Russian Arctic Gas supplies to Europe. By Samuel Bailey ( - Own work, CC BY 3.0, link

The Guardian: “The Paris Agreement is Failing”

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Does The Guardian want military invasions of countries which fail to reduce CO2 emissions? Author Jojo Metha laments the Paris Agreement has no enforcement clause – but she shies away from describing exactly how future agreements could be enforced, and what the world would do to replace the lost energy production.

To stop climate disaster, make ecocide an international crime. It’s the only way

Jojo Mehta and Julia Jackson
Wed 24 Feb 2021 18.16 AEDT

Outlawing ecocide would hold governments and corporations accountable for environmental negligence. We can’t wait

The Paris agreement is failing. Yet there is new hope for preserving a livable planet: the growing global campaign to criminalize ecocide can address the root causes of the climate crisis and safeguard our planet – the common home of all humanity and, indeed, all life on Earth.

The science is clear: without drastic action to limit temperature rise below 1.5C, the Earth, and all life on it, including all human beings, will suffer devastating consequences.

Currently, much of humanity feels hopeless, but the establishment of ecocide as a crime offers something for people to get behind. Enacting laws against ecocide, as is under consideration in a growing number of jurisdictions, offers a way to correct the shortcomings of the Paris agreement. Whereas Paris lacks sufficient ambition, transparency and accountability, the criminalization of ecocide would be an enforceable deterrent. Outlawing ecocide would also address a key root cause of global climate change: the widespread destruction of nature, which, in addition to increasing greenhouse gas emissions, has devastating impacts on global health, food and water security, and sustainable development – to name a few.

Conviction for ecocide would require demonstrating willful disregard for the consequences of actions such as deforestation, reckless drilling and mining. This threshold implicates a number of global and corporate leaders through their complicity in deforesting the Amazon and Congo basins, drilling recklessly in the Arctic and the Niger delta, or permitting unsustainable palm oil plantations in south-east Asia, among other destructive practices.

Read more:

According to her bio, author Jojo Metha is an Oxford trained lawyer based in the Netherlands.

The Netherlands utterly depends on Russian gas for heating in winter. Thanks to a fracking ban, hostility to nuclear power, and the unexpectedly rapid depletion of North Sea gas fields, domestic Netherlands energy production is in steep decline. Imported Russian gas produced by intensive drilling in the Siberian Arctic is keeping Dutch homes warm in winter, and helping to keep the lights on.

From what I saw of visiting the Netherlands, they might talk the talk, but they like their comforts – Dutch home heating is usually cranked up pretty high in winter. So good luck convincing Dutch people they have to start living like paupers, for the sake of the planet.

5 21 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 24, 2021 10:12 pm

It’s the political party in power at the time they have to convince, and that’s what is terrifying. Skippy the Prime minister of Canada where I live would probably take little convincing.

Reply to  Terry
February 25, 2021 9:15 am

Climate Change came up the other day when Skippy met Creepy Joe Biden

David Middleton
Reply to  Neo
February 25, 2021 10:16 am

Dumb and Dumber talking about things they know nothing about.

Big Al
Reply to  Neo
February 25, 2021 1:35 pm

So did childern.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Neo
February 26, 2021 11:45 pm

I think a change of climate would do them a world of good.

John V. Wright
February 24, 2021 10:13 pm

Er….and then there’s the small problem of China. “Excuse me, members of the Chinese Communist Party politburo. We notice that ever since you signed the Paris Agreement you have been building a planned total of 1,760 additional coal-fired power stations so that your CO2 emissions – already the highest on the planet – will be much, much higher by the year 2030 which happens to be the year you have agreed to hold your level of emissions.
“Indeed, it transpires that by the year 2030 just the additional number of these coal-fired power stations will outnumber ALL of the coal-fired power stations in the EU, never mind the vast number of such power plants already in your installed base.
“This is clearly ecocide. Now come along my lads, slip into these handcuffs and we’ll continue the conversation down at police headquarters”…

Bryan A
Reply to  John V. Wright
February 24, 2021 10:24 pm

And for penance…
Say 10 Hail Michael’s, 15 Re-Gretas and the Stations of the Hockey Stick

Reply to  Bryan A
February 25, 2021 4:38 am

Sorry, but as any Catholic can tell you, you ony get a penance once you have confessed your sins AND have the sincere intention not to commit those sins again.

Reply to  Alba
February 25, 2021 3:15 pm

Admission without Contrition means nothing.

Lance Flake
Reply to  Bryan A
February 25, 2021 7:55 am

penance: “voluntary self-punishment inflicted as an outward expression of repentance for having done wrong

Sounds like Bryan got that right

Reply to  Lance Flake
February 25, 2021 11:04 am

Repentance includes a commitment to sin no more.

Reply to  John V. Wright
February 25, 2021 1:30 am

The Chinese know the truth: more CO2 is good for the planet.

Reply to  Herrnwingert
February 25, 2021 6:29 am

No. They know the truth that electricity makes a better life. They no more care about CO2 as plant food than most people. It’s a nice after-the-fact rationalization to counter the after-the-fact nonsense spewed by the warmists, but no one woke up one morning and realized that more plant food would make a batter planet, therefore let’s burn more coal.

Reply to  John V. Wright
February 25, 2021 9:17 am

Apparently, Mexico has noticed, and has decided to join in by building it’s own coal fired plants.

Reply to  John V. Wright
February 25, 2021 11:02 am

Because of their one-child policy, there’s a pretty good chance that China’s population will start falling at or before 2030.

Tom Gelsthorpe
February 24, 2021 10:33 pm

How will punishment of “ecocide” be enforced? Carpet bombing of industrial countries to return them to medieval peasantry? Bombing by whom? Other industrial countries? Then what? The bombers renounce victory and dismantle themselves?

Or shall Third World peasants invade with spears and pitchforks, destroy the advanced countries, then say, “Live like us from now on. We know best!”

Reply to  Tom Gelsthorpe
February 25, 2021 12:08 am

Carpet bombing of industrial countries to return them to medieval peasantry?

They’d have to wind up the elastic band really tightly to get those bombers off the ground

Reply to  Tom Gelsthorpe
February 25, 2021 4:39 am

From what I read in the article in The Guardian, it is companies they are after, not countries.

Reply to  Alba
February 25, 2021 5:11 am

Companies produce what countries (people) need or desire. If this Dutch attorney doesn’t like it, then she should go sit naked under a tree until she dies of hypothermia, since she doesn’t support the production of food, feed, fiber, shelter, etc.

She does cite an odd set of “sins.” Reckless drilling is only done by 3rd world countries, if at all. Reckless mining is done to provide materials for “eco friendly” electric cars, wind turbines and solar panels. Deforestation and palm oil are done to produce “green” biofuels. So she appears to be indicting her own environmentalist movement. She might have added onshore wind farms that cause ecological and cultural devastation.

Reply to  Pflashgordon
February 25, 2021 9:30 am

She must be hanging out with Michael Moore

Reply to  Tom Gelsthorpe
February 25, 2021 9:28 am

How will punishment of “ecocide” be enforced?
By writing a strongly worded letter (see Hans Blix)

Last edited 1 month ago by Neo
Reply to  Neo
February 25, 2021 9:44 am

and tell them how angry we are?
(C’mon Jojo, you’re breakin’ our bawrs)

February 24, 2021 10:37 pm


WTH is that. ????

And whatever it is , the OPPOSITE is happening.

The Biosphere is EXPANDING !!

Last edited 1 month ago by fred250
Peter W
Reply to  fred250
February 25, 2021 7:53 am

But – but – if this keeps up, pretty soon all that greenery will crowd us out of the green areas of earth, forcing us to spend years wandering in the deserts!

Reply to  fred250
February 25, 2021 8:14 am

Oh noes! The deserts are disappearing!

I can see the headlines now “In 50 years the children will not know what deserts look like!”

Phillip Bratby
February 24, 2021 10:44 pm

It is a given that 97% of what is written in the Grauniad is the opposite of what makes sense.

February 24, 2021 10:44 pm

This person has zero scientific education, and has made her career from mindless virtue seeking jibber-jabber.

Joel O’Bryan
February 24, 2021 10:46 pm

Jojo is clearly either an idiot or a recruited agent working for Russia. I’m thinking the latter.

Gary Ashe
Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
February 25, 2021 9:18 am

Russia,,………..Try China…………

February 24, 2021 10:48 pm

From pole to equator, 10,000 Km, temperature varies from -40 to +40…that’s Jojo’s 1.5 degrees every 200km. So our “devastating consequences” will be that our climate will be whatever it is at the city 200km. further South (or N. in the S. hemisphere). Probably won’t bother even throwing out a sweater to adapt to the climate change….

Reply to  DMacKenzie
February 24, 2021 11:04 pm

Actually, under the fake AGW nonsense, the further you are from the equator the more you will warm.

So Siberia in winter will go from say -60C to -56C

How HORRIFIC is that !!!

Bill Toland
Reply to  DMacKenzie
February 25, 2021 1:49 am

It is even more stupid than you are stating. Jojo Metha is talking about 1.5 degrees of warming from pre-industrial times. What she is actually saying is that a temperature rise of more than half a degreee from current levels will be devastating. I have tried to reason with climate alarmists like her but it is utterly hopeless. As the saying goes, you can’t fix stupid.

Gary Ashe
Reply to  Bill Toland
February 25, 2021 9:21 am

Did ou try verbal violence with lots of expletives that doesn’t work either but leaves you feeling a lot more satisfied.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Bill Toland
February 25, 2021 2:04 pm

Supposedly, the year 2016, was right at the 1C mark above the average for the period from1850 to the present.

We are currently at about 0.6C below the level of the 2016 highpoint, so temperatures would have to increase from here about 1.1C to equal 1.5C above the average for the period 1850 to the present. In other words, the temperatures would have to exceed the 2016 highpoint by 0.5C to equal a temperature of 1.5C above the average.

Reply to  DMacKenzie
February 25, 2021 4:42 am

If I could afford to move 50km, the extreme summer days would be 10C cooler and cold winter nights would be 8C warmer. From near Penrith to near Sydney or anywhere near the coast (north or south). Or move up the mountains for cooler climate.
I can set the aircon temp 2C warmer in Summer because I get used to it. People living in warmer climate feel an Australian day of 24C is a winters day vs a Scotsman who feels the same temp as a heatwave. YMMV, we adapt.

Reply to  tygrus
February 25, 2021 11:08 am

When I lived in Florida, one could always tell who the snowbirds were. They were the ones walking around in short sleeve shirts and short pants, while the locals were bundled up in their winter coats.

David A
Reply to  DMacKenzie
February 25, 2021 4:48 pm

Well you forgot the other major disaster. Every seaside city in the world will have to build a curb.

Climate believer
February 24, 2021 10:55 pm

Thousands of laws protecting the environment already exist.

Ecocide is a dumb lefty buzzword.

Jeroen B.
Reply to  Climate believer
February 24, 2021 11:02 pm

Ecocide is very real.
And mostly advanced and perpetrated by those pushing for stricter environmental laws and solutions.

Ron Long
Reply to  Climate believer
February 25, 2021 2:12 am

Funny how those “laws protecting the environment” don’t apply to New Green Weenie energy. Windmills and solar reflector arrays mangle and cook or flying friends without any demand for corrective action. I remember working for Pegasus Gold, when a dead bird was discovered at our Florida Canyon gold mine, the Nevada Department of Wildlife agent said to put it in a paper bag and into the refrigerator and they would analyze it. Then 3 NDOW agents showed up to collect the bird, took it away, and concluded that the cause of death was unknown. Contrast that to clean-crews throwing dead birds into the back of pickup and driving off.

Jean Parisot
Reply to  Climate believer
February 25, 2021 6:46 am

Ecocide: the slaughter of protected bird and bat species by wind farms.

February 24, 2021 10:57 pm

We seem to be getting closer to that magic 97% consensus on the proposition to “Nuke China Now!”

Nicholas McGinley
February 24, 2021 10:59 pm

It is a source of continual amazement to me that the warmistas manage to get away for even a second with their pronouncements of imminent doom, since none of the claimed harms they have been warning of for over 30 years has ever materialized in any way shape or form, even slightly.
In fact, in every case, their predictions of bad things on the horizon have proven to be the exact opposite of what has actually transpired.
Storms are not worse, they are not as bad, and harm less people, and in no cases has any event been demonstrably worse than many other such events in recent history, going back only about 130 years.
Food production is not declining, it is increasing rapidly and steadily.
The world is not becoming a barren desert, it is greening lushly.
Polar bears are not dying out, they are rapidly increasing in number.
Sea ice is not in a one way spiral, it is pretty much unchanged and not all that far away from amounts and extents that have been commonly seen for over 100 years.
Heat waves are not worse than ever.
The sea is not rising faster and faster…it has barely budged.
The low lying islands of the world are not disappearing under the waves, they are growing in size.
And CO2 is not a dangerous poison that is way too high, it is the essential building block of all life on earth, and is in precariously short supply, at a level which is very close to the lowest values ever to exist in billions of years of Earth history.
It is not too hot, it is way too cold. The planet is in an actual ice age for crying out loud!
There is no place on the planet where hot weather is able to kill a healthy person or any other life forms that are adapted to the region they inhabit. But huge areas are far more than cold enough to rapidly kill even the hardiest of life forms, unless they are specially adapted and/or equipped.

There are more people than ever and yet we are as a group healthier and longer lived than ever, and poverty and hunger are rapidly becoming things of the past.
In a single lifetime, drought caused crop failures and the subsequent famines that used to be regularly occurring events have ceased to occur.
There is more food for everyone. More calories per person, more total tonnage of food being produced, and on less land, than ever before in history, and not by a little, by a lot.
Populations are not exploding. In fact, when people are well fed and prosperous, they tend to have less children. The better education people get, the less children they have.
And yet warmistas want to keep the people poor and hungry and stupid, which is exactly what the policies they advocate for are designed to achieve.

In fact, every single thing they say is as near to the opposite of the truth as can be imagined.

So how is it they can stand up and yammer on about some nonexistent climate crisis?
How on Earth can they say that life in Earth will be extinguished by a 1.5° temperature rise above preindustrial levels?
The number itself is made up out of thin air, and is actually a modified version of the number they screamed about for several decades, 2°, which they adopted because it began to appear that we may never see 2° above preindustrial GAST.
But every student of Earth history and even Human history knows that it has been far warmer than 2° above current temps many times, even in the recent past, and it was not a problem, it was a boon for human beings and for life and for human endeavors.

So how on Earth is it they can say these things, when it is all a pack of obvious lies.
Bad lies, told by bad liars. Transparently false and utter nonsense, ever word of it.

And perhaps the most inane part of it all is that not once has a single one of these people ever enunciated exactly how such a change will harm anyone or anything!
Even without considering that most of the 1.5° rise from preindustrial temperatures has long since occurred!
We regularly have excursions all over the world in which the temperature rises many tens of degrees above local averages, and nothing happens.
Nothing dies.
You go outside, and except for feeling somewhat uncomfortable, if the hot weather happens to be during Summer in a place where it is normally hot in Summer, nothing is amiss. The birds are singing in the trees, the insects buzzing about, the grass is green, the trees are bursting with greenery and flowers and fruits, wildlife goes about the daily activities that they have engaged in for all of history. Clouds are white, rain is wet, snow is cold, the Sun is bright and…um…sunny…
Nothing bad(outside of the normal range of weather variability) or unusual or unprecedented is occurring…anywhere! Even when the worst happens, people go outside when it is over and put things back the way they were and life goes right on, same as it ever was.

And as always, the people that are screaming the loudest are, on closer examination, among the people who are actually the worst perpetrators of the things they are screaming about.

No one has any climate crisis in their town, or their state, or their country.
No records indicate anything dire or show a long term inexorable rise in temperature or heat.
No where.
And yet people somehow do not scoff and shout these liars down as soon as they open their mouths.
It is all a pack of ridiculous lies, plainly spoken, about something no one can see and no one can point to, but somehow large numbers of people believe it, at least somewhat.
Somehow, people believe our beautiful planet is on the verge of becoming a lifeless rock, even though no one has ever seen anything like that happening anywhere, ever.
And no one has ever explained how it will come to pass.
They went straight from dire predictions to being wrong and then proclaiming the debate to be over and the matter settled and therefore any nitwit jackassery they can think to utter is a fact.
If I was not living through it, I could never have believed it.
In the 21st century, a significant portion of the human race has allowed doomsday panic mongering psychopaths to convince them that the end is nigh.
And the ones who have done that to themselves, think of themselves as intelligent and educated, sophisticated even.
Even as they bought a story that used to be the province of crazy eyed old men with sandwich boards standing on city street corners.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Doomsday then and now..PNG
Last edited 1 month ago by Nicholas McGinley
Steve Case
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 25, 2021 1:40 am

The sea is not rising faster and faster…it has barely budged.

Over the last 100 years the tide gauges around the world do show acceleration. It averages out to about 0.01 mm/yr² and about 6.5 inches (0.16m) of sea level rise by 2100. Not the 0.097 mm/yr² and over 0.65m claimed by the heavily adjusted satellite data.

And CO2 is not a dangerous poison that is way too high, it is the essential building block of all life on earth, and is in precariously short supply,

“…and in short supply.” Now where did I hear that phrase? Hmmmmm (-:

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Steve Case
February 25, 2021 4:34 am

Now where did I hear that phrase?”
Like the tree said to the lumberjack…I’m stumped!

As for that first point, my understanding is somewhat different.
The acceleration seems to originate from spicing satellite sea level data onto tide gage data sets.
I have examined closely pretty much every individual tide gage chart on the website that disseminates them, and have not seen any that show an acceleration.

What I have found is that the tide gage records are highly adjusted. IOW…modelled.
They are not a simple record of the height of the ocean, at all.
It is right there on every chart in plain language.

Also, when one looks at what was published and what was in every text on the subject prior to the era of global warming alarmism, one finds a far different time series than what is presented these days.
There are decades with no sea level rise at all, and in fact falling sea levels, and then there are periods of rapid increases.
The pattern appears to be cyclical.

Sea level CSIRO.jpg
Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 25, 2021 4:37 am

Here is a sample tide gage record showing the language I am referring to:

Sea level Johnston Atoll.JPG
Steve Case
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 25, 2021 12:01 pm

I’ve down loaded all the tide gauges at the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level
in 2009 and again in 2019 and in ten years nothing was changed except for the addition of ten years worth of data. NOAA gets their data from the PSMSL, but I don’t know if they adjust correct modify or fool with it in any way at all. The acceleration of around 0.01 mm/yr² was derived from the PSMSL, not NOAA. Thanks for your reply.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Steve Case
February 27, 2021 3:30 am

When I say I have found they are highly adjusted/modeled, I am referring to two things.
One of them is the part at the bottom of the chart that says “The plot shows the monthly mean sea level without the regular seasonal fluctuations due to coastal ocean temperatures, salinities, winds, atmospheric pressures, and ocean currents.”

What that means to me is that they have “corrected” the instrument reading, supposedly to remove the effects of this large number of variables on the water level that was actually recorded.
And also they are anomaly charts…they are all relative to some level, “…the most recent Mean Sea Level datum established by CO-OPS”
Hard to say if all parts of the chart are using the same mean sea datum, or if each month is relative to the MSL for that month. IOW, is the comparator being used a moving target?
No way to say from what is told to us here.
Except that without saying the words adjustment or anomaly, these charts are listing an adjusted anomaly.

(BTW, I like to use this page as a go to reference, as it has every chart that can be found and viewed with a single click:
Sea Level Trends – NOAA Tides & Currents )

When something is corrected to removed the effect of a single variable, that necessarily is at best someone’s guess about how much the raw data needs to be altered. And they have done that for at least five variables that have an effect on what the actual water level is at the tide gage that month.
That is five alterations based on a guess about how much each of those factors has affected the level of the ocean at that spot in that month.
So not only can these guesses be wrong, but it allows anyone with an agenda who is making these alterations to fudge the data before it is even presented on these graphs. We know they have an agenda, we know they are more than willing to simply make stuff up if is suits their agenda, and we know that they are very bad at guessing about anything, even if they have the best of intentions and are for once being 100% honest and careful.

So that is one thing. And it is a big one, largely overlooked.
In fact completely overlooked so far in every conversation and discussion page on the subject that I have seen, both here and on other sites.

And the second one is the disparity between the long term graphs as they were known to have been presented back in 1982, and in all years prior, and what is being presented in recent years as the same data, the information gathered and recorded on the tide gages around the country and around the world.
They have blatantly and without discussion completely altered what was originally recorded and reported! Clearly.

So we have no idea what the tide gages actually show in any year in any location.

But, we do have other sources of information. For one thing, we have a large number of photographs and films taken as far back as the early 1900’s and some even earlier than that.
If we limit ourselves to an examination of merely the ones which show in detail clearly recognizable features suck as rock formations in well known places, or structures that are right on the water in various places around the world, and compare those images to images taken more recently, and right up to the present, of those same places and rock formations and structures, in which the level of the sea and also of high water marks are plainly visible, we have a worldwide data base of what the ocean is actually doing, that is impervious to alterations by those who may be wrong or those who seek to deceive us.

We know that when we see a photograph or a film of an event which is in the news, we give it far more credence than what anyone says, even people who were right there at the time.
Because seeing is believing.
We want to know if the sea level is changing in some way which will subsume land and structures that are important to us.
And unless it will do so at some rate which is important with respect to the amount of time structures will last, or people naturally relocate over time, then it does not matter if some tiny changes are occurring.
But what if it is not changing at all, by any amount which is perceptible, even over an entire century or more.
What if we are unable to find even one single image which shows that the ocean has risen and the land is shrinking, or beaches have disappeared, or structures that were high and dry are now in the water?
What if instead we see that, in every single case for which we can find photographic evidence of what the ocean level was a long time ago, either there is no change whatsoever, or else the land area next to the ocean have actually gotten larger?

And in fact, this is exactly what we do find: Not a single case where anyone can show even a small amount of ocean rise that is in any way perceptible even on the closest of examinations!
And many cases where photographic evidence shows the exact opposite…the ocean has clearly given way to land!
My own Twitter page has a large collection of such images, as do the pages of many others.
I have concentrated on publicly available photographs from the air and from the tops of buildings of various locations in Florida, such as Miami Beach, or St. Pete beach.
Other well known photographs show the exact same thing in places from La Jolla to a famous harbor in Australia.

And even the tide gages do not show any rise in certain key areas, areas know to be particularly stable geologically and geographically, such as the Pacific Atolls.
The one above, from Johnson Atoll, has a small rise painted on, but a careful look shows that this is simply due to the points in time used as the two endpoints. A few excursions near 0.15 in the 1950-1965 range are matched but not exceeded in even a single month. There are some low excursions in the earlier years that have not been matched recently, but that is not much to argue that the sea is rising. There are more recent months below the center line than there were in the first half of the time series.
And we know that the surface area of these islands is in fact getting larger, even though those are the exact places that the alarmists have used to great effect to scare the public.
Ditto Miami.

Even the average sea level that is reported cannot be confirmed by looking at a chart showing the amount of rise of all the 233 NOAA tide gages.
Here is a link to a period of time when I was posting some of my collection of photos on Twitter, and also an attached picture of a graph made by Tony Heller of this last point I mentioned:

Scroll up and down my page from there to see lots more.

Heller sea level composite.png
Last edited 1 month ago by Nicholas McGinley
Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 27, 2021 4:02 am

Here is one of my favorites. It is a map showing the historic location of the Atlantic shoreline in Miami Beach.
Note that the farther back in time one looks, the further inland the shoreline was.
The orange line is the shoreline in the 1800s, and it is several blocks inland. A quarter mile or so, maybe a little more on the south end.
The green lines are the early 1900s, and they are also inland of where a lot of streets and buildings are today.
Miami Beach has grown a lot, and is wider today (and in the most recent years) than ever in recorded history.
The long and the short of it is, in every single case where alarmist propaganda is examined closely and some sleuthing done, what they are saying is found to be a pack of pure lies.

Prior to adjustments, all data sets agreed with historical observations.
There were no jarring incongruities or absurdities.
Now that is all there is.

Steve Case
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 25, 2021 11:55 am

“Like the tree said to the lumberjack…I’m stumped!’

I think you saw it here but that’s OK. Use the other two as well and as you please (-:

Steve Case
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 25, 2021 1:45 am

Great rant every point could be expanded into a book chapter. I wuz gonna say that in my earlier reply and hit the [post comment] button too soon. Sorry ’bout that.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Steve Case
February 25, 2021 4:21 am

Great rant…”

David A
Reply to  Steve Case
February 25, 2021 5:03 pm

Steve, certainly .01 mm is within the error range to call acceleration non existent.

People argued for 20 years about the real range of the Palmdale Bulge, and that was some 12 plus inches, and on land.

Last edited 1 month ago by David A
David A
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 25, 2021 4:55 pm

Great rant, and truth throughout. For years I refrained from calling CAGW the fraud that it transparently is. Tony Heller had it right from the get-go.

February 24, 2021 11:02 pm

How does she balance her laws against ecocide with the ever increasing acreage for solar and wind power. Maybe we should delay these laws until after the US and Europe are covered with useless solar and wind farms.

Flight Level
February 24, 2021 11:03 pm

In 2020, Mr. Putin made the following rather chilling statement to the press:
-To all those counting on the decay of Russia, our only worry is not to catch a cold at your burials.

The statement was all over German TV then suddenly vanished from all media the next day.

Jean Parisot
Reply to  Flight Level
February 25, 2021 6:49 am

They are both so far behind the demographic curve, their only concern should be a shortage of diapers.

February 24, 2021 11:21 pm

It’s a good thing that neither the Grauniad nor even the EU has access to large scale military options or there could be widespread bloodshed in the furtherance of the Global Warming Fraud and Paris ‘Agreement’..

February 24, 2021 11:46 pm

How funny,

“wilful disregard for the consequences of actions such as deforestation, reckless drilling and mining.” these will be criminal offences?

How are we going to build renewables? It takes all of these just to make silicon wafers!

Coeur de Lion
February 25, 2021 12:22 am

The dear little thing does not know about the Medieval Warm Period, the silly little uneducated hack. (No, sorry, ‘hack’ is a proud description of a journalist ). I mean silly scribbler. And what about their editor? (Do note the woke use of ‘their’ in that sentence ). Anyway the MWP was not noted for ecocide, rather the reverse.

Bengt Abelsson
February 25, 2021 12:24 am

The act of pumping oil from the well does not release any significant amount of corbon dioxide into the air.
Burning the same oil does.
So, who is the culprit, and where is the damage?

Vincent Causey
February 25, 2021 12:25 am

Lovely. I can see how that would backfire. She includes unsustainable practices like palm oil (biofuel) and you would have to include mining operations that have destructive footprints and/or toxic runoffs. That would mean all the mining for materials that make up “renewables”. You could expect to see lawsuits by “the other side” brought against the “renewable” industry. Is she that stupid?

February 25, 2021 12:52 am

The Netherlands utterly depends on Russian gas for heating in winter.’

No it doesn’t: Dutch gas production from the field which provides domestic heating gas is expected to continue into the 2030s… and there is a transition plan away from gas heating to be completed by 2050, with an intermediate target by 2030.

The-great-Dutch-gas-transition-54.pdf (

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2021 2:44 am

Long enough that the people yammering about all of this and passing laws to impose on future leaders and taxpayers, will be long gone.
What happened to the end of the world if we do not immediately stop burning all fossil fuels?
I for one recall when the date we all stop using FF or die was 20 years in the future and ten years ago last week.

David A
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
February 25, 2021 5:08 pm

Greta will be around, someday she may be Greta the grandma.

Sorry to all about that…

Reply to  Eric Worrall
February 25, 2021 10:07 am

Hey Eric, on the topic of hydrogen, were you around in the early 70s when then Qld premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen was promoting a hydrogen powered car?
(a Falcon as I recall)

I think it worked OK, but petrol was affordable, efficient and dependable.
(I know, I know – what’s changed?)

Reply to  griff
February 25, 2021 4:04 am

We will see, the one is a fact, reduced production on the one hand, ideas for 2050 not fullfilled now on the other hand, and the need of gas will not change, maybe even increase.

John Garrett
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2021 4:40 am

Production from the giant Groningen field is in decline.

That is fact.

David Yaussy
Reply to  griff
February 25, 2021 6:01 am

Griff, I read the document. Thank you for sharing it. It seems, though, to contradict your premise that the Dutch are implementing a successful transition away from natural gas. On the contrary, they are having trouble meeting even the initial goals of the plan and there is real question whether they can do so without significant dislocations to their economy.

Reply to  David Yaussy
February 25, 2021 11:11 am

According to griff, the fact that they have a plan is all that matters.
Are they following the plan? Irrelevant.

Reply to  David Yaussy
February 26, 2021 6:11 am

Griff is famous for citing articles which actually refute the point he’s trying to make.

Reply to  griff
February 27, 2021 12:27 am

Now that there was funny … thanks for the laugh Griff.

Derek Wood
February 25, 2021 1:34 am

They realise that the old, tired “Global Warming” meme has been flogged to death. So now they are hitching the bandwagon onto a more general, one-size-fits-all argument around “Ecocide” and “Environmental Negligence”. I expect an imminent revival in the fortunes of vague, Green narratives everywhere. It was only a matter of time.

Jaap Titulaer
February 25, 2021 2:01 am

unexpectedly rapid depletion of North Sea gas field

Not entirely correct. Sure some wells ran dry, economically speaking. But, first, several North Sea fields haven’t even been taken into production and second most NL gas came from Groningen, i.e. is land-based. And there is still enough in the ground for many decades.

Issue is simply that it was decided to curb pumping in Groningen and even entirely stop retrieving it due to vibrations and semi-earth quake risk. There are a few thousand homes in the area which are already damaged. But instead of buying them out or fixing the damage caused, the government & companies tried to ignore the issue. When the problem could easily have been solved, as the local gas bubble is so huge that you could have bought all houses in the province and still make billions.

After first ignoring the issue and only paying cents on the euro in damages caused, they suddenly made a 180 degree turn and decided to ‘simply’ stop retrieving gas all together.
When they could’ve simply paid of those affected, buy their home and continue with the retrieval.

A related issue is that its more efficient to take new wells into production, several which are closer to the Waddenzee, which is an environmental protected area (for birds etc). We’re talking NG here, not oil, so the biggest issue is the sinking of the surface (which can prevented, if only partially & with significant quake risk). Instead of exposing the birds to the occasional vibration in the earth, they are now planting hundreds if not thousands of windmills in this area and elsewhere, ensuring that those flocks of birds will soon cease to exist or at least cease to migrate via NL, as the windmills work as a perfect meat grinder for them.

The stupid, it burns.

John Garrett
Reply to  Jaap Titulaer
February 25, 2021 4:17 am

Thank you for clarifying the Groningen situation. Having written that, I believe there is little doubt that the field is in decline.

There is no excuse for Royal Dutch Shell’s craven pandering to and appeasement of those whose underlying objective is the destruction of Royal Dutch Shell.

Peta of Newark
February 25, 2021 2:09 am

She’s a lawyer.
She’s trying to drum up new business for all her friends, colleagues, co-workers etc in The Lawyering Business
The Lawyering Business is huge already, certainly already in the Western World – she wants to take it Global

Then, she complains about ‘large global business’ ruining the planet.

How perfectly lacking in self-awareness is it possible to be?
How 2-faced and hypocritical is it possible to be?

While promoting a business that is the very definition of Parasitic – it creates nothing of value, quite the opposite in fact. She is promoting the widespread use of copious resource in the businesses of

  • Buck-Passing & Time Wasting
  • Stress Creation
  • Body, Soul & Business Destruction
  • Faerie-Counting & Tailoring to the Emperor
  • Money Laundering.

All riding on the back of Good Intentions and the obviously unprovable yet mendacious assertion that ‘She cares more than you do’ aka Virtue Signals
So childish, so pointless and oh so sad.

By now, we should all recognise chronic chemically-induced depression and magical thinking? One occasions the other.
See reflections also of the UK’s very own unelected and perfectly unaccountable, Prime Mistress Carrie?
15 years ago we had to endure Cherie Blair = another hi-power lawyer that, via careful tweaking of her husband, tripled the size of the UK Statute Book as an epic Early & Everlasting Christmas Present to her ‘Chosen Vocation’ and Lawyer Friends.
give me matchsticks under my fingernails please

We still have to endure Anth0ny – call me ‘Tony’ Blair = more fake than a really fake thing.##
At least Mr Trump’s ‘orange-man’ sun-tan was real.

## Not quite in the same league as a ‘Kerry’ though. just wow at that

Last edited 1 month ago by Peta of Newark
Gary Ashe
Reply to  Peta of Newark
February 25, 2021 9:52 am

We still have to endure Anth0ny – call me ‘Tony’ Blair = more fake than a really fake thing.##

Jordans tits. aka Katie Price.

Ed Zuiderwijk
February 25, 2021 2:55 am

Jojo and Julia are just reincarnations of 17th century Witchfinders General.

February 25, 2021 3:04 am

I have often wondered if that “newspaper” runs their presses and facilities from totally “Green” and “renewable” energy sources and if they stipulate that every vehicle that delivers their paper be electric or at least a hybrid? And that all trucks delivering their paper and ink, and various other supplies are also electric or hybrid? And are all their company vehicles electric or at least hybrids? And do they demand that every member of the board of directors and every employee and contractor use only EVs or hybrids?

I would bet that the answer to every single one of those questions is a big fat NO!

February 25, 2021 3:35 am

It feels to me that the Guardian writes this rubbish as a call to arms. If they said “Paris is a success”, it demands no action. “Paris is failing” will be a call to arms for environmentalists to push even harder.

Right-Handed Shark
February 25, 2021 3:40 am

Poor Jojo is seriously unhinged, therefore in perfect synch with the grauniad and moonbat.

February 25, 2021 3:58 am

a lawyers paydirt
define ecocide any way they choose

John Garrett
February 25, 2021 4:10 am

The unfortunate shareholders of Royal Dutch Shell, Total and BP are suffering from the craven capitulation of their managements and directors.

The watermelons have now turned their sights upon ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips et al.

Larry Fink of Black Rock and Mike Bloomberg (among others) are rendering aid and assistance to the enemy within. Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan Chase is wavering. Goldman Sachs will (as ever) be bought by whoever offers the largest bribe.

Last edited 1 month ago by John Garrett
Bruce Cobb
February 25, 2021 4:12 am

“The Paris agreement is failing.”
Yes. Of course it is. It is a total sham, based on bogus science and lies. It only pretends to do something about a non-existant “problem”. It is mostly about punishing the western world, especially the US, for being rich.
So, invent a new faux crisis – “ecocide”.
Yeah, that’s the ticket.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
February 27, 2021 4:05 am

That’s what Trump said, but everybody notable in academia, journalism, and entertainment disagreed. Then Biden rejoined it, and immediately destroyed it. Obviously it must be so.

Truth is Paris is, pardon my French, biggus crappus, but sadly Grauniad is even more enormous caca.

It takes three decades to take a turn in major trends. 1990 to 2020 is three decades, so I’m waiting for young ppl to appear and criticize what Thunbergism is.

Jean Parisot
February 25, 2021 6:42 am

limit temperature rise below 1.5C, the Earth, and all life on it, including all human beings, will suffer devastating consequences.”

I only see positive consequences.

Steve Z
February 25, 2021 8:31 am

The writers of this article on “ecocide” talk about “drilling recklessly in the Arctic and the Niger delta”. What is “reckless” about drilling in the Arctic, in brutally cold climates where there is very little wildlife, and the wildlife that is there tend to congregate around oil pipelines for warmth?

The “Niger delta” in southeastern Nigeria is where “Bonny Light” crude is obtained, which contains about 5 times less sulfur than the best Middle Eastern crudes, and contains a large concentration of high-quality naphtha that is easily refined into gasoline. Over about the past 10 years, the Nigerian government has encouraged the building of new refineries, owned and managed by Nigerians, so that the Nigerian people can benefit directly from the refined products (gasoline, jet fuel, kerosene, Diesel) instead of exporting the crude, leading to an economic boom in southern Nigeria. Are these “ecocide” cops going to force Nigerians back into poverty? Don’t “Black Lives Matter” in Nigeria?

If some of the high-sulfur Middle Eastern crudes are replaced by low-sulfur Bonny Light, this results in less emissions of sulfur dioxide for the same amount of energy produced. A light, sweet crude also requires less energy input to refine into useful fuels than heavy, sour Middle East crudes.

February 25, 2021 8:39 am

How can they say that when it was such a successful stunt of Obama to go along with his weekly queue of federal agency press conferences jabbering on about climate change instead of doing their assigned work. Besides, news publishers of all sizes got paid to run agenda news stories in the lead up to the grand ceremonies of the signing and Obama got the Nobel Prize in advance for “being there”. The Guardian needs to learn PR basics, maybe from the new woke climate communications specialists.

Rick C
February 25, 2021 9:28 am

Presumably the legal principle of Corpus delicti would apply to “ecocide” prosecutions. First they’d have find a deceased eco. Then they’d have to prove cause of death and finally demonstrate that the specific actions of the defendant caused the death. There might also be a need to classify the degree of the crime – 1st, 2nd, 3rd, “ecoslaughter”, etc. Would there be an allowance for self defense?

I could see a possible conviction in the case of wind turbines as bodies of birds and bats would provide plenty of corpus delicti and the perpetrators would be easily identified. But allegations of ecocide related to CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels is problematic. Who would be charged, those who produced the fuels or those who actually burned it? Is a gun or ammunition manufacturer responsible for a shooting or is it the person who pulls the trigger? If The claim is that CO2 emission cause a particular case of ecocide everyone who has ever driven a car or used electricity or heated their home with gas, oil or coal could be charged.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.

February 25, 2021 10:31 am

Reckless echocide, a new crime and word to force support for their agenda and name for a lawless law. They are running out of goal posts for our demise and now inventing words to charge industries producing energy that actually extend and save lives. Who is the criminal here.

February 25, 2021 11:07 am

The Netherlands finally succumbed to political pressure and mandated universal wearing of facial diapers beginning December 1. The coronavirus-attributed death rate, which had been falling since November 9, began a rise from 2.78/day on December 7 to 6.27/day on January 10. Whether masks affected the rate in any way cannot be proven.

I suspect the pressure to criminalize nations for “ecocide” comes from the same people who demand criminalization of individuals for failure to mask themselves. Are these people useful idiots or do they really believe they will personally experience better living through oligarchy?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  verdeviewer
February 25, 2021 2:20 pm

Speaking of masks, the Wuhan virus is very small and can pass through an N-95 mask. If the virus is incased in a water droplet, then the mask can prevent the passage of the larger particle. At least, that is my understanding of the situation.

There has been a drastic reduction in cases where people are infected with the flu and common cold virus over the last year, and my question is: Are the masks people are wearing today effective at blocking out the flu and cold viruses? What else would account for the large reduction in flu and cold cases?

Reply to  Tom Abbott
February 25, 2021 4:45 pm

Leave room for the possibility of overzealous (and improper) misdiagnosis of flu as C19. Unfortunately, there is no possible way to know that now.

S. K.
February 25, 2021 1:30 pm

Forget Paris Accord, the real problem will be the political leverage Putin gains over Europe when they begin purchasing more Russian nat. gas via the Nordstream II pipeline and thus funding Putin’s military. A threat of a reduced energy supply would be powerful and opposing Putin’s military threat will far more difficult.

I don’t know how Putin brainwashed the Europeans into believing Russia’s nat. gas was the solution to their energy and environmental needs but he did.

The previous US administration was justified in their opposition to Nordstream II pipeline and all the NATO members should be putting pressure on Germany to cancel the project.

John Garrett
Reply to  S. K.
February 25, 2021 2:05 pm

Putin didn’t persuade them. Germany committed economic seppuku. The lunatic Greens in Germany shut down the country’s nuclear generating fleet.

Reply to  John Garrett
February 26, 2021 6:05 am

Who funded the lunatic Greens?

Reply to  S. K.
February 27, 2021 7:07 pm

If any US sanction is applied, ever, Europe should threaten US with counter sanctions like the world has never seen.

Tom Abbott
February 25, 2021 1:45 pm

From the article: “Currently, much of humanity feels hopeless,”

Not me. I think the author, Jojo, is projecting her own feeling on others.

As with most leftists, she feels like she speaks for everyone.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
February 26, 2021 6:17 am

“Currently, much of the Guardian workforce feels hopeless, having seen the latest circulation figures.”

Fixed it for you.

Tom Abbott
February 25, 2021 1:46 pm

Who gets to decide what is ecocide and what is not ecocide?

Gordon A. Dressler
February 25, 2021 1:55 pm

Noting the above article’s title: “The Guardian: “The Paris Agreement is Failing”
That is just excellent news . . . well deserved!

However, I learned long ago to never trust anything stated in The Guardian.

Last edited 1 month ago by Gordon A. Dressler
S. K.
February 25, 2021 2:12 pm

It does not look like Russia or India are interested in enforcing the ecocide mandate (or what ever it is) via the UN Security Council. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Nick in Vancouver
February 25, 2021 3:00 pm

Who writes this garbage?, more oddly, who pays for it?
Currently, much of humanity feels hopeless”
My English teacher would have failed my essay for such wildly exaggerated, unsubstantiated hyperbole.

Last edited 1 month ago by Nick in Vancouver
February 25, 2021 9:53 pm

a search will show there have been discussions of cooling or warming back to the 1890’s. Old Popular Science, Popular Mechanics etc…, had articles both ways since 1920’s. The world runnuing out of oil was discussed even in the 1950’s. Look, climate has always been in flux. During Roman Empire the earth was warmer than now

February 26, 2021 2:57 am

Michael Crichton:

You think man can destroy the planet? What intoxicating vanity. Let me tell you about our planet. Earth is four-and-a-half-billion-years-old. There’s been life on it for nearly that long, 3.8 billion years. Bacteria first; later the first multicellular life, then the first complex creatures in the sea, on the land. Then finally the great sweeping ages of animals, the amphibians, the dinosaurs, at last the mammals, each one enduring millions on millions of years, great dynasties of creatures rising, flourishing, dying away — all this against a background of continuous and violent upheaval. Mountain ranges thrust up, eroded away, cometary impacts, volcano eruptions, oceans rising and falling, whole continents moving, an endless, constant, violent change, colliding, buckling to make mountains over millions of years. Earth has survived everything in its time.

It will certainly survive us. If all the nuclear weapons in the world went off at once and all the plants, all the animals died and the earth was sizzling hot for a hundred thousand years, life would survive, somewhere: under the soil, frozen in arctic ice. Sooner or later, when the planet was no longer inhospitable, life would spread again. The evolutionary process would begin again. Might take a few billion years for life to regain its present variety. Of course, it would be very different from what it is now, but the earth would survive our folly, only we would not. If the ozone layer gets thinner, ultraviolet radiation sears earth, so what? Ultraviolet radiation is good for life. It’s powerful energy. It promotes mutation, change. Many forms of life will thrive with more UV radiation. Many others will die out. You think this is the first time that’s happened? Think about oxygen. Necessary for life now, but oxygen is actually a metabolic poison, a corrosive glass, like fluorine.

When oxygen was first produced as a waste product by certain plant cells some three billion years ago, it created a crisis for all other life on earth. Those plants were polluting the environment, exhaling a lethal gas. Earth eventually had an atmosphere incompatible with life. Nevertheless, life on earth took care of itself. In the thinking of the human being a hundred years is a long time. Hundred years ago we didn’t have cars, airplanes, computers or vaccines. It was a whole different world, but to the earth, a hundred years is nothing. A million years is nothing. This planet lives and breathes on a much vaster scale. We can’t imagine its slow and powerful rhythms, and we haven’t got the humility to try. We’ve been residents here for the blink of an eye. If we’re gone tomorrow, the earth will not miss us.

February 26, 2021 4:20 pm

Has Mankind really progressed much in over half a millennium?

“Archaeologists working in Peru have found what they say is the site of the largest known child sacrifice in the world. About 140 children and more than 200 animals, probably llamas, were killed in the middle of the 1400s. A civilization known as the Chimú sacrificed the children in response to catastrophic weather, the scientists suggest. An unusual layer of thick mud, a sign of an extreme El Niño event, covered the burial pits.”

Seems we have only shifted who the victims will be for changing the climate. I have made the point for decades that a child born today is just as ignorant as one born hundreds of years ago. Every child must be properly educated. When that is not done, expect violence to be the response to things they do not understand.

Gary Pearse
February 26, 2021 11:42 pm

It is spellbinding that such a large percentage of Westerners can be whipped up into such a misanthropic froth. The hatred is palpable. The worst are among the scientifically illiterate practitioners of the misnamed “humanities”.

Their corrupted education gave them their marching orders long before climate was cobbled together as a ploy to ‘necessitate’ a Marxist putsch to end free enterprise and centralize governance of the globe. They really didn’t need a climate emergency to subdue, incarcerate, and even terminate those that don’t buy into their plan.

The scariest part is that resourceful, well-adjusted and analytically-minded people tend to transcend such an evil-purposed education and it is the easily-led, psychologically unfulfilled that can be exploited for such ‘work’.

Gary Pearse
February 26, 2021 11:54 pm

I disagree with the article’s author that Echo-cide is a widespread problem these days. It’s the brainless echoing that should be stamped out.

Hutches Hunches
February 27, 2021 12:47 pm

Lets face it…the only way the Greenies would be able to enforce their policies is to enslave the entire population of the world. There is no middle ground. World governments as the way they are (other than China) will do what is necessary to stay in power and as long as people can express themselves they will never agree to give up all their creature comforts to save the planet. It makes you wonder if the current China friendly globalist movement isn’t a part of a larger plan to “do what’s necessary to save the planet:”

%d bloggers like this: