial institutions, as well as the politically compliant energy industries, will announce massive “new” expenditures of green energy projects. In fact, in some cases, they may announce the same projects for the fourth or fifth time. It is all part of the cheerleading and the media campaign to demonstrate that everyone except the vile Trump Administration is on board. It is also, however, a large distraction from the real money question that was allegedly answered at COP21 – the confirmation that by 2020 the Annex II countries will be contributing at least 100 billion per year to the Green Climate Fund. COP21 left one or two “minor” issues unresolved. The first is the formula to determine what the contribution of each Annex II country will be. The second, probably even more contentious, is the formula for determining the shares of this financial bonanza for each of the recipient countries. A third issue arose when the United States announced its intention to withdraw – how will the U.S. share of the Green Climate Fund financing be made up? I will believe that the COP group is making progress on the big money topic when they have resolved these issues. Recall, if you will, that under the COP 21 agreement, the less developed countries will be exempted from the requirement to meet emission reduction goals if the Annex II countries fail to come up with the cash. As of now, that seems like a virtual certainty.