Bonn bombs, climate pact in disarray

UN negotiations in Bonn are set to end in a stalemate today as delegates have become bogged down in technical arguments about the Paris climate pact. Poorer nations say they are fed up with foot-dragging by richer countries on finance and carbon-cutting commitments. Some countries, led by China are now seeking to renegotiate key aspects of the Paris agreement. An extra week of talks in September has been scheduled to try and get the process back on track. –Matt McGrath, BBC News, 10 May 2018

A proposal for bringing international environmental law under one legally binding treaty at the United Nations will be up for a preliminary vote later this week at the U.N. General Assembly. The United States U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley tells Fox News in a statement that the U.S. won’t support the measure. —Fox News, 9 May 2018

The EU has committed to a 20% cut in its energy use by 2020 to be achieved by two directives, covering energy efficiency and buildings. But leaked documents seen by the Guardian show that Britain is pushing for its 2014-2020 timeline to be stretched backward four years to count “early actions” taken that comply with the efficiency directive. —The Guardian, 9 May 2018

Ex-New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman (D) was at the vanguard of the climate movement, heading legal and political fights against Trump administration attempts to weaken environmental regulations. Schneiderman is also a pugnacious and media-savvy figure whose abrupt and stunning political fall this week after cringe-worthy sexual abuse allegations is an undeniable blow to climate hawks across the country. It may force them to reshuffle their tactics and, to a lesser extent, their priorities. —E&E News, 9 May 2018

The grim irony of the pursuit of “green” energy is that it may be placing millions of people in poor countries at risk of living much shorter, unhealthier lives due to air pollution, according to a new report from The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF). —Tim Pearce, Long Island News, 5 May 2018

As President Donald Trump’s decision to reinstate sanctions on Iran sends oil prices higher, consumers and the administration might hope that US producers could come to the rescue with increased production. —Financial Times, 10 May 2018

President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the nuclear agreement with Iran marks the end of the current output agreement between OPEC and its allies. OPEC is likely to insist the current agreement remains in effect, at least for now, but the prospective removal of several hundred thousand barrels per day of Iranian exports from the market will require a major adjustment.– Reuters, 9 May 2018

h/t to Benny Peiser, The GWPF

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 10, 2018 8:54 am

I think “is” was supposed to be “in”, but it looks like it still works.

Reply to  Canman
May 10, 2018 9:07 am

It depends on what the definition of “is” is.

Reply to  Kamikazedave
May 10, 2018 11:57 pm

The definition of is is is isn’t it.

May 10, 2018 8:57 am

“legally binding agreement” does not sound like the unofficial Paris “agreement” that bypassed the U.S. Senate as part of a major push by Pres. Obama–not even close. Or is part of the usual tactic of gradual strangulation of libs in getting to end stage objectives?

Reply to  ResourceGuy
May 10, 2018 12:59 pm

A suicide pact is never legally binding.

Phil Rae
May 10, 2018 9:00 am

The boondogglers have just added an extra week to their next junket! More money down the drain as the climateratti swan around the globe in their never-ending quest for free money, subsidies and the opportunity to tell other people how to live their energy-deficient, miserable lives!

John Bell
Reply to  Phil Rae
May 10, 2018 9:05 am

Exactly! cheers

Reply to  Phil Rae
May 10, 2018 10:51 am

Well-said Phil!!

Javert Chip
Reply to  Phil Rae
May 10, 2018 11:39 am

As usual, Josh nailed it.

Reply to  Phil Rae
May 10, 2018 12:10 pm

Technically correct but it gets worse: the next boondoggle is officially slated for Poland (the big one, COP24) but the extra week isn’t tacked onto COP24. No, that would be way too efficient in costs, air miles and CO2. It’s going to be on the other side of the planet in Bangkok.

Reply to  Scute
May 10, 2018 3:02 pm

Bangkok! going to be interesting to see what they put those ladyboys down as on their expense sheets. Lest go for ‘hospitality’

Reply to  Scute
May 10, 2018 4:30 pm

“It’s Iceland or the Philippines or Hastings or…
Or this place!”

Hocus Locus
Reply to  Scute
May 10, 2018 10:39 pm
Reply to  Scute
May 11, 2018 7:55 am

Every official will get a free hooker at government expense.

William Grubel
Reply to  Scute
May 11, 2018 1:35 pm

Don’t take the free hooker. It will only cost you $130.000 later.

May 10, 2018 9:05 am


May 10, 2018 9:06 am

Ex-New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman (D) … stunning political fall …

The extreme Left tends to eat itself. example

Reply to  commieBob
May 10, 2018 9:20 am

Quite frankly, the entire political spectrum tends to eat itself. It is the nature of a power hungry industry where only one can win the ultimate prize. I guess that is why everyone is so mad at Trump. He isn’t even one of them and he managed to win their coveted 1st place ribbon.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Jeff in Calgary
May 10, 2018 10:55 am

And they see that at the ultimate danger to their self-eclared “rightful place” as leaders.

J Mac
May 10, 2018 9:09 am

As the in-fighting to secure Other Peoples Money increases like a mann made hockey stick, I can only wish this Ship Of Fools “Bonn-voyage”!

Reply to  J Mac
May 10, 2018 9:28 am


May 10, 2018 9:11 am

The failure of Western Countries to put money where their mouths were in Paris has rightly caused the Developing World to agree that the Paris Accord was all Blow and No Show! Most of the Western plans to implement extensive “renewable” energy projects have proven that Intermittent “green” energy costs jobs, industrial growth, and high taxes! Is it any wonder why those same Countries are failing to commit Billion to the Developing Countries to aid those same efforts that admittedly Do Not Work! It has long been said that there is No Such Thing as a Free Lunch. The same can be said for “free and green” energy!

Bill Powers
Reply to  sz939
May 10, 2018 9:29 am

It has long been attributed to Mark Twain that “God made an idiot for practice and then he created the committee.” We have watched this play out year in and year out since the United Nations began this Climate scam.

Stephen Richards
Reply to  Bill Powers
May 10, 2018 11:23 am

funny, really funny. Every project manager will recognise the veracity of that statement

May 10, 2018 9:31 am

This reads like a Shakespeare play, partly a comedy, partly a tragedy. The drama requires contrived problems to persist until an 11th hour resolution, then all the heroes ride off into the sunset.
All this for a beneficial warming, and improved conditions for plant/crop growth. Why are they not trying to solve real problems, such as plastic in oceans?

Henning Nielsen
Reply to  climanrecon
May 11, 2018 4:36 am

At 11.59, they resolve all by by agreeing to address the world-threatening subject matter at a new location, and take off down the runway into the sunset, happily spewing tons of co2.

May 10, 2018 9:39 am

Brussels can handle this and your fee will be determined later along with the annual increase.

Reply to  ResourceGuy
May 10, 2018 10:05 am

Spring in the EU headquarters — Brussel sprouts.

J Mac
Reply to  beng135
May 10, 2018 11:11 am

HA! …. With Hollandaise sauce?

May 10, 2018 10:03 am

The US unemployment rate cracked the 4% barrier last month and now chimes in at 3.9%. Today the inflation rate for April also came out and stands at 2.5% (up slightly from 2.4% in march). Oil prices were already on the rise due to higher world wide demand, so today’s news on Iran is not welcome news. Hopefully we can boost production relatively quickly here in the states, as higher energy prices inevitably mean higher inflation. And higher inflation inevitably leads to higher interest rates a la the federal reserve. We can thank our lucky stars right now that Trump is president. (i can just imagine a president hillary cranking up a few extra windmills)…

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
May 10, 2018 10:05 am

Yet again this crowd of charlatans selects an exotic holiday venue where no doubt they will be staying at vast expense in the best hotels after jetting in first class. No wonder they are only too happy to continue this deceitful process safe in the knowledge that their vast contribution in CO2 spewing air miles won’t harm the planet while continuing to pretend to save the planet.
You’d think video conferencing had yet to be invented.
I hope the air -conditioning will be turned off in the conference rooms, seems the right thing to do if they really believe.

May 10, 2018 10:22 am

bogged down in technical arguments!
The matters that cannot be agreed are hardly “technical”, they go straight to the heart of things. That boils down to cutting CO2 and money.
Developed countries are getting fed up with the ROW being allowed to increase their emissions till 2030 and beyond.
And developing ones want to know where their money is.
Paris of course fudged both of these issues, which was why it achieved virtually nothing. But poor, dim Matt McGrath of the BBC still does not appreciate this simple fact

Javert Chip
Reply to  Paul Homewood
May 10, 2018 11:25 am

NEWS FLASH FOR “DEVELOPING” COUNTRIES: The USA isn’t playing the game anymore. There ain’t no money. Get over it.

michael hart
Reply to  Paul Homewood
May 10, 2018 4:54 pm

Paul, I think you are giving Matt McGrath at the BBC too much credit (in the honesty column) when you describe him as dim.
As Richard Black’s heir at the BBC, he understands very well that Paris always a case of “the third world will sign-up on the basis that the first world will pay-up”. The latter was always unlikely in any significant amount (other than paying the bureaucrat’s salaries, which is what they are now haggling about). The bulk huge payments wouldn’t be happening even if Hillary Clinton was in the White House. The money just isn’t there.
That is why I am almost pleased that the BBC has changed tack towards targeting plastics. They know that the full frontal assault on fossil fuels has almost run its course. But plastics are the obvious secondary use of petroleum products. Less valuable to the human race than the use of fossil fuels as an energy source, for sure, but still an attractive target for people naïvely wanting to reverse the industrial revolution and destroy the fossil-fuel industry.
It is no accident that they are doing this now at the BBC and elsewhere. Just as the attack on Glyphosate is not really about Glyphosate: it is about an attack on the GMO-industry that produces glyphosate-resistant crops. Even if they can’t immediately succeed by attacking the central object of their hatred, they will attack the ancillary products and supporting industries instead. They will not stop, and yet are still essentially being granted charitable status for what is political campaigning. Worse still, the BBC is doing it with money from a legally-enforced license fee in the UK, and acting as a private profit-making corporation outside of UK jurisdiction where most UK citizens don’t even see what they are up to.

May 10, 2018 10:24 am

Translation: The Paris Accord lost their sugar daddy, and are back on the street.

May 10, 2018 10:46 am

Thank you Nikki Haley.

Stephen Richards
Reply to  ResourceGuy
May 10, 2018 11:25 am

The next president !!!!

Reply to  Stephen Richards
May 11, 2018 3:15 am

strewth!!! i REALLY hope you forgot the sarc tag on that?
shes scarier than killary and i didnt think it was possible
the perfect brainwashed warmonger and to me she comes across as damned near droid

May 10, 2018 10:52 am

The Paris Agreement always was daft. Non-binding, nationally determined targets to reduce CO2 emissions and voluntary contributions to the Green Climate Fund. It gave the delegates something they could sign without actually committing them to do anything.
The $100 billion per annum fund always was a fantasy. So far about $10 billion has been pledged and that includes $2 billion that the USA will not now pay. Actually paid is about $7 billion. This over a year after the agreement was signed, call it $5 billion per annum.

Javert Chip
Reply to  BillP
May 10, 2018 11:29 am

What countries were stupid enough to cough up $5-7B?
Are you sure this wasn’t just the hotel & bar tabs for the conferences?

Alan Tomalty
Reply to  Javert Chip
May 10, 2018 11:54 am

Canada was stupid enough to give other countries green money because our Prime Minister Trudeau is the biggest idiot of them all

John Endicott
Reply to  Javert Chip
May 10, 2018 12:27 pm

as joelobryan, Obama forked over some money, so Trudeau wasn’t the only idiot.

John Endicott
Reply to  Javert Chip
May 10, 2018 12:28 pm

as joelobryan *pointed out* curse of typing and thinking not being in sync LOL

Javert Chip
Reply to  Javert Chip
May 10, 2018 4:55 pm

So USA, at 5% of world population, gives 30% of pledged amount…

Reply to  BillP
May 10, 2018 11:30 am

The Treaty of Paris unilaterally favored China as a major world power, set in contrast of this China up in the status of a developing 3. world country until 2040. Then, with the help of blue-eyed activists, China would have overtaken any other country on earth, militarily and economically. Trump does not want to accept that, and China has since understood that unlike Obama, Trump is a very tough negotiator. Therefore, in the case of Kim Jong Un, China has returned to a pragmatic mediating role. Not because they care about Trump and the US, but out of interest in saving the remnants of its political Potemkin villages. In the case of a total trade war between the US and China and the return to the political cold war, China can win nothing, but can loosing all. His world markets would break away with major consequences for the internal situation in China itself. China is afraid for its Communists (or in other words, the fascist communists are afraid for themselves). However, this must not obscure the view that this is just a tactic change, the content of the thoughts and simulation games of the Chinese communists has not changed, they only see themselves suddenly not in front the lame duck Obama, but in front of a tough negotiator. Therefore the new warm wind comes.

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  BillP
May 10, 2018 11:33 am

The now failing Paris Agreement was the over-reaction to the failure of the Kyoto Agreement to get US Senate ratification. President Clinton never submitted Kyoto to U.S. Senate for ratification. He was hoping a President Al Gore would have a more favorable opportunity for Senate submission for ratification in his administration (oops). In March 2001, newly sworn-in President George W. Bush rejected Kyoto and the U.S. never became a party.
The failure of the Paris Agreement was predicted 2 years ago by the Senate Majority (Republicans) in this White Paper:
available here:

The final two conclusions in the Senate Majority White Paper’s Executive Summary:
• Kyoto was legally binding and countries still failed to comply. Non-binding targets in the Paris Agreement will not produce any greater confidence that countries will comply.
• Kyoto failed to produce a long-term meaningful approach to address global climate change, and so will the Paris Agreement. Countries adopting costly GHG-cutting policies under Kyoto’s first commitment period devastated their economies and actually increased GHG emissions at a rate faster than the U.S. Most of these countries have not committed to the second round of Kyoto commitments, which has not even entered into force, and many others have expressed reluctance in joining the Paris Agreement.

Hans Henrik Hansen
Reply to  BillP
May 10, 2018 11:44 am

“Today, GCF has around 172 staff members at its headquarters, in addition there are a number of consultants who support the staff. Some limited support is being provided offsite, in other countries. With close to a 50/50 balance between men and women, 55+ nationalities, and many more languages spoken, the Fund is an institution that speaks and acts for all people on the planet” – must be quite to expensive to run this organization!

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  Hans Henrik Hansen
May 10, 2018 11:57 am

Article I, Section 9, pp 7 of the US constitution: “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.
Two US payments ($500 million each) were illegal transfers by President Obama. He knew he could get away with it because he was politically un-impeachable.
1st, in March 2016:
Quoting the article: “Last year’s omnibus spending bill from Congress did not appropriate any money for the Green Climate Fund, but it also did not specifically prohibit State from using any of its other money for the fund.”
2nd, on January 17, 2017:
“Final Days: Obama Sends $500M to UN Climate Fund; Trump Vowed to Cancel ‘Global Warming Payments’”
$1,000 Million USD will pay for a lot of staff.

May 10, 2018 10:56 am

Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your world governing body and its staff and travel plans and further agendas.

Joel O’Bryan
Reply to  ResourceGuy
May 10, 2018 11:41 am

Bonn in September is lovely. Bring the wifey/significant other.

Tom in Florida
May 10, 2018 11:01 am

The U.S. is out and not sending any more money.
“Well, we’re not paying” (fill in any country)
“Neither are we” (fill in another country)
“Not us” (fill in another country)
“We don’t care who pays, just give us your money” (fill in everyone else)

Joel O’Bryan
May 10, 2018 11:16 am

Ex-NY AG Schneiderman has a nice ring to it.
Without the US the whole thing almost certainly will fall apart. Europe can not meet its announced targets without drastic cost, unless they move the goalposts, again, unless they cut their own industrial output throats. Which China is happy to accommodate.
Brazil, India, and China only want climate cash without any restrictions on their own emissions.
If oil stays above $65/bbl through the summer, especially above $70, US shale-frackers are going to be so ramped-up by September, that the Fall of 2018 (going into the elections) will be a boom-time for employment, industrial demand for goods and oil field services, and pipeline and drilling stock using US steel output (with the tariff war with China). Steel pipe and drilling stock will be coming from North American foundries, not China.

May 10, 2018 11:17 am

It seems that POTUS Trump is not JUST putting America FIRST ( as he said he would )
and saving it from the INSANITY OF THE NEO-MARXIST LEFT by “pulling-out”
of the “Obama obsession ” ( the Paris Greenfest Climate Scam ) , he seems to
be saving the entire Western Civilisation from the corrupt “scam science of the IPCC”
by appointing Scott Pruitt to ‘clean up’ the EPA science too !
“Now wouldn’t it be nice” ( apologies to the Beach Boys ) :
If he pulled the US out of the UN and spent the money on something more
worthwhile than the 135 or so “Cargo Cult Mentality Countries” who make
no contributions apart from turning up to get yet ANOTHER HANDOUT !
“Wouldn’t it be nice if we were older
Then we wouldn’t have to wait so long
And wouldn’t it be nice to live together
In the kind of world where we belong”
Ah ! We can but dream that the LEADERS of other
Western Countries will get on the same bandwagon !
Go to the profile of David Siegel
David Siegel
Entrepreneur, investor, blockchain expert, start-up coach, CEO of the Pillar project and 20|
Oct 15, 2015
What I Learned about Climate Change: The Science is not Settled
– David Siegel
Well worth the TIME YOU SPEND !!
ps. Don’t become a VEGAN…………generally speaking …………….I eat vegans !!

May 10, 2018 12:20 pm

From the article: “Some countries, led by China are now seeking to renegotiate key aspects of the Paris agreement.”
I wonder what China hopes to get out of renegotiating the agreement? They don’t have to comply with any CO2 reduction plans as it stands now under the current agreement, so it must be a play for more money from the Western World.

May 10, 2018 2:07 pm

The USA is now a poor country with a huge federal deficit and huge annual trade deficits. The USA is not in a position to fund anything. Let countries with huge trade surpluses like China do that.
I want to do my part. I want a solar power system that will allow me to live entirely off the grid to include powering up an all electric car. I cannot afford any of this myself so I want China to supply this to me totally free of charge so that I can do my part to reduce CO2 emissions.
Those that believe that the use of fossil fuels is bad should stop making use of all goods and services that involve the use of fossil fuels. For me that would include the clothes that I wear, the food that I eat, the shelter that I live in, and even the man made surfaces that I walk on. The least they can do is to hold their meetings on the Internet and cut out travel. The technology is already in place.
But the reality is that the climate change we have been experiencing is caused by the sun and the oceans over which mankind has no control. There is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate and plenty of scientific rational to support the idea that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. To date all of their efforts have had no effect on our climate. But even if they could stop our climate from changing, extreme weather events and sea level rise would continue unabated because they are part ot the current climate. There are many good reasons to be conserving on the use of fossil fuels but climate change is not one oi them.
The best way to cut back on energy use is to cut back on population. The most populous nations in the world should take the lead in reducing their human population. The most humane way to reduce human population is to reduce the birth rate.

Reply to  willhaas
May 10, 2018 2:38 pm

Forgotten sarc/ ?

Tom in Florida
Reply to  willhaas
May 10, 2018 6:06 pm

I would counter the most humane way to reduce population is to stop medical treatment and drugs that prolong life. Let nature take its natural course.

Reply to  willhaas
May 11, 2018 8:29 am

“The best way to cut back on energy use is to cut back on population. The most populous nations in the world should take the lead in reducing their human population. The most humane way to reduce human population is to reduce the birth rate.”
Not only are they ANTI-MALE but they are also PRO-ABORTION and it’s been very successful.
Most Western Countries are either AT or BELOW population replacement level
( which is why so many of them are ENCOURAGING MIGRATION or taking-in “refugees”
……….somebody had better BE THERE to pay the TAX and provide the SERVICES !! )

Reply to  Trevor
May 12, 2018 5:25 pm

Trouble is Islamic nations (fights/immigration) will never support this – unless we let them starve first!
Note also that the “rich” nations among them such as Saudi, Dubai etc. offer little or no charity to support the poorer so that immigration (world domination) is necessary and possible!

May 10, 2018 2:51 pm

I used today’s stalemate regarding differentiation of developed and developing country commitments to continue my year-long effort to call out MIT climate scientists. They seem to think such a differentiation “has nothing to do with the Paris Agreement”…which is handy for them because President Trump does think it has something to with the Paris Agreement…as do the 183-country-strong negotiating cohort of delegates at Bonn.

May 10, 2018 2:55 pm

So the result is a plan for another week of five star hotels and restaurants at sucker taxpayers cost , and you think it failed ?
Meanwhile without the USA the cash shake down scam is likely to go no where. For there is simply no other rich sucker wiling to bend over and take it. So the next meeting is likely to result in little more than meaningless talk, an even more worthless document , and a nice tan.

Javert Chip
May 10, 2018 4:59 pm

Who the hell wears suits & ties in Bangkok?

Reply to  Javert Chip
May 11, 2018 6:07 am

People with a big enough carbon footprint to never leave air-conditioned buildings/vehicles.

Verified by MonsterInsights