Twisting the Knife: European lawmakers consider tougher climate law

From Reuters

Kate Abnett

(Reuters) – European Union lawmakers are considering toughening the bloc’s planned climate law, with stricter near-term emission goals and a binding commitment for every member state to decarbonize by 2050, according to a draft document seen by Reuters. FILE PHOTO: European Union flags fly outside the European Commission headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, February 19, 2020 REUTERS/Yves Herman/File Photo

Such goals are required if the world is to stick within limits scientists say are needed to avoid devastating fallout from global warming, the lead author of the document, Swedish lawmaker Jytte Guteland, said.

The European Commission, the EU’s executive, proposed the law in March – weeks before the coronavirus pandemic prompted an economic crisis that the bloc has pledged to tackle with “green” investment.

Centred around a legally binding goal to cut EU net greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 2050, the law must be agreed with lawmakers and member states to take effect.

Under a draft proposal for the parliament’s position on the law, each individual EU country would need to reduce its national emissions to net zero by 2050 and achieve net “removals” of greenhouse gases after that date.

This is tougher than the Commission’s bloc-wide 2050 target, which had raised the possibility that some of its 27 members could decarbonise later, if others did so early.

The draft also calls for the EU’s 2030 climate target to be tightened to a 65% cut in emissions from 1990 levels, rather than the 50% or 55% cut being considered by the Commission.

Guteland, who guides the parliament’s talks on the climate law, said the proposal fits the emissions pathway scientists say would avoid catastrophic climate change.

“Scientists are talking about planetary limits. If we do not limit our emissions faster during the first 10 years, then we might actually go over the planetary limits,” she told Reuters of the risk of breaching the crucial 1.5 degrees boundary.

“It is political choice whether we do it or not.”

Full article here.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 9, 2020 6:08 pm


Rick K
May 9, 2020 6:10 pm

Go for it, EU.

Charles Higley
Reply to  Rick K
May 9, 2020 10:22 pm

“The draft also calls for the EU’s 2030 climate target to be tightened to a 65% cut in emissions from 1990 levels”

Two-thirds of 1990 emissions puts us back to easily 1850 or even earlier. Yeah, that will work. We are all farmers now. But, they probably will not let us have livestock either, so we are subsistence farmers, with rake and hoe and a spouse in harness pulling the plough.

Reply to  Charles Higley
May 10, 2020 12:26 am

As long as it’s my wife in the plough and not me….

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Michael
May 10, 2020 6:23 am

That reminds me of the old Danny Thomas show. His uncle Tanoose (sp?) thought Danny’s wife (in the TV show) was too skinny. He said, “you should find a wife who is big and strong and who can pull a plow”. I must have been 10 years old when I saw that and I thought it was so funny I never forgot it.

Reply to  Rick K
May 10, 2020 2:04 am

The article is wrong. nothing in EU requires approval of member states.

May 9, 2020 6:12 pm

The EU will be long gone before 2050.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Rob
May 9, 2020 8:58 pm

Agreed. Once the UK finally leaves the EU at the end of the year (Assuming BoJo can keep his dick in his pants and deliver what has been voted on 3 times), the rest will follow. Italy will be next IMO as the EU showed what it is all about with COVID-19, it distanced itself from Italy. British fishermen are lockdown at home while EU fishermen plunder, as always, British waters.

Eric Vieira
Reply to  Patrick MJD
May 10, 2020 2:10 am

That’s exactly why the EU is trying to coax Switzerland into signing their “bilateral” Framework which would practically subject Switzerland to EU laws and regulations. What the EU financially loses with UK, they could take back in with Switzerland or even more. A small surrounded country is easier to bully around than the UK… On top, they (FR, DE) get rid of a bothersome competitor…

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Eric Vieira
May 10, 2020 3:15 am

That didn’t happen before WW1, or WW2 or after and it ain’t going to happen now.

Reply to  Patrick MJD
May 10, 2020 5:06 am

British fishermen are lockdown at home while EU fishermen plunder, as always, British waters.

Why the hell are british fishermen in lockdown, doesn’t food production count as “essential”.

Fisherman would probably be a lot safer at sea than in virus infested Britain, right now.

There are so many stupid and ill-thought out regulations getting decreed with no reflection or oversight.

Reply to  Greg
May 10, 2020 3:31 pm

It’s almost as if the regulations are designed to inflict maximum pain.

Richard Patton
Reply to  Rob
May 9, 2020 9:00 pm

Possibly within the next couple of years.

Reply to  Rob
May 10, 2020 2:57 am

Im just amazed no ones blown their brussels HQ up yet
they keeppushing this trash and it may yet occur
there isnt one EU country was doing that welll before covid hit
far more important things to handle than iditic carbon fiddlin

I read that BHP in Aus is also muttering about emissions levels regs etc and wanting them held as is ir knocked back, sorry didnt read in full cant remember where I saw it.

Ian E
Reply to  Rob
May 10, 2020 3:24 am

And, if not, this should help finish it off!

John Robertson
May 9, 2020 6:13 pm

Well why not?
When you have killed your economic productivity by forcing people to stay home and forbid them from working..whats a few more idiotic rules?

Ditto ,whats the point of having “Emergency power” if you cannot rub the plebs faces in it?

By the way..Where on this planet has the Wuhan Flu spread without any attempts to prevent it?
Where has this virus spread “naturally” that we may compare reality to the Projected (modelled) spread?

Bryan A
Reply to  John Robertson
May 9, 2020 7:16 pm

The only way to actually test the predicted spread against the actual spread would be to Test Everyone.
7.7b tests for active virus or antibody. Then you would “Know” if the models were accurate or not.
Of course you could test 10% and extrapolate but that would still only be a guess

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Bryan A
May 9, 2020 8:59 pm

It is not necessary to to test every member ofg a population to get a reasonably accurate idea of the characteristics of the population. That is the basis of all statistical procedures. Roughly the accuracy of the sample is inversely proportional to the square root of the sample size. The accuracy is not changed by the size of the total population.

A sample of 1,000 gets you about +/- 3% accuracy. To get to 1% you need to go to 10,000.

10% of the world’s population is 770,000,000. That will get you about .01% accuracy. But, you are probably just wasting money by taking a sample of more than 10,000.

It is surprisingly difficult to wring more decimal places of accuracy out of any sampling procedure. Even a simple count. That is why accountantss write financial statements with 000,000 omitted

David Sigman
Reply to  Bryan A
May 9, 2020 9:28 pm

If we can poll 3000 Americans to find out who is going to win the next presidential election we can. Test 1 million people worldwide for COVID antibodies to extrapolate how many have had the disease.

Charles Higley
Reply to  Bryan A
May 9, 2020 10:33 pm

First, you have to have a test for the actual virus. That is not what we have. We have a test for a general sequence in coronaviruses (covis) and not C-19, so the tests are testing for an environmental factor. As there are many covis and many harmless, we have them on and off all year round. This explains why there are so many asymptomatic positive tests out there. They actually also do not know which covis is the one taking the elderly as they have never isolated it. As many people would have more than one virus of the flu season salad of viruses, they would have to isolate and identify all viruses present in a number of sick people and find the common denominator, which they have not done.

We have a test that they pretend is for a specific virus. The faster, non-PCR tests are either simply testing for the presence of RNA or for a surface protein common to covis, again non-specific for C-19. Also, humans make exosomes that contain RNA, just like covis, so RNA tests are even less specific as human exosome levels vary in response to a whole range of stimuli, including stress and, oh my, disease.

We do not have a Gold Standard culture of C-19, and they admit that they are using PCR for a general covi sequence, which makes testing a true joke.

We need to stop testing and do what we have done for decades, identify the symptoms and get people through whatever version of the flu season they are suffering from. You cannot stop the spread of such an infectious virus, so you just have to give the sick the best support you can.

Rod Evans
Reply to  Charles Higley
May 10, 2020 1:10 am

Thanks Charles,
Unfortunately, very few people know the detail you do. The governments talk about testing and everyone thinks great we will be tested, little do they know they would be just as wise picking a card out of the pack marked viruses in general.
The way the reporting always uses the general term Corona virus rather than the specific Sars Cov 2 title tells us all we need to know about the lack of accuracy in play that is holding the public to ransom.

Reply to  Rod Evans
May 10, 2020 3:03 am

on youtube the prez? or some highup of zimbabwe was seen saying hed sent a range of swabs in to be tested they used goat sheep ppaya birdsand even car oil
the oil was neg but the goats mango n bird teseted + for covid
so the tests mght also be iffy?
high chance as china had those dud ones to get rid of after all

Tom Abbott
Reply to  John Robertson
May 10, 2020 7:54 am

“Where has this virus spread “naturally” that we may compare reality to the Projected (modelled) spread?”

I don’t think Brazil is doing any Wuhan virus mitigation.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
May 11, 2020 3:52 am

You would be wrong thinking that😎
The situation here in Brazil is a bit chaotic but various city’s and states have various levels of social distancing or even lockdown In place. For some time now.

Check out :
For a rather excellent overview.
The peak of infections seems to be 13 days ago, at least in our state.

Other parts of the country are unfortunately not in such ‘good’ shape and there is a real crisis.

Stay safe,

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Willem69
May 11, 2020 5:44 am

Thanks for that information, Willem. I had heard differently from a couple of tv talking heads so thanks for clearly that up.

Mike McHenry
May 9, 2020 6:17 pm

Sounds like EU wants to commit suicide? China isn’t going down this road and hopefully not the USA. Will eastern Europe go along or exit the EU?

Richard Patton
Reply to  Mike McHenry
May 9, 2020 9:01 pm


Reply to  Mike McHenry
May 11, 2020 5:51 am

Eastern Europe can sniff socialism and dictatorship from miles away, they will not fall for it as “core” of Europe did.
It is clearly visible now with Covid-19, where eastern part did not fall for official WHO propaganda, did what common sense was telling and currently they are doing much better than their western counterparts.
Same with climate b……t, it will not work there.

Sweet Old Bob
May 9, 2020 6:24 pm

Such goals are required if the world is to stick within limits scientists say are needed to avoid devastating fallout from global warming, the lead author of the document, Swedish lawmaker Jytte Guteland, said….

So global warming is now radioactive ? Or a nuclear weapon ?

These idiots need to self isolate .

Reply to  Sweet Old Bob
May 10, 2020 3:05 am

self IMMolate would be better

May 9, 2020 6:26 pm

The insanity in the EU continues despite the best efforts of Covid-19 to cull behavioural incompetence.

Capn Mike
May 9, 2020 6:27 pm

It’s like a Python sketch. “No One expects the Spanish Inquisition”.

May 9, 2020 6:33 pm

Hotel EUfornia as we are learning with GB attempting to withdraw.

Paul R Johnson
May 9, 2020 6:34 pm

Watch how the Eastern Europeans react. This could the be straw that breaks the EU’s back.

Hari Seldon
Reply to  Paul R Johnson
May 9, 2020 11:50 pm

Dear Mr. Johnson,

Putin mentioned in a speech recently it could happen, that the east-european countries will decide to leave the EU about in 2028. No comment…

May 9, 2020 6:53 pm

If the EU decides to commit economic suicide because of climate change, it’ll embolden China. Because the EU, mostly NATO countries, won’t be able to support the USA when China attacks. Granted, the EU countries aren’t worth much militarily, anymore, but it would certainly help if they had some capacity.

(@mods…why do I seem to go into moderation, a lot? have I written something offensive or verboten?)

Richard Patton
Reply to  SMC
May 9, 2020 9:03 pm

It seems to be random. I will get a comment instantly posted and then a few minutes the next one goes into moderation, and then a few minutes after that instantantly posted. It makes no sense.

David Sigman
Reply to  SMC
May 9, 2020 9:31 pm

They have little or no capacity. Germany, the richest EU Country, only has a handful of tanks and fighter jets in ready to go condition. We’re on our own.

Hari Seldon
Reply to  David Sigman
May 9, 2020 11:46 pm

Dear Mr. Sigman,

Unfortunately you are right. Instead of enough firepower, the German army has now kindergarten und advanced hairdresser’s shops in the barracks, and the pregnant women soldiers can get a tailored uniform.

Pillage Idiot
Reply to  SMC
May 9, 2020 9:34 pm

Schrodinger’s cat controls the posting process.

Reply to  SMC
May 9, 2020 11:21 pm

Wooden ships and iron men.

Reply to  SMC
May 10, 2020 5:32 pm

… when China attacks? When China attacks whom?

Dennis G Sandberg
May 9, 2020 7:08 pm

Hard to understand. No matter what EU does or does not do about “carbon”it will only have a negligible effect. Surely they understand this. So the question is why are they doing this? The only plausible reason is empty virtue signalling. Germany has proven that wind and solar is a fools errand. Onshore wind expansion is passe. Indications are that with the 20 year subsidies beginning to expire this year Germany’s actual net wind installed capacity will most likely be negative beginning in 2021. Mercedes recently abandoned hydrogen as a possible transportation fuel, trashing the Green Dream of using excess electrical power on sunny windy days to produce hydrogen. Electrical storage is more expensive than generation Germany is too far North for cost effective solar. Eventually they’ll figure that out.

Steve Case
Reply to  Dennis G Sandberg
May 9, 2020 7:43 pm

Dennis G Sandberg May 9, 2020 at 7:08 pm
Hard to understand.

Religious fanaticism is always hard to understand.

Reply to  Steve Case
May 9, 2020 9:22 pm

Moral, perhaps. Ethical, its relativistic cousin, yes. Secular motives, always.

Reply to  Steve Case
May 10, 2020 2:25 am

What I think is happening is that they are frantically trying to get some reduction in CO2 emissions (a) before the public support for them disappears completely, and (b) before the temperature cycle downturn becomes obvious, so that they can claim that it was their action that caused the downturn.

They still control all of academia and most of the media and politicians, so the western world is still some way away from sanity.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  Dennis G Sandberg
May 9, 2020 9:08 pm

“Germany is too far North for cost effective solar.”

The southernmost point of Germany is at the latitude of Hibbing, Minnesota. (Bob Dylan’s hometown)

And that my friends is way far north.

In honor of Bob Dylan:

Chris Hanley
Reply to  Dennis G Sandberg
May 9, 2020 10:10 pm

Greenhouse gas emission trends in Germany 1990-2019 shown here …
… indicate that the Merkel Government has conceded that meeting their original 2020 target is impossible.
Added to their problem is their policy to shut down all nuclear power by 2022.
The cost of Energiewende, began in 2010, has been enormous so far for very little effect; watching Germany struggling to achieve the impossible is fascinating and darkly humorous.

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  Dennis G Sandberg
May 10, 2020 8:18 am

“…Germany is too far North for cost effective solar. ”

And cloudy too much…..

…compared to many U.S. cities (especially in the southwest)…

Here in Wisconsin, Milwaukee gets more annual sunshine hours than German cities do. Yet, I see very little in the way of solar panels on the roofs of homes and buildings from what I’ve noticed around the state.

Reply to  Dennis G Sandberg
May 10, 2020 9:44 am

So the question is why are they doing this?

Because it’s coming from the unelected in Brussels, I would have to say the reason is C-O-N-T-R-O-L.

Michael Keal
Reply to  Dennis G Sandberg
May 12, 2020 10:36 am

Corruption. The world’s biggest swindle. There are many pig’s snouts in the global warming trough. They squeal very loudly whenever they’re stopped from slurping, for more of that lovely swill. Obviously the good comrades in China aren’t complaining as they build their industrial base and military capability. For them it is easy to understand.

Ronald Bruce
May 9, 2020 7:36 pm

If the EU goes ahead with this plan in about 2035 the rest of the world will look at the broken countries of Europe the destitute people, the starving, the deaths and the wrecked economies under the Communist government of Europe and think that could have been us. So go ahead EU wreck all the European countries we will look on at the revolutions and the civil Wars raging in Europe while we get on with our lives.

Reply to  Ronald Bruce
May 9, 2020 9:40 pm

Who you kidding. We’ll bail them out like we always do. Unless something changes.

Dennis G Sandberg
Reply to  Ronald Bruce
May 9, 2020 11:00 pm

Ronald Bruce, As you suggest a total EU wreck is almost inevitable. They have seriously damaged their economies with “renewables” (unsustainables). One thing that might save them is the USA getting out of NATO. It would give them something to rally around instead of the phony “climate crisis” USA participation in NATO was all about stopping an invasion of tanks from Russia (If Hussien was still around he could tell Europe about tanks vs USA aiirpower). If Europe wants a Russia deterence they can do it without the USA. (A EU military may be a paper tiger as Russia will soon be able to control Europe by shutting off the natural gas in the middle of the winter….if the EU continues to pretend they can survive on sunshine and breezes).

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Dennis G Sandberg
May 10, 2020 6:34 am

“They have seriously damaged their economies with “renewables” (unsustainables).” Except for the one renewable that truly is renewable- woody biomass. It’s a big industry in Europe. The “greens” in North America hate it because they say it results in carbon emissions- failing to understand that the forest not cut that year more than makes up for it by sequestering carbon. This is the one major fault of the Moore movie.

Reply to  Ronald Bruce
May 10, 2020 1:01 am

Long before 2035 , in fact in less than 12 months time you will be living in whatever Green hell Pres Hilary dictates.
Biden will not survive the primaries. The Wuhan flu has destroyed Trump.

Reply to  mikewaite
May 10, 2020 3:14 am

if theres justice then killary might catch covid,bit before the elections
isnt there a cutoff point to be nominated anyway?
seems its got into whitehouse staffers and the fbi
so the upper crusties mgiht be getting “concerned” about now?

Reply to  mikewaite
May 10, 2020 9:20 am

A Biden-Clinton ticket would infuriate the Sanders-AOC crowd, as well as most of the Me-Too supporters. The revelations of the Flynn trial has shown how corrupt the Obama-Biden administration, and perhaps Obama, himself, was. Hillary has managed to insult every voting bloc since her defeat.

Trump would carve them up like a Thanksgiving turkey.

May 9, 2020 7:37 pm

“Such goals are required if the world is to stick within limits scientists say are needed to avoid devastating fallout from global warming”

Any scientist who says this looses all credibility as a scientist. They need to prove it, not just say it, which they can’t do because the scientific method leads to the contrary.

Eamon Butler
Reply to  co2isnotevil
May 10, 2020 2:34 am


Reply to  co2isnotevil
May 10, 2020 8:18 am

I just had to turn on my gas fireplace. Global warming works in mysterious ways.

Reply to  Scissor
May 10, 2020 9:25 am

Read yesterday that there was a 100 degree F difference in the US between the west coast and the east. Life goes on without a hiccup, but we are suppose to be panic-stricken by a two degree rise in average global temps?

May 9, 2020 8:04 pm

Dear EU

We know of course that the age of European domination is coming to an end and that the age of Asian dominance is near but we do appreciate the voluntary effort you have undertaken to speed things along. Now if you could only talk some sense into that obstinate orange man on the other side of the Atlantic we could get this transition on the road.

Xi Jinping

May 9, 2020 8:05 pm

“Guteland, who guides the parliament’s talks on the climate law, said the proposal fits the emissions pathway scientists say would avoid catastrophic climate change.”
Which scientists? Based on what data? What constitutes “catastrophic climate change”.
This guy and so many of these policy folks have the message memorized but have never bothered to check these basic questions. Two other questions they need to look into is who are the scientists that disagree with their unchecked message and what are their reasons for disagreeing? From his harangue you would think there is no disagreement and scientists not only all agree but know the whole story including the part not yet revealed.

Reply to  DMA
May 9, 2020 8:22 pm

fits the emissions pathway scientists say …

You would think that given the disastrously false COVID-19 models and recommendations, politicians might want to distance themselves from “scientists say…”. On the otherhand, they have nothing else.

Hari Seldon
Reply to  DMA
May 9, 2020 10:28 pm

Dear Mr./Ms./Mrs. DMA,

Please, take into account, that Guteland is from Sweden, und Sweden has such excellent scientists like Greta: She is mentally a little bit disordered und she doesn’t need any school, so she is the right candidate even for a Nobel Price. Another possible scenario: Guteland is a Russian and/or Chinese agent with the mission definition to accelerate the voluntary harakiri of the EU without any special investment (eventually free of charge) from Russia / China. BTW, Guteland’s approach is very common in the EU: If the government of an EU-country can not enforce unpopular measures in own country, then these measures will be initiated on the EU-level, and the local goverment can tell the population, sorry, these measures are “higher level measures” from the EU. Exactly like in the former East-block countries: In such cases the local east-european goverments always could reference a decision of the Politbüro in Moscow, which could not be ignored (argument: This measure would be in the interest of the working class all over the world….). An additional wrgument war to warn the own population that maybe some armoured soviet divisions could visit the country like in 1956 Hungary or in 1968 Czechoslovakia. The EU-approach is 1:1 with copy-paste. Note, that the main idea behind the Paris Climate Agreement was seemingly very similar. If a country would not be compliant with the highest level priority saving the planet, for example a US carrier group would have visited the non-compliant country “to motivate” the local leadership, or to support the “real democrats” of the non-compliant country. US will leave now the Paris Climate Agreement, so currently no ways are available “to motivate” other countries like China / Russia, etc. to be compliant with the climate- und CO2-hysteria.

Al Miller
May 9, 2020 8:38 pm

I’m really looking forward to some ” head up their butt” region or country to do it full on as an example to the rest of the world. Oil companies need to cut off some the looney tune states too. Bring it on! The rest of us will be heating up the popcorn to watch the s@&$show! Nothing will bring this environmental stupidity to a head like watching it happen for real. No more dreaming of unicorns- everyone in European Union gets their own unicorn, yay!

Reply to  Al Miller
May 9, 2020 11:19 pm

It’s happening right now “here”, in fact “everywhere”. We’re committing economic suicide under lockdown. Almost all power is being generated by RE, no cars or lorries are in operation so the air is clean. Lunatics are already saying that we must keep it like this “because Climate Change”. As a side-dish the Scientific American accuses “us” of racism because minorities are more vulnerable to COVID19. All our concerns as a modern society are coming together all at once. And people think I’m mad because I speak out against all their nostrums. When will we come to our senses? Obviously not as I originally thought when tens of millions of people are unemployed. Perhaps it might happen when major dislocation occurs in the food supply chain & people start starving.

Reply to  Al Miller
May 10, 2020 1:08 am

South Australia is the role model for this. In fact, they were so enthusiastic with their policy, they dynamited the last of their coal fired power stations. The result – the entire state went back to the stone age for weeks during the state-wide blackout in 2016. In 2019, they learnt their lesson & shut power for around 30,000 homes fast enough that the state didn’t completely turn off, but the cost to industry was immense.

This summer, I don’t know what their plan is, but it doesn’t involve generating cheap, reliable power.

Reply to  Hivemind
May 10, 2020 3:22 am

this summeer they plan to CUT the solar cell feed from the places the subsidised n bribed to get them installed
because it made the grid unstable
thatleaves the gasplant at torrens island to battle on alone and the interconnector from vic to provide backup
stuffed if i know what they planned to do about the billions of$of birdshredders input
oh not enough to be countable most days so not an issue
they could pay the corps they sold the billion$ battery to for a half hr of power too I guess?
@top dollar to buyback naturally

May 9, 2020 8:39 pm

This should be good. Without the UK footing a good portion of the EU budget now they will tell the remaining members they will have to bleed more to keep the EU alive, and give up more industrial production in the process. The end is nigh.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  markl
May 9, 2020 9:01 pm

The UK, IIRC, is the third largest economy in the EU. There is a very good sketch by the Not the 9 O’clock News team from the 80’s about it. Very funny! Wish I could find a video of it.

Robert Keon
May 9, 2020 9:19 pm

Never interrupt an enemy when he’s making a tactical error.
Top enemy of our western capitalist world is the UN, with the EU a close second.

Sean Guthrie
May 9, 2020 10:05 pm

“Scientists are talking about planetary limits. If we do not limit our emissions faster during the first 10 years, then we might actually go over the planetary limits,”

Planetary limits??!? Let’s see the planet is, arguably, some 4 billion years old. These morons have been ‘modeling’ for less than a hundred. Last I checked the planet has no ‘limits’; it will probably survive long past our time…

May 9, 2020 10:42 pm

Yes! of course ! thats what the EU needs right now. Pile it on , good to see Brussels focussed on the main game isnt it?

Roger Knights
May 9, 2020 11:12 pm

“Guteland, who guides the parliament’s talks on the climate law, said the proposal fits the emissions pathway scientists say would avoid catastrophic climate change.

““Scientists are talking about planetary limits. If we do not limit our emissions faster during the first 10 years, then we might actually go over the planetary limits,” she told Reuters of the risk of breaching the crucial 1.5 degrees boundary.”

Hmm: “planetary limits” “our emissions”. first he’s talking about the whole globe. Then he’s talking about the EU. What the EU does will not much affect the planet’s CO2 levels, because most big countries aren’t intending to make EU-size reductions, or indeed, any reductions. The list of countries whose emissions will increase includes Mexico, Brazil, Russia, India, China, Japan, Indonesia, the Philippines, Pakistan, Turkey, etc.

Carl Friis-Hansen
Reply to  Roger Knights
May 10, 2020 1:26 am

Not to be gender fixated, but Jytte Guteland is a woman according to her first name.

Jytte Gunlög Elisabeth Bengtsson Guteland is a Swedish politician and Member of the European Parliament from Sweden. She is a member of the Social Democrats, part of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats. (WikiP)

Boldface is mine. She is so beautiful Green, how can you not trust her to serve the welfare of the people?

Sweden and probably many other countries are to lower the pension payout due to #19 lock-down and the resulting production crises.

We still have some way to go, before we are down to the 500 million world population, his Highness Prinz Philip hopes for.

Curious George
Reply to  Carl Friis-Hansen
May 10, 2020 8:50 am

Is she Greta’s schoolmate? No, a Master’s degree in Economics. Hell, she could be considered a scientist herself.

May 9, 2020 11:34 pm

”The European Commission”… Shouldn’t that be The European Commissariats ??

Flight Level
May 9, 2020 11:45 pm

Then one day, EU issues a climate cease and desist order to Russia and attempts to enforce it. The rest is already history, too bad they forgot how it all started in the mid thirties.

Kiwi Gary
May 10, 2020 12:37 am

Just for personal fun, I looked up the I.E.A. estimate for fossil fuel use mid-century. I then estimated the number of 7MW wind turbines required to produce that level of energy, assuming the present international capacity factor. Start building,fellows !! 1100 new turbines have to be commisioned and operating somwhere useful in the world every single day from now until 2050. No holidays. no supply-chain hold-ups allowed.

Of course, there is always a slight glitch. Chinese Scientists and Engineers have investigated wind patterns from 1975, and discovered that, over that period, the winds have reduced over the Northern hemisphere sufficiently to reduce wind power potential by 30%. 1100 turbines per day may well be much too few.

May 10, 2020 1:01 am

I love this part: “Countries not on track would receive recommendations from the Commission, and could face fines if they flout the advice.”

If you’re fined for not following advice, then it isn’t advice.

Rod Evans
May 10, 2020 1:18 am

This EU law maker doesn’t come from Sweden, by any chance?

Martin Howard Keith Brumby
May 10, 2020 1:54 am

Whilst everyone on here is looking with a mixture of horror and schadenfreude at the EU’s suicide note, there is another thread to the Commissariat”s cunning plan.

Due to basic demographics, it is now projected that Austria will have a “Religion of Peace” majority by 2045.

Other countries and especially major cities (London, Paris, Malmo, Brussels) are already leading the way.

Will this cultural change help meet the EU’s “Climate” aspirations?

I wonder…

May 10, 2020 2:04 am

good luck with that, EU. setting aside COP26 being postponed –

7 Feb: Climate Home: World misses symbolic February deadline to ratchet up climate action before Cop26
The 2015 Paris Agreement seeks to raise global ambition every five years. But only three nations have issued upgraded climate plans nine months before Cop26 in Glasgow
PIC: GRETA: Countries are under pressure to submit tougher climate plan this year but only two have met a symbolic February deadline.
by Alister Doyle
Only three nations have submitted upgraded climate plans nine months before the start of November’s summit in Glasgow, adding to uncertainties after UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson last week sacked Claire O’Neill, who was due to preside at the talks…

A little-noticed paragraph 25 in the 2015 UN decision implementing the Paris Agreement says that such climate action plans, known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), are meant to be submitted to the UN “at least 9 to 12 months in advance of the relevant session” of the Cop.
Sunday 9 February marks nine months before the start of Cop26, from 9-19 November. NDCs are crucial in defining national policies for the next 5-10 years…

Originally, the Paris Agreement had been expected to start in 2020 and several legal scholars said the nine-month deadline in the Paris text strictly applies only to future five-year milestones starting with 2025, 2030, 2035 and 2040.
But the Paris Agreement entered into force far earlier than expected in 2016 after many governments ratified, adding pressure for the spirit of paragraph 25 to apply in 2020 amid pressure from voters, companies, cities, NGOs and youth activists led by Greta Thunberg…

10 Feb: Climate Home: Marshall Islands, Suriname, Norway upgrade climate plans before Cop26
The three nations account for 0.1% of global emissions. Norway says 9 February was the deadline for new plans before climate talks in November
By Alister Doyle
The Marshall Islands, Suriname and Norway have submitted plans for tougher action to tackle climate change before a five-year milestone of the Paris Agreement in 2020, with almost 200 others ignoring an informal 9 February deadline…

3 Apr: Climate Home: Japan’s woeful climate plan amounts to science denial
Japan reiterates past pledges for 2030 rather than mapping out a radical overhaul needed by the world’s fifth largest greenhouse gas emitter
By Shekhar Deepak Singh
(Dr Shekhar Deepak Singh is a post-doctoral researcher at the Chinese University of Hong Kong specialising on issues of Energy Policy, Environment and Sustainable Development)

9 Apr: Climate Home: The US election is even more crucial with UN climate talks delayed to 2021
A Democratic president could be a game changer for the international fight against climate change, beyond rejoining the Paris Agreement
By Thom Woodroofe and Brendan Guy
(Thom Woodroofe is the Senior Advisor on Multilateral Affairs to the President of the Asia Society Policy Institute and is a former climate diplomat.
Brendan Guy is the Manager of International Policy at the Natural Resources Defense Council)

And while President Trump has expanded offshore drilling and overseas financing of fossil fuel projects in recent years, Biden has outlined an ambitious and far reaching international climate agenda that goes beyond simply returning the US to the Paris Agreement.

For example, Biden has said he would also put the economy on track to reach net zero emissions no later than 2050, implement carbon border fees or quotas on carbon-intensive goods, recommit investments through the Green Climate Fund, phase out fossil fuel subsidies globally, accelerate emissions reductions in key sectors such as aviation and shipping, and also make climate change a core national security priority…

But a potential Biden administration – with its inevitable commitment to bring a more ambitious 2030 national target on behalf of the United States – has the potential to unlock similar efforts by other major emitters, including China, India, Japan, and Australia.
This is partly why it is also important a potential Biden administration does not rush to table a new 2030 national target at the same time they rejoin the Paris Agreement, but instead seeks to leverage it for maximum impact diplomatically.
One important opportunity to do this would be through Biden’s idea to convene a world leaders’ summit on climate change early in his administration…

May 10, 2020 2:15 am

These insane Leftist CAGW targets will completely destroy what’s left of the global economy following the equally insane consequences from the Wuhan-flu global economic shutdown…

What’s truly ironic is that the AMO and PDO seem to be entering their respective 30-year ocean cool cycles, a strong La Niña cycle (1st in 10 years) seems to be developing, and a 50-year Grand Solar Minimum event just started, so by 2050, global temps will likely be substantially falling due to natural climatic events, despite record global CO2 emissions…

We’ll see how long this silly CAGW charade can continue..

Hari Seldon
Reply to  SAMURAI
May 10, 2020 3:00 am

Dear Samurai,

You are very optimistic:

“Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former.”

Albert Einstein

( )

May 10, 2020 3:48 am

I can’t take seriously the intellect of these people who think thats solar/wind is going to play any significant part in lowering emissions. If they can’t see that the obvious future no carbon energy generators will be small modular molten salt reactors, fueled either by uranium or Thorium, then
they don’t deserve attention for anything they say. These reactors have the ability to produce power as cheaply as any fossil uel (except the lowest priced natural gas) – around 4 cents per kWhr, levelized, and have the additional ability to act as peak and baseload generators, to be locatable just about anywhere (no need for space or cooling bodies of water) and buildable in plants at a rapid pace and installable upon minimally prepared sites. To ignore this imminent, vastly superior technology (within 7 years) indicates a view that deserves to be characterized as unqulaified to deal with the subject altogether. These people are just plain energy-stupid.

May 10, 2020 1:05 pm

Looking for another wave of immigration to America. With Harry and Meghan it may already have started.

William Haas
May 10, 2020 2:58 pm

But the reality is that there is no real evidence that CO2 has any effect on climate. There is plenty of scientific rationale to support the conclusion that the climate sensitivity of CO2 is zero. There are many good reasons to be conserving on the use of fossil fuels but climate change is not one of them. The best way to reduce the use of fossil fuels is to replace ageing fossil fuel power plants with nuclear power plants.

May 10, 2020 4:52 pm

The UK is already out of the EU.
What is happening now is a voluntary transition period, to try to make the split easier for both.

The UK has agreed to continue to behave as if it were a member, still following EU regulations and treating EU residents as they did before.

By the end of the year, there are supposed to be agreements on how EU residents will be treated in the UK, and how UK residents will be treated in the EU. How the Irish border will be handled, and various other things like fishing limits in UK territorial waters and trading agreements.

Some of that is relatively easy. Or should be. But the EU is trying to play hardball with fishing limits, basically wanting none. What they don’t seem to understand is that there are two answers: whatever the UK agrees to hand out, revised on an annual basis, or nothing at all. They may have to learn the hard way. Same with the Irish border. Either leave it open, which the UK is ok with, or if the EU doesn’t want the Irish to be able to hop over the border and buy a vacuum cleaner that actually sucks, for example, then they are going to have to create and man the border so that it becomes clear to the Irish just who is restricting who.

Rudolf Huber
May 11, 2020 3:46 pm

COVID shows us where the limits of European liberty are. All borders are closed. So much for liberty of movement. This thing will further unravel the EU as some member states will decide that they cannot take the burden anymore and will snipe at those rules from inside. Some will just balk as politicians will recognize that its easier to blame it on the EU rather than face public unrest. The EU is in for hard times.

May 13, 2020 8:46 am

Knock yourself out, EU. Don’t count on the USA supporting your socialist agenda. We have problems ourselves with our virus cost and the socialist demowits from within our own 240 year old Republic Democracy founded back then. The Nazis and commies have been trying to take over the most successful Nation on the face of the Earth ever since Karl Marx penned his Communist Manifesto (~1840s) and his Marxist armies took over our Ivy League schools (1880s). Too bad General Patton didn’t live to take on the USSR after WWII. Mao Zedong was stopped short of taking over S Korea and we were winning the battles and war in ‘Nam until LBJ decided to go to the peace table.

May 13, 2020 3:54 pm

The truly insane thing is that the IPCC SR15 report that everyone refers to says that the difference between 1.5 degrees of warming and 2.0 are small. Nor is exceeding 2.0 all that bad. Yet somehow 1.5 has morphed into the threshold to catastrophe. No science, not even IPCC science, supports this nonsense.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights