Caught on video: John Kerry admitted U.S. CO2 emissions cuts are pointless at Joe Biden’s #LeadersClimateSummit.
Watch the video:
h/t to Steve Milloy.
He also said essentially the same thing back in 2015:
From the YouTube video:
“The fact is that even if every single American citizen biked to work, carpooled to school, used only solar panels to power their homes – if we each planted a dozen trees – if we somehow eliminated all of our domestic greenhouse gas emissions – guess what? That still wouldn’t be enough to offset the carbon pollution coming from the rest of the world. If all the industrialized nations went down to zero emissions – remember what I just said – all the industrial nations went down to zero emissions, it wouldn’t be enough – not when more than 65 percent of the world’s carbon pollution comes from the developing world.”
Reference for that statement:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Why do anything at all?
Where is the climate crisis?
I look around everyday I go outside, I don’t see any indication we are in danger of a looming climate emergency, it is all propaganda that we have to deal with, the reality doesn’t help them wise up because many of them lack the critical thinking skills, we see that every time people like Griff post here, a man who seems very worried about something…., I am sure he hates ice breakers….
That is sad when people are scared of something that doesn’t exist as there is no climate crisis around the corner, but they see it all day long….. very sad…..
The alarmist who are True Believers live in a very scary world. An artificial world, but real, and scary to them still. I wouldn’t want to be them.
CO2 is not pollution but is required for life as we know it. 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. Hence eliminating all human caused CO2 emissions will have no effect on global climate.
CO2 does absorb surface IR and delays the time it takes for the energy to make it to space. Doubling CO2 will cause a little more energy in the IR radiation window to be delayed. This would have a warming effect except for other processes.
1) Since CO2 produces such weak photons and some energy does make it back to the surface, it enhances evaporation. This enhances the water cycle which likely utilizes at least half of the additional energy.
2) As everyone knows CO2 enhances plant growth. This also requires energy. The combination of CO2 with the enhanced water cycle produces far more green stuff which is continually absorbed into the surface of the planet through many processes. This is taking the carbon with it. Essentially, it is sequestering the carbon. It’s how fossil fuels were produced.
So, the energy made available by CO2 IR absorption is being utilized in the expansion of the biosphere. It is unavailable to cause any warming.
If CO2 is not warming the planet, what is? Lots of ideas have been put forth and there is evidence to support many of them. I’ve been showing evidence that the warming since the depths of the LIA could have been due to increasing ocean salinity, particularly the Atlantic Ocean near the gulf stream where the warmer waters get carried into the Arctic.
Now I believe that micro-plastic pollution (or any pollution that stays near the surface) has pretty much the same effect as increased salinity. They all reduce evaporation which is a known cooling effect. Micro-plastics are also solids so they could also cause increased solar energy absorption near the surface.
So, ketchup bottles, ketchup packets or any condiment packaging, which are often discarded carelessly, could be a factor in the warming.
How ironic.
Other than being dishonest, he is the most boring speaker in government and that is an accomplishment. From the look on his face he is obviously boring to himself.
He will take on any cause if it gets him something and come up with any excuse for behavior contrary to his position.
I would count China among industrialized nations
How long can the Climate Accord scam go on?
Answer: As long as the gatekeepers/politicians, MSM and social media that control our information want it to. People don’t look out their window and see climate change, like they do the weather. Weather forecasts from the local meteorologist get reconciled every day because we see the weather. Climate change is something we hear about on the news.
We believe whatever they tell us on climate change….after all they also told us that 97% of climate scientists agree with this…………so it must be so.
The Climate Accord, we are told is the only chance to save the planet. How many people have actually read the Climate Accord and know the completely different rules for developed countries compared to undeveloped countries?
CO2 is well mixed in the global atmosphere.
For the climate accord to be authentic and really be intended to save the planet(if CO2 really was pollution), one has to assume that CO2 molecules from a rich country, like the US are…….. killing the planet. While the CO2 emissions from a poor country, like China……….. is greening the planet.
And that money, billions of it that flows from rich countries to poor countries is also saving the planet from climate change.
That’s if you actually read the Climate Accord and still believe it’s saving the planet.
Kerry is an insufferable fool, but even worse he’s a traitor who should be in jail for aiding our enemies (in this case, Iran).
Biden chose him for Energy Czar, because he is an accomplished dissembler and liar.
He was wrong regarding Iran.
He is wrong regarding CO2 reduction of remaking TRANSPORTATION, and in particular about Electric Vehicles.
The CO2 reduction claims he and other RE folks make are vastly excessive.
RE folks would have everyone drive unaffordable EVs, that would not reduce much CO2 compared with efficient gasoline vehicles.
On a lifetime, A-to-Z basis, with travel at 105,600 miles over 10 years, the CO2 emissions, based on the present New England grid CO2/kWh, would be:
NISSAN Leaf S Plus, EV, compact SUV, no AWD, would emit 25.967 Mt, 246 g/mile
TOYOTA Prius L Eco, 62 mpg, compact car, no AWD, would emit 26,490 Mt, 251 g/mile
SUBARU Outback, 30 mpg, medium SUV, with AWD, would emit 43.015 Mt, 407 g/mile
VT Light Duty Vehicle mix, 22.7 mpg, many with AWD or 4WD, would emit 56,315 Mt, 533 g/mile
1) The above shows, the NISSAN Leaf, a SMALL vehicle, would have a CO2 reduction of 56,315 – 25.967 = 30.3 metric ton over TEN years, if compared with an AVERAGE gas vehicle of the VT Light Duty Vehicle mix, which contains small and big vehicles.
2) If the NISSAN Leaf is compared with my 30-mpg Subaru Outback, a vastly more useful vehicle than a NISSAN Leaf, the CO2 reduction would be only 17 metric ton over TEN years.
Energy Action Network, EAN, prepared a report listing the measures required to “meet Paris by 2025”. That goal is mandated by the Global Warming “Solutions” Act, GWSA, and in accordance with the VT Comprehensive Energy Plan.
https://www.eanvt.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/EAN-report-2020-fi…
One EAN measure is adding 90,000 EVs to reduce CO2 by 0.405 million metric ton/y, or 4.5 Mt/EV/y.
EAN, claims, without providing calculations, the CO2 reduction of EVs versus VT LDV mix of gasoline vehicles, would be 4.5 metric ton per EV per year, or 45 metric ton in TEN years.
The 45 metric ton CO2 reduction is a TOTAL FABRICATION, but the Climate Council, which does not know how to perform the calculations, takes the biased EAN numbers as the truth, whereas REALITY is quite different.
Read this URL to be much better informed; see section “EAN report to Meet Paris”
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/poor-economics-of-electric-vehicles-in-new-england
RE folks claiming EVs have no CO2 emissions is utter nonsense.
Anthony pointed out in his presentation of the new site that we have to be on a ‘War Footing’ in light of the election outcome. Arguing the futility of one-sided restraint on CO2 instead of arguing the science these days (to no avail) has been a strategy I’ve been trying to promote here at WUWT for some time (apparently
to no avail!!).
To my surprise, even John Kerry gets it and that underscores my main point that this is the only strategy that can be broadly effective in bringing this whole sham down. It is something easily understood by the very large majority of people (taxpayers and voters). Otherwise, its the “3 percent” of flat earther, evil fossil shills against the “97 percent” of upstanding captains of academia, prestigious Institutes and research excellence.
My strategy levels the playing field for all. Presented with IPCC supporters’ end of world alarm unless we shell out 90trillion and retreat to the Dark Ages, can be countered by Joe – Sixpack with Kerry’s words:
“If all the industrialized nations went down to zero emissions …., it wouldn’t be enough – not when more than 65 percent of the world’s carbon pollution comes from the developing world.”
Sixpack wins the big debate.