Climate Policy Prescription: We need to Convince the Yellow Vests to Trust the Government

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

According to Wired contributor Daphne LePrince-Ringuet, the kind of anti climate policy protests which rocked France can be prevented with a few government handouts, and by convincing ordinary people of the good intentions of government.

To win the climate change battle, we need to talk about gilets jaunes

Saturday 22 December 2018

Shifting to a low-carbon economy won’t be painless, and politicians need to win the public over

On the first day of this year’s COP24, nearly 50 heads of state – including British prime minister Theresa May – signed a declaration proposed by the Polish government and ambitiously named the “Solidarity and Just Transition Silesia Declaration”. The paper didn’t make waves in the media, yet it addresses a key issue in the fight against climate change: ensuring that the transition towards a low-carbon economy comes with jobs and an decent quality of life.

Ironically, the story that hogged the limelight in the press was the gilets jaunes protests in France – whose root cause is linked to the very same issue. The carbon tax on diesel fuel announced by the French government as part of low-carbon strategy didn’t go down well with the middle class rural population, who can’t jump on a metro to go to work – but who also can’t afford to see their salary whittled down by an extra tax.

Building on those pillars, David Wei, director for climate at sustainable consultancy group Business for Social Responsibility (BSR), has written a guide for businesses to implement low-carbon models while reducing disruption for their workers. Wei’s handbook includes advice and case studies that are more hands-on than the ILO’s guidelines, such as increasing transparency or implementing re-skilling programmes. And it also highlights the importance of working hand-in-hand with governments. Political decision-making, it insists, is crucial to orchestrate a fair transition.

As an example of good behaviour, Wei points to Canada, where this year unions set up a Just Transition Task Force after the government announced plans to phase out the use of coal-fired electricity by 2030. The organisation bridges between policy-makers and the workforce, meeting with the communities affected by the plans, and then reporting to the federal government on how to create opportunities for them. A further $35 billion (£27.55bn) budget was allocated to support training and re-skilling, with the end-goal of making for a smoother shift of the workforce away from coal.

For Wei, this “inclusive economy agenda” should be the focus of governments and businesses alike for the years to come. “We have to look at the threats and risks that decarbonisation poses to the people,” he says. “You can’t ignore the social impact of a transition. If you don’t tackle the human dimension of climate change policy, you will never generate the political will necessary to meet the two-degree target [agreed upon in the 2015 Paris Agreement].”

Businesses and policy-makers will also need to communicate effectively if they want to win over those that will be impacted first-hand by the new rules of the game – especially if those rules imply sacrifices such as paying higher taxes.

Read more:

See – if you want to defuse protests by mainly rural workers smashed by unavoidable fossil fuel tax rises, all you have to do is convince businesses to work more closely with governments, better communicate your good intentions, and give money to the unions, who will ensure the cash is fairly distributed to their members.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
December 23, 2018 6:05 am

Isn’t that just like trying to convince the fox to trust the scorpion?

Reply to  PaulH
December 23, 2018 6:24 am

Yep. The trick is to get the people to ignore the blatantly obvious. Gaslighting comes immediately to mind.

Bryan A
Reply to  commieBob
December 23, 2018 9:20 am

Sounds a lot like Ayn Rand’s story Atlas Shrugged
Gas prices are $40.00 per gallon $10.32 per liter
Only the wealthy can drive or fly.
People are protesting in the streets
Production of anything is limited due to government interference

Andy Pattullo
Reply to  Bryan A
December 23, 2018 11:01 am

Exactly. [Ayn] Rand came from the soviet block where she experienced the misery that centrally planned socialist economies create – everyone is equal (except for those in charge) and they all get to share the same measly crumbs. She came to the west and saw the beginnings of the slide towards this antihumanistic socialist decay in America. She wrote those books to warn us. We should heed that warning. George Orwell also warned us in “1984”. Now the IPCC, UN, EU and progressive socialists want it all to come true in their lifetime. Oddly, the most vocal advocates are wealthy elites who, I presume see themselves in charge after all their rest of us loose our right to a happy and productive existence.

Reply to  Andy Pattullo
December 23, 2018 11:54 am

Andy Pattullo

Worse than that. Governments working with big business to manage the country is fascism.

Mark Smith
Reply to  Bryan A
December 23, 2018 2:43 pm

Atlas Shrugged detailed a free public market. The government sets the market rules that apply to everyone without prejeudice.

Reply to  Mark Smith
December 23, 2018 4:37 pm

government sets the market rules
In creating a fair market the government strangles the free market.

Reply to  Mark Smith
December 23, 2018 5:28 pm

MarkS, I can only conclude that you are still in school and not spent any time in the real world.
Government makes rules to benefit those who benefit government.

The idea that the government acts without prejudice is one of the most ridiculous claims that I have heard in a long time.

Reply to  Bryan A
December 23, 2018 4:02 pm

Exactly. But sounds like you watched the movie (which was bad).

If you really want to wake up with chills, read the book.

We are living through the prequel…

Reply to  Bryan A
December 24, 2018 3:49 am

“Gas prices are $40.00 per gallon $10.32 per liter
Only the wealthy can drive or fly.”

Hmmm, I gotta imagine that a whole lot of people aren’t driving as much…resulting in roads with little or no congestion. Wonder who would benefit from this scenario?

Jon Salmi
Reply to  commieBob
December 23, 2018 10:30 am

Gaslighting does come immediately to mind, as does paving the road to Hell.

Reply to  commieBob
December 23, 2018 2:42 pm

Bob – thank you for the note on gaslighting

Here is my suggestion for Daphne Leprince-Ringuet:

“Kindly eliminate all fossil fuels from every aspect of your life, starting now. Call me in a month and let me know how that is working for you.”

Regards, Allan

December 24, 2018 6:26 pm


bit chilly
Reply to  commieBob
December 23, 2018 10:54 pm

i think miss le prince-ringuet would be better remaining in edinburgh during the current revolution in france. her name alone marks her out as part of the social class the working class french have had enough of.

Dr K.A. Rodgers
Reply to  PaulH
December 23, 2018 7:08 am

Perhaps persuading the lamb to lie down with the lion when it knows only the lion will get up.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  PaulH
December 23, 2018 10:47 am

If the French would trust in properly administered nuclear power instead of badly administered government they could solve this thing in a decade.

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  Pop Piasa
December 23, 2018 1:12 pm

The French shut down their nuclear power because the Japanese nuclear power go smashed by a wave. Clearly they don’t trust their own, because someone else’s failed. Doh!

Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
December 23, 2018 5:29 pm

I don’t know of a single French reactor that was at risk from tsunamis.

Rich Davis
Reply to  MarkW
December 23, 2018 6:03 pm

But what about the millions of deaths from Fukushima?

Oh, wait. Nobody died. Never mind.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
December 24, 2018 2:51 pm

Thanks for the reminder, Greg. That means they could be back to cheap power in a few years tops. All that is required is that the public be given all the facts on the waste and the observed, immediate environmental impacts of safely operated nuclear installations vs. what is considered to be safely operated wind and solar generation. These data would be most effective when represented on a per-kilowatt-hour scale.

Ted Getzel
Reply to  Greg Cavanagh
December 25, 2018 8:32 pm

France has not shut down its reactors. They currently operate 58 reactors (2nd to the US) which produces 71.6% of French electricity. Germany closed down its nukes after Fukushima.When Germany runs low on power, when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t ‘shine they often buy French nuclear power. 🙂

rhoda klapp
December 23, 2018 6:13 am

I’m sure a bit more central control will sort this all out, any day now.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  rhoda klapp
December 23, 2018 10:52 am

Despotism is the ultimate enforcement tool of socialism, from my perspective.

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  rhoda klapp
December 24, 2018 11:55 am

And if it doesn’t, why, just go for a little more central control, until it finally works.

Reply to  rhoda klapp
December 24, 2018 12:01 pm

Who centrally controls the central control?

Duncan Smith
December 23, 2018 6:30 am

A further $35 billion (£27.55bn) budget was allocated to support training and re-skilling

This is where the Green-Math does not add up again. Assuming a very generous income of $100,000 this 35 Billion could support 350,000 people for one year at this level of income. There might be just a few thousand employed at coal plants. Where is the money going?

The Greens (Justin Trudeau) are insane. The “good behaviour” this article claims will help with the transition is exactly why we have Yellow-Vests in the first place. *facepalm*

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  Duncan Smith
December 23, 2018 8:27 am

But it is a lie; there is no $35 billion.

Bryan A
Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
December 23, 2018 9:22 am

Wag the Dog…

Duncan Smith
Reply to  Robert of Ottawa
December 24, 2018 7:16 am

Robert, you should write both Daphne and David Wei for lying, collusion and interference while requesting a full retraction from both.

Javert Chip
Reply to  Duncan Smith
December 23, 2018 6:31 pm


No socialist program could possibly operate without appropriate oversight. This means:

o A ministry of Green-Stuff – there will be a slight haircut fr this vital service
o Inter-governmental coordination committee – there will be a slight haircut for this service
o Mandatory diversity & gender training – (training someone to do “gender” is somewhat of a mystery) – there will be a slight haircut for this service
o Green goalpost movement & compliance – there will be a slight haircut for this service
o Audits – – there will be a slight haircut for this service
o Future plans & programs – – there will be a slight haircut for this service
0 Travel & expenses to an infinite number of conference – there will be a slight haircut for this services

Fun disclosure: There is absolutely no sarcasm here.

John Endicott
Reply to  Javert Chip
December 24, 2018 7:19 am

After all those “slight haircuts”, there will be no hair left to cut.

December 23, 2018 6:32 am

There is an English language newspaper/magazine called Connexion sold in France, from a lot of the kiosks and delivered in the mail to ex-pat households. Inceasingly its editorial comments are like reading the Guardian. It runs with stuff like this.
As most ordinary French people outside Paris don’t give a fig about anything coming from Paris nevermind anywhere else, the constant CAGW drumbeat means little compared to maintaining the things a French person holds dear. When there are real threats to ‘the social contract’ any government of any hue has problems.
Macron forgot that the first ( and last) rule of politics , which is to do what is possible. He has lost, unfortunately he now will hang around for a long time as a lame duck. Still he has gone off before Christmas to enjoy himself in Chad. If anyone has been following the scuttlebuck about his personal predelictions, they will understand.

Reply to  JimW
December 23, 2018 6:47 am

I’ll bet Trump didn’t bother telling Macron he is pulling the troops from Syria – France refuses to leave. That colonial mindset is still festering. Macron is meeting his troops in Chad.
France could back the Transaqua Project to refill Chad from the Congo :

Then France would be welcome there – such a large scale project needs advanced engineering. China is already involved.

Reply to  bonbon
December 23, 2018 2:34 pm

Good read, thank you for the link.

Stephen Richards
Reply to  JimW
December 23, 2018 7:25 am

Be careful with that journal. They have never been a useful read. I learned to read french and bought french newspapers. Although not much better, the info provided from government to these newspapers appears to be better than the translation / interpretation done by the English ones.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  JimW
December 23, 2018 10:36 am

I assume Chad is the name of his lover.

neil watson
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
December 23, 2018 2:27 pm

You are naughty….but I like it!

Javert Chip
Reply to  JimW
December 23, 2018 8:58 pm

Guess I need to read up on Macron’s “personal predilections” (or maybe not; enough of that stuff is enough), but it’s interesting to note that at least Nero stayed in Rome (actually, Antium, 35 miles away, but close enough) while it burned.

Macron’s flying outside he country, creating CO2 & on French-taxpayer expense account.

December 23, 2018 6:34 am

30 years of deindustrialization since the fall of the Wall is the cause of the mass strike. Climate etc is only a recent insult from the same liberal globalist cabal. A “Lehman II” is just about to hit that very clique – their desperation that with Trump exercising now his constitutional prerogatives, and the Gilets Jaunes not at all appeased, another Bush/ Obama bailout heist will hit a wall.
Time for a new paradigm with Russia, China, and USA tackling deindustrialization, financialization. GM is a text book case of the now flailing bankrupt looting system. The Paris Accord in all of this is just collateral damage.

December 23, 2018 6:34 am

Interesting — what makes the gilet jaunes so powerful is their lack of a central structure – which makes it difficult for the government to simply suborn that structure instead of trying to meet the overall group’s demands. Ms. LePrince-Ringuet seems to think that bribing the labor unions would act as a controlling force, but that seems unlikely, at least in France. I suspect if the unions started suddenly backing the government, they would find themselves similarly disenfranchised.

Paul Deacon, NZ
Reply to  Hartley
December 23, 2018 10:23 am

My understanding is that the gilets jaunts are staunchly anti-union, regarding the unions as part of the problem.

John K. Sutherland
December 23, 2018 6:39 am

If you want to see how well it goes down in Canada, watch the result of the next election. The drama queen is toast.

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  John K. Sutherland
December 23, 2018 8:30 am

Yes, running on a new tax is not a vote winner.

Chris Hoff
Reply to  John K. Sutherland
December 23, 2018 8:39 am

Last time I voted federally, all the people manning the polling station were elementary school children, and a lot of them had day glow hairdo’s. Probably no scrutineers in place either. I wouldn’t at all be surprised if we have the same level of dead voters and ballot stuffing as the states. As for CO2 reduction, as the Yellow Vests in France have pointed out, freighters off the coast spew out way more that all the ground transport combined in French cities.

Melvyn Dackombe
Reply to  Chris Hoff
December 23, 2018 10:56 am

I’m interested in knowing if the shipping argument is valid.

Reply to  Melvyn Dackombe
December 24, 2018 2:09 pm

A modern aircraft carrier gets roughly 6 inches per gallon of diesel, so yes, shipping burns a lot of hydrocarbons.

Reply to  drednicolson
December 24, 2018 10:14 pm

Many tons of petroleum fuels are burned in the jets flying from the modern aircraft carrier, in the fossil-fueled ships refueling them and supplying them, in the escort around them, in the plants and bases supporting them. Yes, the carrier power plants are now all nuclear, but the “Navy” is not nuclear.

Reply to  drednicolson
December 24, 2018 10:20 pm


A modern aircraft carrier gets roughly 6 inches per gallon of diesel, so yes, shipping burns a lot of hydrocarbons.

Aircraft carrier, or any modern ship? Of the tens of thousands of large vessels, only a handful are nuclear powered aircraft carriers. Of the hundreds of thousands of vessels and tugs and inland craft, none are nukes.

Tom Halla
December 23, 2018 6:40 am

So if the public figures out the effects of a program, lie even more? As the intent was to harm economically rural residents enough to change their behavior regarding driving, suggesting they move to the cities and go on welfare is a solution?

Garland Lowe
December 23, 2018 6:48 am

History shows Governments are not Trustworthy.
Governments actions should be questioned and held accountable to the people.

Hitler, Mao and Stalin are just few examples.

Russ Wood
Reply to  Garland Lowe
December 24, 2018 4:30 am

Basically, one has to understand that, whoever wins the elections, the Government always gets in.

John Endicott
Reply to  Russ Wood
December 24, 2018 7:28 am

The government is already in before the election. Here in the US we call it the Deep State, but it exists in most all governments – the unelected bureaucrats who run the governments day-to-day operation and don’t leave when there is a change of elected administration.

Darcy C
December 23, 2018 6:51 am

Canada has a low coal power production of approximately 5% but they still need to have a 35 billion budget for retraining. With already an annual federal deficit of 20 billion, where is this money going to come but from more taxes on the middle class. This will not make any difference on Canada’s carbon dioxide foot print but will make everyone poorer.

December 23, 2018 6:54 am

The reference to Canada conveniently ignores what is in essence the concept of a social contract. Translation: the government doesn’t do anything without the prior consent of every constituency that is impacted in any way, and spends whatever is necessary to buy their consent. Result: national paralysis. We can’t get a pipeline built to the east coast or the west coast and our oil remains in the ground or is sold at a huge discount to the Americans. This contract with the coal miners will end up costing taxpayers a fortune. 35 billion to support training and reskilling sounds like several orders of magnitude too high even for our free-spending prime minister. At that rate, every coal miner could be trained to become a doctor, lawyer or (perish the thought) climate scientist.

Reply to  Trebla
December 23, 2018 8:41 am

Trudeau needs money. He effectively opened our borders by signing the UN right to migrate document. It will cost billions when thousands of unskilled “migrants” flood into Canada (welfare, medical, housing, education). He also gave $2.6B to the UN climate fund, and needs that every year. That’s where this money will go. I hope Canadians can see through the “revenue neutral” carbon tax scam. Everything the globalists do centres on income redistribution. Even my intelligent friends haven’t yet figured out that there are two ways to redistribute their money: climate reparations to foreign countries, and allowing mass immigration with financial backing for immigrants. Combine this with traditional foreign aide and their is one big number of $$$$.

December 23, 2018 6:59 am

There is nothing more dangerous than a young ambitious politician using his current position as a springboard to a higher office. Martin O’Malley, former Democratic governor of MD instituted 24 new taxes including a rain tax and $3billion surcharge on electricity to support offshore wind to build green credibility. For all that pain, he wouldn’t have carried his home state in the Democratic primary against HRC if he hadn’t dropped out and managed to get a Republican elected to succeed him. Unfortunately while some of the green taxes got reduced, many remain.

December 23, 2018 7:00 am

They publish almost as much BS about how to make their message more effective as they do BS doomsday stuff about what terrible things “climate change” is going to cause in the future. The bottom line is that even the well indoctrinated will pay lip service to the meme, but when it comes to real sacrifice they won’t want anything to do with it until some real physical and persistent consequences that have been predicted come to pass. IOW, the liars cannot sustain their campaign on words alone in the long run. I really believe that despite the indoctrination our youth get in schools, the meme is doomed in the long run.

Reply to  rah
December 23, 2018 7:43 am

I remember Obama once commenting that the reason why more people didn’t support him was because he hadn’t given enough speeches.

Reply to  MarkW
December 23, 2018 8:11 am

Hey MarkW
This is completely OT but you may have a link to some knowledge I seek. My impression has been the Ring of Fire has been becoming generally more active over the last decade or so after a period of relative calm. It there a source that provides data on activity over the total range of the ring arranged chronologically and rating each event by magnitude?

Reply to  rah
December 23, 2018 12:20 pm

Try this website …..

Ring of Fire

Reply to  Samuel C Cogar
December 24, 2018 12:54 am

Thank you for the link. Though informative, it did not provide what I was looking for. My impression of increased activity is one based on a time span of the last decade or two, not just the last few years. And one of not just for eruptions but also seismic activity in general. I noticed that as for seismic activity around the time of the slide below Krakatau which resulted in a Tsunami, the only activity noted in the vicinity was a 5.0 at about 5 K deep.

Dave Fair
Reply to  rah
December 23, 2018 12:22 pm

Personal circumstances trump ideology. Unless forced. That’s the next step.

December 23, 2018 7:01 am


Sorry for the off topic post, but I cannot see anywhere to post about site issues.

Several times recently if have been redirected to a site that McAfee says is dangerous.

The last one was

This generally happens when I change page in this site.

[Please copy this also to the “Tips and Notes” Forum on this site. .mod]

Reply to  BillP
December 23, 2018 7:22 am

Yeah that Amazon add is frustrating on my iPhone 🙁

[Amazon ads are apt to be the most frustrating apps on Applephones. .mod]

Stephen Richards
Reply to  BillP
December 23, 2018 7:27 am

I keep getting a virus advert that totally disrupts my PC forcing me to shutdown and reload

Reply to  Stephen Richards
December 23, 2018 7:58 am

Anthony explained a while back that these are attacks. Don’t click on the link. I just shut the window and come back in a different window. BTW it has not only happened to be here. It happened just this morning on a story I clicked on the link for at the Drudge report. It has also happened at like the Conservative Tree House and the Ace of Spade HQ blog.

Ian W
Reply to  Stephen Richards
December 23, 2018 8:12 am

Add an application like Malwarebytes that will kill the ad before it even appears rather than letting it execute then saying it is bad. You would then get a ‘Site Blocked’ indication in the popup or ad window.

Reply to  Stephen Richards
December 23, 2018 12:07 pm

Stephen Richards

You might try using Opera Browser which has an inbuilt pop up blocker. It also has a free Proxy feature although it’s not a proper Proxy, but it helps if you don’t want to pay for one. Add Ghostery I can’t remember the last time I had a redirect or malicious attack.

Pop Piasa
Reply to  Stephen Richards
December 24, 2018 3:08 pm

Stephen, I use chrome (with Duckduckgo as my search engine) and Adblock plus. Even with this app I once-in-a-while see the browser crash when visiting this site. There is IMHO someone attacking this blog.

December 23, 2018 7:03 am

Astonishingly, another child who forsook schooling in favor of climate alarmist indoctrination, continues in her vocation; spreading nonsense and silliness.

“To win the climate change battle, we need to talk about gilets jaunes

By DAPHNE LEPRINCE-RINGUET Saturday 22 December 2018
Shifting to a low-carbon economy won’t be painless, and politicians need to win the public over

On the first day of this year’s COP24, nearly 50 heads of state – including British prime minister Theresa May – signed a declaration proposed by the Polish government and ambitiously named the “Solidarity and Just Transition Silesia Declaration”. The paper didn’t make waves in the media, yet it addresses a key issue in the fight against climate change: ensuring that the transition towards a low-carbon economy comes with jobs and an decent quality of life.”

Daphne starts her religious tirade sermon, by blaming the protestors. It is the gilets jaunes fault for not trusting their superiors, Daphne states in her falsehood centered condescension writing.

Then after firmly establishing the gilets jaunes as immature and impatient children, she hands over the discussion to another alarmist earning gobs of money from climate alarmism.

Empty articles circulating the same tired nonsense and specious phrases.

Reply to  ATheoK
December 23, 2018 8:45 am

She’s just doing what she’s been trained to do.

The educational system is working hard to produce just this sort of result. If it wasn’t so dastardly, you’d have to applaud the techniques effectiveness.

John B
December 23, 2018 7:09 am

‘Shifting to a low-carbon economy won’t be painless…’

The the annual understatement award goes to…

Mankind lived in a low-carbon economy for over two hundred thousand years until the late 18th Century.

It is called misery, continual hunger, disease, high infant mortality, short life expectancy and abject poverty.

Reply to  John B
December 23, 2018 9:17 am

“Shifting to a low-carbon economy won’t be painless”

So is poking yourself in the eye with a stick, but why would anyone want to do that either?

December 23, 2018 7:12 am

Macron is applying the same behavioral economics that drove Obamacare.
ENABLE – European Network for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics in 2004, in cooperation with Harvard, Princeton, and the European behavioral economics institutes including the Center for Research in Experimental Economics and Political Decision Making (CREED), all interfacing with London’s Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR).
Looks like the writer should know of these .

A very nasty animal psychology narrative applied to citizens dressed in an appeal to “feelings” cannot work and causes chaos.

December 23, 2018 7:13 am

The green agenda is a global confidence trick. Now that it is being rumbled it has a difficult problem on its hands. political bribing only exacerbates the problem. It will evolve; but it will take the consequences to really bite hard first and that will take time and cause a lot of aggro.

Alan Tomalty
December 23, 2018 7:19 am

Al Gore’s Church of Climatology does not admit any responsibility for its actions nor does it allow any dissent from its main theme, that we will all drown in the rising seas if we don’t repent our carbon sins. Us great unwashed masses have no comprehension of just how humble we should be in the face of the God of climate change.
The church is truly from another planet.

December 23, 2018 7:37 am

The most dangerous phrase in any language:

Trust me, I’m from the government.

December 23, 2018 7:38 am

give money to the unions, who will ensure the cash is fairly distributed to their members

I guess there is a first time for everything.

December 23, 2018 7:47 am

OMG how can they be so out of touch?

Reply to  Agamemnon
December 23, 2018 2:40 pm

They work for the government.
Being out of touch is a job requirement.

Reply to  Agamemnon
December 23, 2018 5:08 pm

They (bureaucracy, journos, politicians) are not “out of touch”. They geniunely just don’t care.

lee Riffee
December 23, 2018 7:49 am

This argument sounds very much like what was said here in the US when Obama and the Dems were trying to push Obamacare on everyone. It was often said that the reason people don’t like Obamacare is because they “don’t understand it”. In other words, the message wasn’t getting thru correctly. No, people understood it perfectly well, they knew what it was and they simply didn’t want it!
Sounds like they are trying to find a way to do more to treat the populace like mushrooms on a mushroom farm…you know, keep them in the dark and feed them manure!

HD Hoese
Reply to  lee Riffee
December 23, 2018 8:46 am

Communication (Science of Science Communication) is the new growth industry, notice the only mention of science (other than water) for an organization that says it is the National Honor Society for Science and Engineering. Wonder what their mission is?

Sigma Xi Annual Meeting and Student Research Conference, Our Changing Global Environment,
Scientists and Engineers Designing Solutions for the Future, November 14–17, 2019, Monona Terrace Convention Center, Madison, Wisconsin, USA

Scientific and Engineering Content Tracks

Water Track, featuring sessions on emerging research and/or solutions in water science and technology, including global water resources, quality, management, and analysis
Energy Track, featuring sessions that examine emerging energy research and innovations, including conservation, sustainability, renewable energy, alternative energy technologies and assessment
Life and Health Track, including sessions that address how life will be affected by environmental changes and how we can respond

Sigma Xi Mission-related Tracks

Science Communications Track, including sessions on the science of science communication, engaging, and educating the public on environmental issues
Research Ethics Track, featuring sessions on ethical challenges facing the research community and ethics of communicating about environmental changes
Professional Development Track, including sessions on career advancement and general challenges facing the research community such as research funding, cultivating effective interdisciplinary collaborations, leadership training, publishing, and diversity

December 23, 2018 8:02 am

It will be difficult because cheap energy is important for job and the economy They can try and trick the people by phasing in these taxes very slowly to spread the economic fallout over many years. If a competing country has low energy costs, and low wages jobs, industry will move to that country.

Reply to  Stevek
December 24, 2018 8:56 am


This is exactly why China hypocritically pushes the CAGW meme. They know that it will increase the cost of energy for everybody else and since the worlds economy has become one where the value added to raw materials is dominated by energy, rather than labor, whoever has the cheapest energy will dominate world markets.

One thing that many fail to see is that even though China has a high ‘official’ price of electricity, they heavily subsidize it for energy intensive industries like aluminum, steel and silicon, much of which comes from coal with little to no scrubbing of any real pollution.

If the green blob only understood the severe environmental damage being done in China in the name of green virtue signaling, their collective heads would explode. But then again, isn’t this just NIMBY?

December 23, 2018 8:17 am

Daphne, I have a brdge to sell, winks.

December 23, 2018 8:18 am

Shifting to a low-carbon economy won’t be painless

One of their many almost sincere sounding one-liners, but who is Daphne?

I read that she is a recent City, University of London qualified journalist specialising in the arts and culture and currently writing for Wired UK’s editorial board.

Paint me a picture, Daphne…

Reply to  fretslider
December 23, 2018 8:27 am

This is half the problem, they do not address the basic economics of the situation.

December 23, 2018 8:45 am

Maybe they could just pay everyone to stay home and not drive to work. If there is no transportation available, then people should just get paid to “save the planet”. Of course, since growing food and raising livestock will be affected in a negative way (no way to transport food and fossil fuels are needed to grow it—unless we use oxen and steam locomotives), people in the cities will have to figure out how to grow food on their windowsills and become vegan, but that’s to “save the planet”. Plus, no need for supermarkets since everyone is growing their own food, so less fossil fuel use. Pay the displaced workers to sit home, of course. I can see 3/4 of the population being paid to sit at home in order to save the planet. Working with the government could turn out really well for 3/4 of the population. There could be some down sides, but let’s not dwell on the negative……;)

December 23, 2018 8:58 am

And where precisely does the government get this money with which to placate the financially strapped working/middle class/small business people who are hurting from imposed transition taxes? Simple – either tax them more and generously give some back, or crank the printing presses a bit faster, and let the indirect inflation (tax) drain the needed value out of the protesters pockets. Either way, they would be too dumb and grateful to notice. Do it skillfully enough and they would even vote you back into office.

December 23, 2018 9:02 am

Eric, your opening sentence, “According to Wired contributor Daphne LePrince-Ringuet, the kind of anti climate policy protests which rocked France can be prevented with a few government handouts, and by convincing ordinary people of the good intentions of government…” is priceless. It made me laugh. I’m still smiling and chuckling as I write this.

HAPPY HOLIDAYS to you and yours,

December 23, 2018 9:03 am

How can anyone trust a government that acts in complete opposition to the public good, especially when those actions are based on bogus IPCC science that couldn’t be more wrong if they tried, presuming they aren’t already trying as hard as possible to reinforce and perpetuate the many errors.

December 23, 2018 9:14 am

ensuring that the transition towards a low-carbon economy comes with jobs and an decent quality of life.

This sentence added since the pressure of Yellow Vest demonstration clearly shows that the “transition” was initially designed to destroy decent quality of life despite all the green job promises. Confiscation of fossil fuels for military only use is the ultimate goal and anything else is a lie.

Reply to  TomRude
December 23, 2018 9:22 am

Odd that war has gone nuclear, as Putin reminds NATO all the time.

Reply to  TomRude
December 23, 2018 10:10 am

The other issue is, what is the definition of “decent”? This is, again, a socialist mindset where a bar is set and it is labeled as “decent”. A bar inherently caps off financial and social mobility.

To my liberal and socialist friends reading this, this is the core issue: the green movement seeks reduce of the role of the individuals to increase the role of a supposedly just and fair government. This cannot work… ever. Replacing individual autonomy is a disastrous philosophy.

John Endicott
Reply to  leowaj
December 24, 2018 7:16 am

this is the core issue: the green movement seeks reduce of the role of the individuals to increase the role of a supposedly just and fair government. This cannot work… ever. Replacing individual autonomy is a disastrous philosophy.

Indeed, not only that but it’s a fatally flawed idea as history shows there is no such thing as a just and fair government for any significant length of time. Governments are run by people and people have biases. People get corrupted by power or money or both. And consequentially, Governments can and do act in ways that are unjust or unfair. Even if you have believe that the current regime in whatever country you live in is just and fair, you can’t honestly guarantee that the next regime will be so. Or the one after that and so on.

Dave Fair
Reply to  John Endicott
December 24, 2018 9:53 am

John, that’s why SMART Americans hold to their 2nd Amendment.

Tom Abbott
December 23, 2018 9:26 am

I don’t think any amount of propaganda is going to keep average folks from knowing when their pocket is being picked by the government.

When people feel like their pocket is being picked, they get upset and go out and express their unhappiness. No amount of talk is going to stop that.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 23, 2018 11:57 am

We have a Labour (socialist ) government here in New Zealand supported by the Green party and the New Zealand First party who are set to apply every tax to our people that they can.
Some wiser heads have said lets not be to hasty so they have appointed a tax working commission to look at all the ways that they can tax every one in the productive sector and will bring these proposals forward to our next parliamentary election in 2020 where they will attempt to sell them with bribes to the population.
Our prime minister has already pulled back on an extra transport fuel tax across the country as fuel prices soared with the oil price surge .
Auckland our largest city had been allowed to impose a further 11 cents per liter on fuel to fund transport in the Auckland region .
The largest project is a light rail to the airport costed at ten billion dollars and run down the center of streets that will cause even more congestion.
The yellow vest movement is gaining momentum every day in New Zealand .

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Gwan
December 25, 2018 5:05 pm

Everyone who spends money in NZ is taxed. Anyone who runs a business in NZ, above a certain income, is an unpaid tax collector for the Govn’t. The IRD is a rapacious beast. GST was raised to 15% and GST is applied to everything with one or two exceptions IIRC.

My friend in NZ has just accepted a job here in Aus. She has done the numbers and has worked she will be worse off by about AU$100 p/w at the NZ$ – AU$ comparison however, moving to Aus opens up job opportunities for her husband because there are simply no opportunities for him there. Raising taxes and thinking of new taxes to apply will drive industry and people away.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
December 23, 2018 2:43 pm

What they do is apply the fees and taxes to businesses, then when the businesses raise their prices to compensate, the usual suspects tell the people that their suffering is being caused by greedy corporations.
Most of them also proclaim that the only solution is for those greedy corporations to be taken over by the government, so that they can be run for everyone’s benefit.

December 23, 2018 9:49 am

“Training and re-skilling” is the same lie used for Globalization which is really outsourcing with a more palatable name. You can’t create jobs when industry and services leave. The plethora of new jobs opened by “going green” never materialized and those that were promised are disappearing fast. Only China has taken advantage of the outsourcing and rush to green energy as witnessed by their steady GDP and it’s growth but that too will come to an end as the economies of countries shedding their industries shrink along with markets for goods. The grand scam by the UN to redistribute the wealth is coming to light and the West/industrialized countries are waking up to it. One would have to be in total denial not to see what’s happening.

Sally G
December 23, 2018 9:57 am

Philip Cross at the National Post wrote an article on just how successful Canada is in transitioning people into jobs in renewables – Not!! (Article titled ‘Stacan just exposed how worthless green industries are to Canada’s economy’s)

Gary Mount
December 23, 2018 10:27 am
Ken Irwin
December 23, 2018 11:08 am

I really don’t mind the “sacrifice” of taxation – as long as someone else has to pay it !

I am however curious as to the number of human lives are going to be sacrificed on the alter of the climate change AGW deity.

It will run in the millions – genocide in the name of Gaia – an honourable cause (/sarc.).

John Endicott
Reply to  Ken Irwin
December 24, 2018 8:01 am

Millions? Try more like Billions. The Earth currently has around 7.5 Billion people. Some on the Malthusian green left have claimed Earth can only support as little as 1 billion people without severe environmental consequences. That means the “depopulation” needed to reach that “ideal” is on the order of over 6 billion people.

Peta of Newark
December 23, 2018 11:15 am

Hi Daphne, a word in your delicate little shell-like..

It worries me this kind of thing
How you hope to live alone
And occupy your waking hours..

We’re taking sides again
I just wept I couldn’t understand
Why you started this again..

And every day you send me more
It makes it worse is this a plan of yours
To ensure I don’t forget…

I’d write and tell you that I’ve burnt them all
But you never send me your address
And I’ve, I’ve kept them anyway…

So don’t ask me if I think it’s true
That communication can bring hope to those
Who have gone their separate ways…

It hardly touched me when it should have then
But memories are uncertain friends
When recalled by messages……

Sing along: shake what your mama gave ya..
and is why ‘some’ amplifiers go to 11, but you knew that.

December 23, 2018 12:06 pm

Note the puffery where the author claims that “50 heads of state – including Theresa May – signed a declaration”. Theresa May is not the head of state, she’s the head of government (the Queen is the UK head of state).

I wonder how many heads of state actually attended or signed? Not many, I bet. Australia, for example, sent neither the head of state nor the head of government, just the Minister for Environment. I’d be surprised if even 5% of Australians know the Minister’s name.

Reply to  rubberduck
December 23, 2018 2:45 pm

In the US, the head of state can sign anything he darn well pleases. It’s meaningless until the Senate ratifies it.
I wonder how many other countries have something similar.

Reply to  MarkW
December 23, 2018 4:25 pm

And even if ratified, if it causes enough economic damage the next party that has control will vote to reverse it.

John Endicott
Reply to  Stevek
December 24, 2018 7:51 am

On the one hand, its a bit more cumbersome that you make it sound. Ratification require 2/3rd majority in the Senate. Hence why Obama chose not to have Paris be a “treaty” and why he never submitted it for ratification.

On the other, Repeal is a bit fuzzy. Once ratified, treaties are considered federal law, and can be altered by congress as such (regardless if the international community still considered the original version binding on the US or not). Not sure if 2/3rd is required for congress to change/repeal a previously ratified treaty (I’m thinking not). It’s also an open question on whether or not the POTUS can unilaterally repeal a treaty. The Supreme Court refused to weigh in on Carter doing just that with a defense treaty (See Goldwater v Carter) and similarly the courts refused to interfere when W Bush did the same with the ABM treaty in 2002. (wanna bet if Trump ever does such a thing, the courts will be all over it).

John Endicott
Reply to  MarkW
December 24, 2018 7:55 am

There are actually 3 types of international agreements in US law.
1) treaties – requires 2/3rds of Senate to ratify
2) Congressional-executive agreements, just needs simple majority of congress to pass
3) executive agreements, basically agreement by executive order (what Obama did) which can just as easily be unagreed to by executive Order of any subsequent President.

December 23, 2018 12:24 pm

The “‘gilets jaunes” riots in France were triggered by the french govt’s intent to charge the diesel fuels with a further tax, purportedly a “carbon tax” intended to fight the so called climate change. Everybody knows the unbearable level of the prices of the car fuels in Europe and peculiarly in France. Until now the diesel fuel was cheaper than the gasoline thus making the diesel powered cars very popular moreover since the french authorities encouraged the car manufacturers in making diesel motors more sober and reliable than the gas powered ones.
This policy was bluntly reversed when Macron decided to make the diesel fuel prices higher than those of the gasoline with the aim to reduce the number of diesel cars which were suddenly ostracized as environmentally damaging with microparticles and nitrous oxides (though producing less carbon dioxide per km).
Many people of the middle class in remote rural places currently are owning old diesel cars which are proven more robust and less fuel consuming. To oblige these low income people to give up their diesel car and to purchase an expensive new one was tantamount to a war declaration.
Their wrath became fury when the media disclosed that only 20% of the amount of this new “carbon tax” would be used for environmental purposes, the remaining 80% being intended to end in the bottomless well of the public expenses and that of the french sovereign debt (€ 2300 billions !).
One of the gilets jaunes’ slogans was: “Before the (climatic) end of the world we have to face the end of this month (expenses)”.

Tasfay Martinov
December 23, 2018 1:01 pm

And just like that, the climate activists realised on which side of the barricades they now were. They were not the protestors any more – they are the police state.

The pigs and humans at Animal Farm looked at each other round the table, and no-one could tell anymore the difference between them.

High Treason
December 23, 2018 1:22 pm

EVERY society that has put their trust in their ruling class to protect them if they gave them total power has collapsed spectacularly. A collapsing society is brutal in the extreme and these incidents are not isolated.

Once the People recognise that those that took all the privileges of deities-that they were living gods that can protect them from anything but were just full of hot air and lies, they will be very, very angry. For all those years, generations they have been subservient to these imposters that failed when they had to perform their duty. First existential threat and they fail- they are frauds that have defrauded the entire society. If the imposters cannot flee in to exile, they will come to a very sticky end.

December 23, 2018 1:59 pm

Governments working closely with big business was one of the key features of Nazi Germany. Quite rightly people now do not see the connection between having their pockets picked by big business and government, and what the weather will be like tomorrow. People know that big business and government are not their friends and trust nothing those two do, especially in concert.
The CAGW-Warmistas are now facing the increasing fury of those who are slowly beginning to see what is happening to their incomes and taxes for what is nothing better than a cult of mysteries.

Dennis Stayer
December 23, 2018 3:21 pm

Just as there is no credible science to support the theory of human induced catastrophic climate change (computer models that can neither hindcast or forecast, are gigo not science), there is no reason to trust a government when it is run by warmists/alarmists! They have earned all the distrust and skepticism that can be aimed at them, their motivations are driven by science they are driven by politics!

Flight Level
December 23, 2018 7:03 pm

Trust, the quintessential ingredient of climate science beliefs.

John Robertson
December 23, 2018 8:04 pm

The yellow vests are recognizing the obvious.
Our governments have brazenly declared war on the citizens.
The parasitic overclass,know better than you and I how we shall spend our effort.
Far be it for us to decide how we shall live,when the “Credentialed Ones” know best.
The meme of “Carbon Reduction” is so stupid that only a university educated person can believe.

We shall refuse the luxury of cheap plentiful energy from proven methods to embrace environmentally destructive non-producers such as wind and solar.
Always with our money,never theirs..
Oh right they have never produced anything beneficial to society.

CAGW is a big lie,once the bureaus marched loudly and proudly down that road.
War it is.
They keep pointing and shrieking”You evil deniers are the reason this story won’t sell”.

December 23, 2018 11:06 pm

“…fairly distributed to their executives‘.

Fixed it for you.

Donald Kasper
December 24, 2018 1:04 am

There is no plan for quality jobs and better standard of living with a new energy baseline civilization. All current conversion plans are based on taxation and deprivation mixed with poverty and starvation forcing changes through forced institutional poverty and dislocations. People thrown out of jobs that took 30 years to acquire and ascend pay scales get to start over at new menial jobs with very low pay, part time status, and no benefits. This is a plan for the environmentalism/climatism movements, which are anti-human by their conception. The working class has an alternative to this forced poverty, called civil war, kill the bureaucrats, and destroy the energy conversion as destroying the conversion has no bad consequences. In environmentalism and climatism, the animals get consideration, but the humans can go to hell. This is a sort of self-destructive approach that makes conversion impossible as the slogans to convert are based on low IQ and poor planning and cliche thinking, and more commonly, no planning whatsoever, no evaluations of costs and benefits, and no consideration of feasibility. Plans are based on the idea money is infinite and cliches can substitute for detailed plans. Problems are solved by tossing out slogans. A sort of moron way to rule the world through mass stupidity and lack of thoughtfulness.

John Endicott
Reply to  Donald Kasper
December 24, 2018 7:32 am

This is a sort of self-destructive approach that makes conversion impossible as the slogans to convert are based on low IQ

Which is why they work the propaganda/indoctrination in the schools so hard. The more they can lower the collective student IQ the greater the power they can accumulate in government over the long term.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  John Endicott
December 25, 2018 5:08 pm

One common theme in conflict with an invading force is they get rid of the educated people.

Donald Kasper
December 24, 2018 1:06 am

So basically Canada is going to a no-electricity style of civilization by 2030, where they bet on a conversion from coal power based on sloganeering will work, else, the economy crashes and devolves into civil war as provinces all declare independence and choose their own way out of the morass.

Donald Kasper
December 24, 2018 1:10 am

A pile of $35 billion is set up to retrain people, but no one has a clue what they are going to be retrained to do. What high paying jobs enmasse await? No jobs await. There are no jobs to convert to as the economy toilets from the job losses throughout from high energy costs. This does not foster new job creation.

Reply to  Donald Kasper
December 24, 2018 3:55 am

“A pile of $35 billion is set up to retrain people, but no one has a clue what they are going to be retrained to do.”

How about clean solar panels and remove dead birds and bats by wind turbines?

John Endicott
December 24, 2018 5:10 am

Businesses and policy-makers will also need to communicate effectively if they want to win over those that will be impacted first-hand by the new rules of the game

Ah yes, the old “if only we communicate our destructive ideas the right way the peons will fall in line” nonsense. The problem is they have been effectively communicating their desires, and the “peons” rightly want nothing to do with it. Especially as they’re the ones that will be “impacted first-hand” (in a negative way).

December 24, 2018 4:23 pm

What France (and not only France) needs is a government worthy of trust.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights