Dark Green Money Reveals Vast Self-Dealing Network in Canada’s Climate Change “Leadership” like Green New Deal Proposal says Friends of Science

From PRWEB

“Dark Green Money” is a new report by Robert Lyman with a revealing glimpse of the vast self-dealing network of foreign billionaire foundation funding environmental groups’ climate change initiatives, says Friends of Science Society, much like what is being proposed in the US for the Green New Deal.

Dark Green Money

CALGARY, Alberta (PRWEB) January 17, 2019

Dark Green Money” is a new report by Ottawa energy policy consultant, Robert Lyman, that takes the mask off the big green funding machine behind Canada’s Climate Change “Leadership”, issued by Friends of Science on Jan. 15, 2019. According to Friends of Science, what is in play in Canada sounds like the proposed US Green New Deal, as outlined by Vox, Jan. 7, 2019. Contrary to Al Gore’s claims of industry money funding climate dissenters, as reported Dec. 21, 2018 in National Geographic, “Dark Green Money” shows that billionaire foundations with vested interests in renewables and carbon trading, along with government policies are the big money pushing the climate narrative.

The US Senate Minority report the “Billionaire’s Club” of July 20, 2014 reported similar funding.

The claim of a climate crisis is debunked by Emeritus Professor François Gervais of the University of Tours, in a new video presentation: “Cooling of Climate sensitivity – Anthropogenic CO2 Global Warming Challenged by 60-Year Cycle” just posted to YouTube by Friends of Science. Prof. Gervais shows evidence that there is a scientific ‘consensus’ on the nominal climate sensitivity of carbon dioxide from human emissions, meaning its long-term impact on earth’s climate is negligible.

“Dark Green Money” gives a glimpse into a vast self-dealing network of foreign billionaire foundation funding in Canada, detailing staggering amounts of money pouring into questionable ‘climate change’ initiatives.

Author Robert Lyman is a former public servant of 27 years and past diplomat for 10 years for the Canadian government. He’s appalled at the public funds wasted without any cost-benefit analysis and rarely subjected to public scrutiny.

Lyman first refers to Matthew Nisbet’s 2018 paper on “Strategic Philanthropy…”. Nisbet states that philanthropist foundations in the US have framed “climate change” as a social problem, defined it as a pollution problem, pushed to enact a “carbon price” and shifted markets in the direction of renewable energy technologies as solutions.

Lyman writes, “While the funding provided by private foundations is large, by far the largest source of funding to promote climate “mitigation” in Canada is by governments …” Canadians should not have to guess how much money is being spent by governments to fund the “Iron Triangle” of climate change confirmation bias.

The Iron Triangle refers to a paper in the Journal of Physicians and Surgeons of Fall 2013 by Richard Lindzen, explaining how ambiguous scientific statements get hyped by self-interested advocates and media, who then generate public pressure on governments to ‘take action’, who in turn feed the frenzy with funding.

Deloitte’s White Collar Crime update of Feb. 2018, explains the four-point fraud diamond. Touting a climate change ‘crisis’ provides the rationalization for any action; big funders provide the opportunity, governments provide the incentives and capability.

Ironically, spending these green billions in attempts to stop global warming is economically detrimental for Canada according to Dr. Richard Tol. Nominal warming benefits cold countries through better growing seasons, less costs for outdoor industrial activity and heating. In his book “Climate Economics” [page 89] he states “The best-off country is Canada …” The estimated positive net benefit of CO2 emissions to Canada will steadily increase to be $100 billion by 2100.

Tol is the IPCC lead author who refused to sign his team’s report, saying it was too alarmist, neglecting human ability to adapt.

About

Friends of Science Society is an independent group of earth, atmospheric and solar scientists, engineers, and citizens who are celebrating its 16th year of offering climate science insights. After a thorough review of a broad spectrum of literature on climate change, Friends of Science Society has concluded that the sun is the main driver of climate change, not carbon dioxide (CO2).
Friends of Science Society
P.O. Box 23167, Mission P.O.
Calgary, Alberta
Canada T2S 3B1
Toll-free Telephone: 1-888-789-9597
Web: friendsofscience.org
E-mail: contact(at)friendsofscience(dot)org
Web: climatechange101.ca

HT/Willie Soon

Advertisements

85 thoughts on “Dark Green Money Reveals Vast Self-Dealing Network in Canada’s Climate Change “Leadership” like Green New Deal Proposal says Friends of Science

  1. The “Dark Green Money” report by by Robert Lyman pulls back the heavy green curtain drawn over the vast money-churning machine that forms the heart of the Global Warming/Climate Change scam. CO2 is not the cause of ‘Global Warming/Climate Change’ but instead it is the constant propaganda meme and conduit for huge money transfers to members of the cabal.

      • It certainly seems that way Mark.

        In the Canadian public’s imagination the threat of dangerous man-made climate change is real. And along with the MSM, academia and our governing elites their fears are confirmed by the “consensus”

        Science by vote….what has happened to critical thinking?

  2. Its Dr. Gobbles all over again. So unless the climate e does indeed grow much colder, then the GREEN Machine appears to be winning. So the one thing against the warmers lobby is that renewables simply cannot run a modern economy, so we will again have to wit until the lights start to go out, then its Paris again, not their dream, but the yellow jackets version.

    MJE

    • I’m so glad to see this topic today. The financial underpinnings, revolving doors, lobbyists, handlers and ‘self dealing networks’ must be exposed.

    • Always follow the money. In this instance, the “con” has been on for a while and won’t stop until something drastic happens to cause disillusion/reality to hit those deluded masses who think that throwing money at this will “cure” it.

      How can you “cure” something that is not a disease? (I know the answer, but… just sayin’)

  3. This article appears to be by the Friends of Science society… FOS

    “In a January 28, 2007 article in the Toronto Star titled “Who’s still cool on global warming?” the President of the FOS admitted that about one-third of the funding for the FOS is provided by the oil industry.
    In an August 2006 Globe and Mail feature, the FOS was exposed for hiding the fact that they were funded in part by the oil and gas sector. According to the Globe and Mail, the oil industry money was funnelled through the Calgary Foundation charity, to the University of Calgary and then put into an education trust for the FOS.”

    https://www.desmogblog.com/friends-of-science

    Still waiting for the article on how GWPF are funded (purely in the interests of balance…)

    • smogblog griff for your ‘facts’? Pathetic, would be nasty if not so predictable. Your time is nearly up….. Brett

      • Brett

        griff just does drive by commenting now. He doesn’t engage anymore because he gets beaten up so often.

        He figures drive by is really clever.

          • … another Mosher ??

            Not at all.
            Mosher is smart, has interesting things to say, and has a sparky attitude.
            griff, is not smart, has nothing to say {uses ‘talking points’ from other sources}, and shows no sign of a personality.

            Given the opportunity to share pizza and beer, I’d want Mosher, and I’d buy.

          • More often than not, when you read the links griff provides you find they do not support the point he was making. On occasion his sources actually refute his point.

          • “John F. Hultquist January 19, 2019 at 8:31 am”

            I almost agree.
            i.e. I fully agree with you when Steve Mosher participates honestly.

            Still.
            giffiepoo’s drive by dumps are all delusion, fallacy, fantasy and ad hominems. As such, giffiepoo’s drive bys are not even shallow imitations of Mosher’s.

        • Re “Drive-By commenting” by Griff and fellow-travelers:
          That is just one of the deceitful Alinsky “Rules for Radicals” tactics practiced by the far-left. Truth is not important because the far-left appeals to imbeciles.

          The left use environmental issues as a green smokescreen for their political objectives, as revealed in 1994 by Dr. Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace. See:
          http://ecosense.me/2012/12/30/key-environmental-issues-4/ Read “The Rise of Eco-Extremism”

          More on Drive-by – I wrote the following article in defence of several honorable individuals who were being falsely vilified – it was published in E&E in early 2005. Lomborg actually accepted the bogus science of catastrophic global warming (OK – he’s an political scientist, not a true scientist) and simply said there are much more economical means of solving the (alleged) warming problem. For this heresy, he was stoned by the watermelons.

          Willie Soon, Sallie Baliunas, Jan Veizer and Nir Shaviv received similar treatment for actually challenging the bogus CAGW science. “How dare they! The science is settled!”

          Funny how the warming alarmists keep changing their version of the “settled science”, about as often as they change their underwear. First it was Global Warming (but the warming stopped), then it was Climate Change, Weather Weirding, etc, etc.

          Regards, Allan

          DRIVE-BY SHOOTINGS IN KYOTOVILLE
          The global warming debate heats up
          Energy and Environment 2005
          by Allan M.R. MacRae
          [excerpt]

          Full article: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/28/the-team-trying-to-get-direct-action-on-soon-and-baliunas-at-harvard/#comment-713945

          Drive-by shootings have moved from the slums of our cities to the realms of academia. Any scientist who dares challenge the Kyoto Protocol faces a vicious assault, a turf war launched by the pro-Kyoto gang.

          These pro-Kyoto attacks are not merely unprofessional – often of little scientific merit, they are intended to intimidate and silence real academic debate on the Kyoto Protocol, a global treaty to limit the production of greenhouse gases like CO2 that allegedly cause catastrophic global warming.

          Witness the attack on Bjorn Lomborg, author of “The Skeptical Environmentalist”. While Lomborg did not challenge the flawed science of Kyoto, he said that Kyoto was a huge misallocation of funds that should be dedicated to more important uses – such as cleaning up contaminated drinking water that kills millions of children every year in the developing world.

          In January 2003, the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD) declared that Lomborg’s book fell within the concept of “objective scientific dishonesty”. The DCSD made the ruling public at a press conference and published it on the internet, without giving Lomborg the opportunity to respond prior to publication.

          In December 2003, The Danish Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation repudiated the DCSD’s findings. The Ministry characterized the treatment of the Lomborg case as “dissatisfactory”, “deserving criticism” and “emotional”, a scathing rebuttal of the DCSD.

          But such bullying is not unique, as other researchers who challenged the scientific basis of Kyoto have learned…

          **********

      • While I agree “griff” is an alarmist apologist to the extreme, he’s never posted a derogatory comment at anyone, not that I have seen anyway. I myself have levelled “names” at griff and never received a derogatory reply.

        So cut griff some slack, griff repeats propaganda, that is all.

    • Griff, here’s an idea, judge all scientific reports on their merits, irrespective of funding origin. You cite the Globe and Mail review which shows the FOS funding three-times removed from some oil and/or gas money, but what about the science? I actually took money from an oil company, CONOCO, and lots of it (thank you very much!) but it never participated in any of my scientific judgements. Looks like foundations associated with George Soros are supporting both Anarchists and illegal immigrants, but that doesn’t make them wrong, their own personal conduct makes them wrong. The bottom line for Canada is warming up is a good thing, because the next glacial event will be brutal.

      • I find it difficult to find examples of significant harm being done by warming in any part of the world.
        The occasional heat wave may cause a few deaths and discomfort but other factors probably contribute more.
        On the other hand the consequences of cold weather are staggering if you consider them all.
        Examples are, death and discomfort from cold related disease such as the flu. Auto accidents from bad road conditions. Deaths from exposure. The enormous costs and inconvenience of dealing with blizzards or ice storms, heating living and business spaces, vehicle and road damage from salt and frost heaving, etc..
        I can survive a heat wave with a little shade and a cool drink or if really extreme with air conditioning.
        Outside my door right now you could not survive an hour without special clothing or heated spaces to return to. My snowblower alone cost me at least three times the cost of my air conditioner. Although it is true I need very little air conditioning.
        All the food that I grow must be produced in about a three month window to avoid most of the risk of frost.
        Almost all outdoor work is dealing with cold weather related circumstances. Most everything else is delayed until spring or becomes vastly more costly.
        I have to cut through a foot or more of ice to go fishing and move a shack onto the lake with fossil fuel heat to keep my butt from freezing off. Not to mention more important extremities.
        Of course, some enjoy snow machines or skiing but even that pales in the face of 30 or 40 below wind chills.
        But hey, if the heat gets to much for you, come and visit. You can stay in my motor home or tent trailer. Bring lots of blankets and someone to cuddle with.

      • “The bottom line for Canada is warming up is a good thing, because the next glacial event will be brutal.”

        Only if it was truly warming up though…

      • Griff is claiming that funding from corporations and billionaires to be an exclusive privilege for liberals and progressives. They are the new supremacists .

    • “In an August 2006 Globe and Mail feature, the FOS was exposed for hiding the fact that they were funded in part by the oil and gas sector. According to the Globe and Mail, the oil industry money was funnelled through the Calgary Foundation charity, to the University of Calgary and then put into an education trust for the FOS.”

      What’s your point? That industry needs to be valued and appreciated for supplying the resources that make our modern, relatively easy lifestyles (compared to those before oil) possible.

      • “… industry needs to be valued …

        A good point, but not exactly “industry” but rather Capitalism.
        Capitalism produces wealth that gets redistributed in numerous ways.
        I grew up in a town with a Carnegie Library. There are many grants for hospitals and medical research of the Koch Foundations (ex., Institute for Integrative Cancer Research Massachusetts Institute of Technology), or the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation award to Boston Children’s Hospital and others. The list is long.

        And yes, some of the money comes from companies the greens don’t approve of. Because the companies are big (they have to be to conduct the activities), they often make huge profits and they give some of that away. Occasionally the grants are used to promote things helpful to them. As expected.

    • griff,
      Your attempted distraction about a private UK organization seems shallow and cynical since the topic is “Canada’s corrupt green funding”.
      Try to stay topical if you can.

      • I tried reading Desmogblog once. It was a horrible tangle of gobblygook and word salad. That Griff reads it and uses it as his claim for honesty is sad and funny at the same time.

        I knew Desmogblog was founded by an alarmist for his own platform of ridiculing others. In the early days of CAGW there was a lot more interaction between the various blogs.

    • CRU received a lot of oil money, probably still does. Does that invalidate their research? No, their shady practices and shoddy work invalidates their research.

      • The CRU also “lost” raw data in office moves in the mid-90’s. So one can best assume anything after 1995 is pretty much made up. Quelle surprise, it *IS* made up! Thank you Harry!

    • Once again griff pretends that getting money from oil interests proves that your science is bogus.
      I guess it’s easier than actually refuting the arguments being made.

      (And that’s assuming that the charge is accurate which, given the source, is highly unlikely)

    • The Friends of Science Society is NOT funded by the fossil fuel industry. We have never received any funding from big or medium sized petroleum companies. No president of the society ever said that 1/3 of FOS funding is provided by the oil industry. Occasionally we receive minor donations from very small oil companies or service companies. Our 2017 actual funding is detailed in our September 2018 quarterly newsletter at https://friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=2390
      It shows the total funding was CDN$159,071 (about US$ 120,000). We received only a total of CDN$7,540 from 5 corporate donation.

      The claim that “oil industry money was funnelled through the Calgary Foundation charity, to the University of Calgary and then put into an education trust for the FOS” is false.

      In 2004 a professor of the University of Calgary set up a project, “Research on the Climate-Change Debate,” and an associated education trust account to receive funds to produce a DVD that would document the many complexities of the climate-science debate. Donations to the University came from individuals, foundations, and companies. A significant contributor was the Calgary Foundation charity. The university account received funds from only one medium sized oil company. Big oil contributed exactly nothing. Friends of Science provided script writing, interviewing and climate research services free of charge to the university DVD project. FOSS never received any funds from the university and FOS did not contribute any funds to the project. Therefore, FOSS had no ownership in the DVD production. The DVD was released in 2005. The university president objected to the message in the DVD, likely because it would risk the large funding the university was getting from the federal government to promote climate change alarmism. The University of Calgary Logo was removed from the DVD and its ownership was transferred to the Friends of Science Society in 2005. https://friendsofscience.org/index.php?id=394
      I am a director and past president of the Friends of Science Society

    • I am not a representative of the Friends of Science, but I know for a fact that there has been no funding from an oil company, directly or indirectly, for several years. Friends of Science is a small organization of part-time volunteers with an annual budget of about $150,000 per year (Canadian). That is peanuts, especially by comparison with the tens of millions of dollars contributed by U.S. and Canadian Foundations to support the work and public communications of environmental groups promoting climate alarmism in Canada, and the over $1 billion per year channeled into the same cause by the Canadian federal government. The suggestion that the Friends of Science, or any other climate skeptical organization can come close to matching the vast resources of the foundations is laughable.

    • “giffiepoo January 19, 2019 at 12:42 am
      This article appears to be by the Friends of Science society… FOS”

      “appears”!?

      What’s the matter?
      I “appears” that you did not actually read the article?
      Of course not. That requires intelligence.

      Instead you undulate slimiley off to desmog, a blog developed by political activists, solely to spread alarmism and impair people learning facts and science.

      giffiepoo ignores the activist billionaires funding desmog while besmirching real science and scientists, while desmog is all propaganda and noise.

    • Oh yes, the climate activists over at the Globe and Mail. https://blog.friendsofscience.org/2018/12/29/globe-and-mail-editorial-or-climate-activism/

      The Globe and Mail… things they FORGET to report on:
      https://www.newsoptimist.ca/opinion/columnists/the-globe-and-mail-s-environmental-bias-is-showing-1.1560546

      And that DeSmog is funded by the vast ClimateWorks network ClimateWorks Foundation – WikiLeaks
      https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/fileid/57594/16165
      Nisbet
      https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wcc.524

    • Oh who cares?. The central question is whether or not what they say is true. Alarmists are also well funded, perhaps even better funded, than those challenging the AGW mantra. We need more challengers. We need more people willing to seek the truth. If oil companies benefit from the truth, then so be it.

    • Most environmental science funding is provided by the government. Should we question the science-based solely on its funding sources whenever Democrats are in charge?

      Attack the argument.

  4. This report by Robert Lyman is highly credible, as is the organization Friends of Science. While I am not a member of Friends of Science, I know many of its members and they are highly credible professions, typically with university degrees in science and technology, often focused on the Earth Sciences. In general, they are far better-educated and more accomplished than most-if-not-all politicians and global-warming alarmists.

  5. The article by Prof Gervais is :
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012825216300277
    It is an Elsevier article and normally paywalled , but Chiefio provides a link to access, noticed via a joNova posting earlier this week :
    http://www.skyfall.fr/wp-content/2016/05/Earth-Science-Reviews_FG_2016-.pdf
    The abstract, if open access fails:

    Time series of sea-level rise are fitted by a sinusoid of period ~ 60 years, confirming the cycle reported for the global mean temperature of the earth. This cycle appears in phase with the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). The last maximum of the sinusoid coincides with the temperature plateau observed since the end of the 20th century. The onset of declining phase of AMO, the recent excess of the global sea ice area anomaly and the negative slope of global mean temperature measured by satellite from 2002 to 2015, all these indicators sign for the onset of the declining phase of the 60-year cycle. Once this cycle is subtracted from observations, the transient climate response is revised downwards consistent with latest observations, with latest evaluations based on atmospheric infrared absorption and with a general tendency of published climate sensitivity. The enhancement of the amplitude of the CO2 seasonal oscillations which is found up to 71% faster than the atmospheric CO2 increase, focus on earth greening and benefit for crops yields of the supplementary photosynthesis, further minimizing the consequences of the tiny anthropogenic contribution to warming.

    Note that the paper is 2016 . Elsevier provide links to further interesting articles , 2017 -ish , some of which are open access , but I have not had time to look at them yet .

    • https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/07/17/oddly-quiet-sun-3-weeks-without-sunspots/#comment-2407423
      [excerpt]

      I predicted that natural global cooling would commence by 2020 to 2030, in an article published 1Sept2002 in the Calgary Herald. I am now leaning closer to 2020 for cooling to start, possibly even earlier. I hope to be wrong. Humanity and the environment suffer during cooling periods.

      I suggest that it is long past time for society to prepare for the possibility of moderate global cooling.

      This would involve:
      1. Strengthening of electrical grid systems, currently destabilized by costly, intermittent green energy schemes;
      2. Reduce energy costs by all practical means.
      3. Development of contingency plans for food production and storage, should early frosts impact harvests;
      4. Develop contingency plans should vital services be disrupted by cold weather events – such as the failure of grid power systems, blocking of transportation corridors, etc.
      5. Improve home insulation and home construction standards.

      The current mania over (fictitious) catastrophic global warming has actually brewed the “perfect storm” – energy systems have been foolishly compromised and energy costs have been needlessly increased, to fight imaginary warming in a (probably) cooling world.

      I suggest this is the prudent path for Western societies to follow. It has no downside, even if global cooling does not occur, and considerable upside if moderate cooling does commence.

      Best, Allan

    • If atmospheric CO2 increased, and global temperatures cooled for ~4 decades, that would disprove the “CO2 drives catastrophic global warming” hypothesis. THAT ALREADY HAPPENED, from ~1940-1977.

      Here is the evidence:
      a. Fossil fuel consumption (and reportedly also atmospheric CO2 concentration) strongly accelerated starting about 1940.
      b. Then the world COOLED until the Great Pacific Climate Shift of 1977.
      c. Then the world warmed a little, and that warming was distributed over a decade or more by two century-scale volcanoes, El Chichon and Pinatubo.
      d. Then global temperatures were near-flat for another decade or more during The Pause.
      e. All this time, atmospheric CO2 concentrations reportedly increased – so THE CORRELATION OF CO2 WITH GLOBAL TEMPERATURE IS NEGATIVE, POSITIVE AND NEAR-ZERO.
      f. That is all the evidence anyone needs to know that CO2 IS NOT THE PRIMARY DRIVER OF GLOBAL TEMPERATURE.

      The “CO2 drives catastrophic global warming” hypothesis is thus disproved.

    • As I published in January 2008 and Humlum et al expanded in 2013:
      1– Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 11–12 months behind changes in global sea surface temperature.
      2– Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging 9.5–10 months behind changes in global air surface temperature.
      3– Changes in global atmospheric CO2 are lagging about 9 months behind changes in global lower troposphere temperature.

      https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1551019291642294&set=pob.100002027142240&type=3&theater
      https://www.dropbox.com/s/0tpilw8k3p5b834/Humlum%20Nov2017.JPG?dl=0

      It’s a bit complicated, but most people (warmists excepted?) would agree that the future does not cause the past in our current space-time continuum.

      In the 11 years since I published this observation, it has largely been ignored or obfuscated. It is the only clear signal I see in the modern data record, and it happens to coincide with a similar observation from the ice core record, where CO2 also lags temperature, by a longer time lag in a longer temperature cycle. Again, the CO2-primarily-drives-global-temperature meme insists that the future is causing the past.

      I think we really understand very little about global climate, and we have squandered trillions of dollars and decades of research on dead-end false global warming nonsense and related green energy schemes that are not green and produce little useful (dispatchable) energy.

      To me, this is a tragedy of lost opportunity and deliberate academic and political misconduct worthy of a major criminal investigation. In my opinion, global warming alarmism and green energy schemes are the greatest frauds in human history.

      Regards, Allan

      REFERENCES:

      CARBON DIOXIDE IN NOT THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING: THE FUTURE CAN NOT CAUSE THE PAST
      http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/carbon_dioxide_in_not_the_primary_cause_of_global_warming_the_future_can_no/

      http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-co2/from:1979/mean:12/derivative/plot/uah5/from:1979/scale:0.22/offset:0.14

      THE PHASE RELATION BETWEEN ATMOSPHERIC CARBON DIOXIDE AND GLOBAL TEMPERATURE
      Ole Humlum, Kjell Stordahl, Jan-Erik Solheim
      Global and Planetary Change, Volume 100, January 2013, Pages 51-69
      https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818112001658

  6. Any government interference in supply & demand has the same result with maximum entropy as the guaranteed end result.

    The parallels are extraordinary.
    “Prohibition” created the “mob”, which created a Launderette.

    Restrict, control or racket demand for any commodity, alcohol, jeans, music, sport, you name it, you just create another black market & launderette.
    Some like Richard Branson turned semi-clean.

    The EU is the same,
    Energy is no different.
    The law of unintended consequences – market distortions acting as a demand driver.
    The “science is settled” should not suprise anyone.
    The new Launderette, gets going as a speculative bubble fueled by the media, encouraging brain washing for those “not smart” – “not to miss out”.

    https://healthcarefinancials.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/the-cycle-of-market-emotions.jpg

    Like all speculative bubbles it then becomes uncontrollable, generating its own inertia, as investors pile in, looking for subsidy, artificially high returns, then laundering the proceeds.

    The climate crisis is just sub prime all over again, and inevitably comes before a big crash.
    It’s just as unwise as lending cash to those with none, as to bet upon a hydrogen star.

    It can be biggest crash of our generation if we approach a new maunder/dalton minimum.

    FYI:-
    In the USSR Gorbachov tried exactly the same policy and failed (below), and it was one major reason why he was replaced.
    He who controls alcohol tax in Russia controls the country.

    >”Gorbachev’s anti-alcohol campaign
    During 1985–87, Mikhail Gorbachev carried out an anti-alcohol campaign with partial prohibition,colloquially known as the “dry law”.
    Prices of vodka, wine and beer sales were restricted in amount and time of day, The price of alcohol skyrocketed and sugar, a key ingredient to distill alcohol, disappeared from shop shelves.
    People who were caught drunk at work or in public were prosecuted.

    The reform had an effect on alcoholism in the country, as evident from statistics showing some fall in criminality and rise in life expectancy, but economically it was a serious blow to the state budget (a loss of approximately 100 billion rubles to the exchequer according to Alexander Yakovlev) after alcohol production migrated to the black market economy…

    The campaign triggered a massive surge in illegal production of dangerous home brewed alcohol and the curbs soon dealt a fatal blow to the popularity of Gorbachev, the author of the liberal Soviet reform known as Perestroika.”

    • “pigs_in_space January 19, 2019 at 1:23 am

      …“Prohibition”…

      Restrict, control or racket demand for any commodity, alcohol,…”

      It’s how the Kennedy family made most of their money.

      • The Kennedys secured their hold on the illegal alcohol trade by physical assault upon and murder of their comprtition (and/or the competition’s family members).

        A great American family.

        Right up there with the Gores.

        • How did Capone get caught, was it tax evasion or postal fraud? But yeah, a great American family right up there with the Gores.

        • At least one family member prevented a nuclear war. There was, almost, a nuclear war during the Suez conflict a few years before. And, sadly, we stand on the brink of such a war which, IMO, is inevitable.

  7. The level of technical incompetence in governments is enormous – most politicians are so incompetent that they should not even opine on energy matters, let alone set energy policy. Here is one example of why this is true:

    In Calgary, our city council allowed the development of residential subdivisions up to within 1 mile of 40% H2S sour gas wells. Hydrogen Sulphide (H2S) is a powerful neurotoxin that is heavier-than-air and instantly fatal if inhaled at 0.1% concentration. In SE Calgary, these sour gas wells were produced and processed by the Mazeppa project.

    While those wells were responsibly operated for decades, Mazeppa was later sold to Chinese thugs who ceased injecting anti-corrosion chemicals into the sour gas gathering pipelines to save money, resulting in severe corrosion and even minor H2S leaks from these pipelines. Earlier studies stated that a major release of H2S from these wells would have a “kill radius” of 15 km, encompassing the entire SE quadrant of Calgary, now home to about 300,000 people. As a private citizen, I intervened and had the project shut down in 2016.

    There were early signs that the Mazeppa project was at risk – the new owners stopped paying their bills and were transferring funds offshore as soon as received. They also transferred their economic wells into two sister companies, with the intention of dumping all the uneconomic wells and facilities of the parent company onto the industry/public. The project went bankrupt, dumping ~$200 million in abandonment/reclamation costs.

    The punishment against this company was the most severe in Alberta history, but the question remains – how did it get this bad? There was a major failure by governments and regulators to see the big picture and to take suitable proactive steps. These are the same government people who believe they can set energy policy, “fight global warming”, “stop climate change” and promote intermittent green energy schemes that are not green and produce little useful (dispatchable) energy. Add to this the influence of large amounts of foreign money spent to support phony-green leftist political groups and to influence politicians on energy policy, and we have the energy debacle that is Canada today.

    What could possibly go wrong?

    Canada has lost over $120 billion just in oil revenues due to anti-pipeline thuggery, our economy is failing, and our vital energy systems have been damaged by costly and ineffective wind power schemes that fail due to intermittency, a fatal flaw of “green” energy that we have fully understood for many decades.

    We are governed by scoundrels and imbeciles.

    Regards, Allan

    Details of the Mazeppa Sour Gas story:
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/25/climate-hero-chinas-ecuadorian-earthquake-zone-dam-paid-for-by-amazonian-oil/#comment-2567216

    • Too much of Western infrastructure is being taken over by the Chinese, who as far as I can see, do not have a reputation for integrity or goodwill towards us. Who in their right minds would allow such policies? Many of the good citizens of Calgary clearly owe Mr Macrae their lives but will they hold their politicians to account for this treachery?

  8. There is no doubt that monied vested foreign interests from the Deep Green Stateless Environmental Foundations & NGO’s are at the heart of the political direction of a country like Canada. But it also has to have a willing partner in Goverment to be able to enact the scare mongering “CO2 is pollution” hype to implement these multi billion goverment scams that will fundemantally harm our economies and our ability to compete and trade with other foreign states.

    Things like seriously disrupting a entire province’s electrical grid in Ontario the last 12-13 years with an oversupply of ‘green’ electricity from massively overpaid Feed In Tarrif renewables for friends of Gov’t in Ontario. This saw solar PV being paid up to .90 cents/KWh and windmills being pushed onto the grid that caused hydro dams to spill water because ‘renewables’ had priority access to deliver to the grid. Much of which was all dumped at spot level pricing across the border because it had no use in Ontario, especially when the wind was strong with every windmill at 100% output.

    Or the purchase of the Kinder Morgan pipeline and approved twinning of such by the federal Gov’t of Canada only to see a federal appeal court overturn the new twinning of the existing pipeline in an already approved and existing right of way within a few months of the purchase, and then the Gov’t refuses to appeal that decision to the Supreme Court. And it had nothing to do with the pipeline, but the number of ships that would ply local waters, and didn’t talk enough with the local aboriginal folks. Talk about changing the goal posts. (P.S. Guess who is now in the running to buy the Kinder Morgan assets from the federal Gov’t?)

    Both these examples have one thing in common, and that is the right hand man of current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Gerald Butts, is the go to guy behind the older liberal gov’t in Ontario, as well as now the new liberal gov’t in Ottawa run by Trudeau. Gerald Butts used to be the head of one of these con environmental NGO’s that once did good works as the World Wildlife Federation 25 years ago, but now has joined the dark forces of climate doom. When you dig deep, he is behind a lot of the questionable outcomes that are now coming out of Canada, including gutting the entire oil and gas sector in Western Canada.

    The current federal Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, had his own issues when his own father dumped 200,000 shares of their own own family owned stock, (Morneau Shepell Inc.) just before a major tax policy was announced by the newly appointed Minister. Minister Morneau was also privy to everything confidential about the timing and pricing of the US owned Kinder Morgan stock, and with the coincidence of his own family stock sales before, you can fill in the blanks how this has gone so horribly wrong and is possibly steeped in deep mysterious conspiracies of who knew what, and when. There is no way to prove everything that happened now, but if you follow the money, the policies, and who is benefiting from all this, you will see a pattern emerge that is not above board. Just the statement alone that CO2 is pollution should be enough of a wake-up call to anyone that the logic of CAGW climate change in Canada is juvenile at best, and criminal at worst. Especially when you take a real long hard look at what they are doing there.

    • An accurate post, thank you E2.

      I believe this is deliberate criminal conduct by Canadian politicians. civil servants and judiciary, especially at the federal level, but also provincially by leftist governments in Ontario, Quebec, BC and Alberta.

      The only person to ever hurt Albertans more than Justin Trudeau was his father Pierre, with his incredibly destructive National Energy Policy. Trudeau père et fils are both far-left socialists, who consistently put the interests of their home province of Quebec ahead of the interests of our country.

      They are also corrupt to the core. When Pierre credited the national oil company Petro-Canada and put the notorious Maurice Strong in charge, there was huge insider-trading by Liberals, especially during the takeover of PetroFina. Similar scams probably also occurred during the takeover of the TransMountain pipeline. Canadians were dumbfounded as to why the Canadian government would waste $4.5 billion to buy a fully-funded pipeline – Justin was copying dad’s Petro-Canada scam.

      The anti-pipeline thugs have cost Canada $120 billion to date in lost oil revenues, and consumers in Quebec and the Maritimes are paying a huge premium for fuel because they do not have access to cheap Alberta oil, but must import oil at world prices that are almost double Alberta prices.

      The Liberals love big scams like global warming, green energy and (anti-)pipelines because they can put their favorite sons in charge and skim the most graft.

    • E2 wrote:
      “Or the purchase of the Kinder Morgan pipeline and approved twinning of such by the federal Gov’t of Canada only to see a federal appeal court overturn the new twinning of the existing pipeline in an already approved and existing right of way within a few months of the purchase, and then the Gov’t refuses to appeal that decision to the Supreme Court.”

      This was the Liberal’s deceit-and-delay plan from the start, before their takeover of the pipeline. It was all arranged beforehand, including the decision by the Federal Court of Appeal. That decision, claiming there was “inadequate public consultation” on the project, was utterly ludicrous – there were many wasted years of public consultations, on an issue that can be summarized in these few words:
      “Pipelines are cheaper and safer than other forms of oil transportation.”

      During these years of hearings, there were numerous derailments of oil trains in North America, including one at Lac Megantic Quebec that needlessly burned-to-death 47 people.

      Nobody should believe this pipeline debacle was an accident – this is the way the federal Liberal operate – corruption, deceit and delay are their strengths, the only ones in which they excel.

      • Regarding the success of the anti-pipeline thugs – Louis Hooffstetter posted this on 1Jan2019
        https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/31/global-warming-win-venezuelan-socialists-on-track-to-eliminate-their-nations-oil-industry/#comment-2574402

        Warren Buffett is an Obama puppet master. As a result of Obama’s rejection of the Keystone pipeline, crude oil that would have been safely transported through the pipeline was carried by oil trains instead. The amount of crude oil shipped by rail increased from 9,500 carloads in 2008, to 500,000 carloads in 2014. And the biggest winner by far was… Warren Buffett’s railroad (BNSF).
        Obama cited “protecting the environment” in his decision, but oil trains have been an unmitigated environmental disaster. Here’s a partial list of derailments that spilled oil that would have, and should have been transported safely through the Keystone pipeline:

        July 2013, Lac-Megantic, Quebec: Sixty-three tank cars derail and spill more than 1.3 million gallons of oil. Forty-seven people are killed and 30 buildings are destroyed.

        December 2013, Casselton, ND: An oil train derails and spills 400,000 gallons of oil, most of which burns.

        February 2015, Beckley, W.Va.: An oil train hauling North Dakota crude derails destroying a house and forcing the evacuation of two towns.

        Feb. 2015, Gogama, Ontario: 29 cars carrying crude oil derail and spill oil.

        March 2015, Gogama, Ontario: 39 tanker cars loaded with crude oil derail and catch fire. The fire burns for five days, and the spilled oil eventually reaches Kazaway Lake.

        March 2015, Galena, IL.: An oil train loaded with crude oil derails and catches fire.

        June 3, 2016, Columbia River Gorge: An oil train with 96 tank cars derails and spills 42,000 gallons of oil into the Columbia River.

        June 2018, Doon, Ia.: An oil train derails spilling 230,000 gallons of crude oil spill into the Rock River and forcing nearby residents to evacuate.

        • That’s interesting: I live in Calgary and am in the service industry, and I’ve never heard a peep about any of these except Mégantic. Funny, that.

          I also agree 100% with your earlier comment about the handling of TransMountain. His lack of any sort of proper response to the BC actions, given his earlier interference in pipeline building, was a pretty strong signal it was DOA.

  9. I’m still surprised that nobody has done any digging into “The Cause” and its funding that Michael Mann refers to in the Climategate emails. Quote:

    “I gave up on [Georgia Institute of Technology climate professor] Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she thinks she’s doing, but its not helping the cause,”

    • The left will lie about anything that supports the Cause. They always have. The Cause is global Marxism.

      You can save yourself a lot of time by assuming that Everything the left says is False – and you will usually be correct.

  10. Great article.
    Thank you.
    I wonder how many nation’s have had this green slush fund offering huge amounts of money to people who tell scary stories that never come true and help no one but themselves?

  11. An increasing number of passengers report carbon footprint offset donations to GP and alike.

    As much as 120€ for a regional lift.

    Where does that money go ? Definitely not in maintenance or extra fuel.

  12. Definition of a Promotion:
    “At the beginning, the promoter has the vision and the public has the money.
    At the end, the public has the vision and the promoter has the money.”

    • “At the beginning, the promoter has the vision and the public has the money.
      At the end, the public has the vision and the promoter has the money.”

      Or, as is more often the case, the promoter ends up with the money, and the public then owns a boondoggle.

  13. All the environmental groups on Canada’s west coast are funded by the Tides Foundation. You can go to the Tides Foundation website, and see who has been collecting how much.
    ———————————————————–

    Researcher exposes money trail behind U.S.-based campaign to kill the oilsands

    Eight years ago, while researching who was behind an unscientific, misinformation campaign against farmed Canadian salmon, Vivian Krause “came across these three little words: Tar Sands Campaign” in the tax forms of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund

    https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/corbella-vivian-krause-should-become-a-household-name-across-canada/

  14. Clean Energy Ministerial, (CEM) Paris, France

    “Advancing Clean Energy Together”

    http://www.cleanenergyministerial.org/node?keys=wind%20energy

    Organization involved in renewable energy and EV promotion. Just use their search for more information on energy related topics.

    The IEA is a partner of CEM.

    Both Canada and the U.S are members along with other countries. Organization also has UN connections.

    Foreign influence and money flowing into both countries.

    • Sustainable, clean – image marketing, virtue signalling. Look at the policies: rise taxes and prices and give to the special interest groups.

    • Barbara, are you aware of how Maurice Strong was involved with the U.N. to set up these Sustainable Development partnerships? Recently, an undercover RCMP agent spoke out about the financial underpinnings Maurice Strong manipulated. It was recorded on ‘Caravan to Midnight’-Episode # 1014. He exposed many cross border connections, including Al Gore. He has evidence for everything he referred to.

  15. UN Environment, Last update: 24 October 2018

    Climate Initiatives Platform

    Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC) Main. Starting year 2012

    Scroll down to: Other members, 83 including ClimateWorks Foundation.

    And,

    CCAC sub-initiatives
    Sub-initiative: Phasing Down Climate Potent HFCs/HFCs Initiative
    Members include: ClimateWorks Foundation.

    This is a UN Platform Description webpage.

    http://climateinitiativesplatform.org/index.php/CCAC:_Climate_and_Clean_Air_Coalition_(Main)

    Also available online.

Comments are closed.