Via Reuters:
Merkel says EU should meet existing emissions aims, not set new ones
A proliferation of extreme weather events around the world provides ample evidence that climate change is a reality, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Sunday, but she rejected calls for more ambitious climate protection goals.
But Merkel said such calls, most recently from the European Commission’s climate chief Miguel Arias Canete, for swifter cuts to harmful carbon dioxide emissions would be counterproductive, adding that setting new goals made little sense when European countries were already struggling to meet their cuts targets.
“I’m not particularly happy about these new proposals,” she said of Canete’s call to increase from 40 to 45 percent the scale of cuts to target by 2030.
“I think we should first stick to the goals we have already set ourselves. I don’t think permanently setting ourselves new goals makes any sense.”
…
Merkel’s government has already faced criticism for abandoning emissions targets it had set itself for 2020 after concluding they were unachievable, while sticking to a target it had set itself for a decade later.
h/t to Charles the Mod
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
At what point will Germany’s sky-high power costs begin to exert a drag on economic performance?
In 2016, there were a bit more than 300.000 German households (out of ~ 40.000.000) that suffered from a shut-off of electric energy because they couldn’t pay the bill any longer. More than 1.500.000 reminders were sent out. Prices are still soaring.
If the Germans should ever try to start a revolution at a Railway station, you can be sure they will buy a platform ticket first. Many Watermelons there will fight until the “Endsieg der Energiewende”, fools they are and no matter what the cost, even if they get dragged under.
Am I wrong or is it not a FACT that all signers except China could cease all emissions of CO2 and the allowances given to China would still cause an increase over the next 15 year , or at least till they have an obligation to consider reducing CO2 emissions? That fact in itself tells me it is all for politics and “Globalization” efforts.
Extreme weather events are part of the current climate and have nothing to do with climate change. Even if we could stop climate change, extreme weather events would continue to happen unabated.
Based on the paleoclimate record and the work done with models, one can conclude 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 there is plenty of scientific rationale to support the idea that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. There are many good reasons to be conserving on the use of fossil fuels but climate change is not one of them.
Economic reality has a way of smacking you in the face.
I thought we have been told hundreds of times it takes thirty years for it to be climate not weather so how can it be proof? We had a far hotter and drier year here in 76.
What harmful carbon dioxide emissions?
Goethe, Faust: the devil she called for –
Merkel’s government has already faced criticism for abandoning emissions targets it had set itself for 2020 after concluding they were unachievable, while sticking to a target it had set itself for a decade later.
Merkel — straight out of the Frankfurt School and adherent to Critical Theory. What a piece of work.
We have now the AfD in the parliament as the largest opposition Party. And now you can hear it in every debate when they tell that the Energiewende is futile. Its now all on Youtube.
Canete is almost ‘Canute’, now there’s some nominative determinism for ya
I wish they would list all the weather they are talking about and dates so we can see if more than usual. I think Al Gore had the arctic ice free now ten years ago. Some had NYC under water by now. I know Al Gore has made a fortune on his global warming spiel, not sure about the waterlogged NYC guy.