John Kerry & Xi Jinping. U.S. Department of State from United States, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Global Times: Western Countries are Retreating from Climate Change Promises

Essay by Eric Worrall

Chinese Communist mouthpiece Global Times has accused the West, and the USA in particular, of poisoning and politicising global climate cooperation.

Western countries backpedal blustery promises on climate change; US poisons global cooperation by politicizing the issue 

By GT staff reporters Published: Aug 26, 2022 12:41 AM

The record heat waves, alongside an energy crisis partly caused by the US-instigated Russia-Ukraine crisis, have forced some European countries to row back on their climate goals. Meanwhile, in the US, one of the world’s biggest emitters, climate change has descended to an issue for partisan struggle, and most recently, a topic to demonize China after Beijing suspended communication on this matter with the US after US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s provocative visit to the island of Taiwan.

In the latest case, the city of Copenhagen has given up on a long-term goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2025. “As things look now, we cannot achieve our ambitious climate target,” the head of the city municipality’s elected technical and environmental committee, Line Barfoed, said to Danish media on Monday.

The Denmark city’s decision was made after several European countries, including Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and the Netherlands already or are planning to return to coal to generate electricity, after they felt the pinch from energy crisis followed by the Russia-Ukraine crisis, and adding insult to injury, Europe’s worst drought in 500 years. 

Meanwhile, China is heading toward its goal on carbon neutrality steadily. 

Read more: https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202208/1273929.shtml

A lot of what the CCP has said on this occasion is true, except in my opinion the part about China ever taking climate action seriously.

If climate action was a priority for Chinese leaders, in my opinion they wouldn’t be building loads of coal plants, and they wouldn’t have used the Taiwan dispute as an excuse to suspend talks. The CCP would have accepted John Kerry’s plea to keep climate talks disconnected from other political issues.

One silver lining to this mess, as global climate cooperation dissolves into a desperate Western scramble for coal and gas, and edgy geopolitical point scoring between China and the USA, the day when nobody even pretends anymore to take climate action seriously draws ever closer.

5 16 votes
Article Rating
62 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
bonbon
August 26, 2022 10:23 am

China already clearly showed its intention by boycotting COP26.
So it was a simple step to cut off climate talk shops.

Meanwhile the US sells the EU Freedom Molecules, and Taipei sells Democracy Chips.

The West has become merely a slogan shop, bankrupt, like Greta’s and F4F.

Now to get on with real physical economics, the BRI, EAEU, the USA must build that Berring Tunnel with Russia jointly.

Leslie MacMillan
Reply to  bonbon
August 26, 2022 4:55 pm

A tunnel?? Then Tina Fey will say that Sarah Palin should be President because she can drive to Russia from her house.

Richard Page
Reply to  Leslie MacMillan
August 27, 2022 4:46 pm

Driving to Russia is one thing, driving back again is far more difficult!

Andy Pattullo
August 26, 2022 10:35 am

Always good to take a dose of reality, weather voluntary or forced. Now Western voters need to understand what they voted for and what it means to their own standard of living. That Kool Aid isn’t so sweet after all.

J.R.
Reply to  Andy Pattullo
August 28, 2022 1:38 am

“Whether”

Drake
Reply to  J.R.
August 28, 2022 11:36 am

In CAGW speak and per griff, weather = climate.

IanE
August 26, 2022 10:35 am

Well, I hope your last statement is right – doubt I’ll live that long, however.

August 26, 2022 10:57 am

China is the world leader in wind power generation, with the largest installed capacity of any nation and continued rapid growth in new wind facilities.

At the end of 2020, China’s total installed photovoltaic capacity was 253 GW, accounting for one-third of the world’s total installed photovoltaic capacity (760.4 GW). China leads the world as the top producer of solar energy, installing more than 48 GW of photovoltaic (PV) capacity in 2020.

Bob Hunter
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 26, 2022 11:29 am

In 2021, 5.9% of China’s electricity was from wind & solar. Whereas 83.4% was from coal, natural gas & oil.
btw 18.4% of world population reside in China.

Last edited 1 month ago by Bob Hunter
michel
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 26, 2022 11:32 am

The reply to which is, so what?

There are a number of things which are irrelevant, according to the theory. The theory says that the only thing driving CAGW is total tons of CO2 emitted. China is emitting 11 billion of them (twice as much as the next emitter, the US, at about 5 billion) and just under one third of the global total.

Here is a list of things that are irrelevant:

  • How much wind and solar they have installed or will installed
  • What their per capita emissions are
  • What their historical emissions have been
  • How much of their emissions are due to export manufacture

The theory is that the only thing that counts is tons emitted. But for some unaccountable reason, activists who buy into the theory, or claim to, are never worried by the fact that the world’s largest emitter is China, and that they have no intention of reducing their emissions, and you will never come across the slightest hint in activist circles that maybe China should actually… you know… reduce.

Reply to  michel
August 26, 2022 3:56 pm

I wanted to point out FACTS about China to avoid the impression that all they do is to build new coal plants. Some of the new coal plants are intended to replace older coal plants that pollute more.

CHINA HAS SERIOUS URBAN AIR POLLUTION PROBLEMS, WHICH ARE AN INCENTIVE TO REDUCE AIR POLLUTION ANY WAY THEY CAN.

They are also having power shortage problems in very hot weather recently, so obviously need more fossil fuel and nuclear baseload power plants

Last edited 1 month ago by Richard Greene
Barry Malcolm
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 26, 2022 5:33 pm

Richard, the Communist Party thanks you for sucking up.

Reply to  Barry Malcolm
August 26, 2022 7:02 pm

And your Mother thanks you for being so smart

Barry Malcolm
Reply to  michel
August 26, 2022 5:30 pm

Can you stop with obvious, but you’re absolutely correct.

Barry Malcolm
Reply to  Barry Malcolm
August 26, 2022 5:30 pm

The obvious.

Frank from NoVA
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 26, 2022 11:48 am

Or, as the Soviets used to brag during the cold war, ‘Russia makes the world’s largest micro-switches!’

MarkW
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 26, 2022 2:54 pm

Twice nothing is still nothing.
Beyond that, what matters is not total capacity, but per capita capacity.

Editor
Reply to  MarkW
August 26, 2022 3:10 pm

“what matters is not total capacity, but per capita capacity.”. That’s fantastic news. We don’t need China or the USA to do anything – King Island can save the world.

Scissor
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 26, 2022 4:30 pm

Ah, capacity. Could have been a genius. Instead, crack and meth did him in.

Leslie MacMillan
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 26, 2022 4:56 pm

WTF with all the down votes? It’s true.

Barry Malcolm
Reply to  Leslie MacMillan
August 26, 2022 5:35 pm

So what?

Richard Page
Reply to  Leslie MacMillan
August 27, 2022 12:32 pm

Yes but almost completely irrelevant to the discussion. Richard could’ve gone on to mention that, despite all the installed solar, China only generates about 1/10th of the installed capacity but he ducked out on saying anything meaningful.

Barry Malcolm
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 26, 2022 5:27 pm

Richard, and your point would be what?

Reply to  Barry Malcolm
August 26, 2022 7:04 pm

China is building solar farms, wind farms and nuclear power plants too, not only new coal power plants

Pflashgordon
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 27, 2022 4:43 am

They are also speculatively building high rise apartments with nobody living in them, threatening to crash their economy.

Richard Page
Reply to  Pflashgordon
August 27, 2022 12:36 pm

70% of the population can’t afford even a basic level of accomodation is why. Whilst China’s leadership are building massive housing projects that most people can’t afford, sending probes to other planets and putting manned space stations into orbit they have done nothing to lift the majority of their own people out of poverty.

Barry Malcolm
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 27, 2022 7:15 pm

Your point being is what?

August 26, 2022 11:27 am

NOAA CHARTS REVEAL GLOBAL COOLING IS INTENSIFYING; A WORD ON ‘CLIMATE REANALYZER’; + LONG COLD WINTER MORNINGS PERSIST IN AUSTRALIA – ELECTROVERSE
August 26, 2022 Cap Allon
[Excerpt]

Daniel Toleman, Principal Analyst, Global LNG for Wood Mackenzie said: “This recent crisis was caused by a perfect storm of under-investment in new energy supplies, as well as cold weather hitting at the same time as coal outages and supply shortages, low renewable generation and high global commodity prices. It was an incredible combination that pushed the market to the breaking point. LNG suppliers stepped in to divert gas to areas that needed it, but the situation did highlight the need for new sources of energy supply to meet current and future demand.”
 
An extraordinary similarity exists to my following letter, published 9 years ago  in 2013:
 
AN OPEN LETTER TO BARONESS VERMA
British Undersecretary for Energy and Climate Change, 31Oct2013
By Allan MacRae, B.A.Sc.(Eng.), M.Eng.
[excerpt]
So here is my real concern:
IF the Sun does indeed drive temperature, as I suspect, Baroness Verma, then you and your colleagues on both sides of the House may have brewed the perfect storm.
You are claiming that global cooling will NOT happen, AND you have crippled your energy systems with excessive reliance on ineffective grid-connected “green energy” schemes.
I suggest that global cooling probably WILL happen within the next decade or sooner, and Britain will get colder.
I also suggest that the IPCC and the Met Office have NO track record of successful prediction (or “projection”) of global temperature and thus have no scientific credibility.
I suggest that Winter deaths will increase in the UK as cooling progresses.
I suggest that Excess Winter Mortality, the British rate of which is about double the rate in the Scandinavian countries, should provide an estimate of this unfolding tragedy.
 
When making accurate predictions, the key is to follow known science and technology, and not become infatuated by woke popular nonsense based on hopes, dreams and pixie dust.
Fearless world leaders and village idiots, please take note.

Peta of Newark
Reply to  Allan MacRae
August 26, 2022 12:22 pm

Yes it is cooling.

  • CO2 stops solar energy (at 4.1 and 2.7 microns) from reaching the ground. Yes it warms the atmosphere but as the atmosphere at all points is always colder than anywhere below whatever altitude, the surface cools
  • Contrails stop solar energy reaching the ground. Clouds are Cold Things. Yes they can radiate all they like but that radiation can not add to the sum of the energy contained in anything warmer – such as the surface.
  • Yes thermometers near the ground record higher temperatures but only due to lowered Albedo, also lowered moisture content of the ground allowing less solar energy to have greater heating effect than it previously did. Thus the surface/ground/soil contain less energy – that = Cooling
  • As for the UK, the above point is nicely demonstrated by an East-West split. The perennially green & damp West has been cooling for at least 20 years while the increasingly dry and arid East is showing rising temperatures. Due to city building and arable agriculture
  • The above point driving a Coach and Horses through the notion of ‘Missing Heat Stored In The Ocean. The Gulf Stream would surely dredge that heat back up, yet it patently isn’t doing so. Thus, there is No Heat trapped in the ocean.
Reply to  Peta of Newark
August 26, 2022 1:58 pm

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/07/21/ee-news-defames-pat-michaels/#comment-3561834
[excerpts]

Rational analysis concludes that climate is INsensitive to recent observed increases in atmospheric CO2. The false assumption of high climate sensitivities to CO2 is essential to the IPCC’s bogus modelling of catastrophic human-made global warming (CAGW), a decades-old fraud that is clearly NOT happening, and the false and disastrous demonization of fossil fuels.
 
This paper by Ed Berry is the leading edge of the science. Unlike the IPCC’s models, it is consistent with the observation that CO2 changes lag temperature changes (Kuo 1990, MacRae 2008, Humlum 2013). Ed concludes that the majority of the observed increase in atmospheric CO2 is in fact natural, not human-made – another argument against the IPCC’s blatant climate fraud.
 
The smartest people I know believe that Ed Berry is essentially correct. I am confident that “The future cannot cause the past” (MacRae, 2008).
https://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/esrl-co2/from:1979/mean:12/derivative/plot/uah6/from:1979/scale:0.18/offset:0.17
… 

The impact of human CO2 on atmospheric CO2 – SCC (klimarealistene.com)
Dr Edwin X Berry, December 14, 2021

Reply to  Allan MacRae
August 26, 2022 4:14 pm

Ed Berry is a climate science fraud
He is on the leading edge of junk science.

Ed concludes that the majority of the observed increase in atmospheric CO2 is in fact natural, not human-made. In fact. the CO2 increase is 100% manmade from CO2 emissions
Ed Berry is, and will remain, a fool.
Anyone who is a member of his cult is also a fool.
Mr MacRae appear to follow Ed Berry.
Therefore Mr. MacRae is a fool.

This is Ed Berry alt-science tin hat conspiracy theory claptrap, denying 100% of the climate science consensus on AGW. Not 90%. Not 95%. But 100%.

Every other scientist in the world is wrong about why CO2 increased from 280ppm to 420ppm, except Ed Berry? The estimated +200ppm of manmade CO2 emissions had nothing to do with that +140ppm rise of atmospheric CO2? Only a deluded fool would believe that malarkey.

ECS is unknown, but obviously not dangerous
CAGW is a prediction, wrong for 50+ year, not reality. AGW is a reasonable theory with some measurements of downwelling infrared radiation showing an increased greenhouse effect, which rising CO2 is part of. The C13 / C12 ratio shows manmade CO2 is increasing in the troposphere, obviously.

The very difficult battle over CAGW scaremongering can not be won by denying 100% of conventional climate science.

There is a greenhouse effect
Humans have added a lot of CO2 to the troposphere More CO2 should increase the greenhouse effect. The greenhouse effect has increased, but the increase was small and harmless for the past 47 years. No CAGW.

In fact, the actual warming since 1975 has been beneficial: Mainly in the upper, colder half off the Northern Hemisphere Mainly during the six coldest months of the year, and Mainly at night (TMIN) Think of warmer winter nights in Siberia. Add the greening of the Earth since the 1970s and all the results from the past 47 years of global warming has been good news, not a climate emergency. The obvious conclusion: more CO2 in the atmophere would be good news.

Last edited 1 month ago by Richard Greene
Barry Malcolm
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 26, 2022 5:42 pm

100%, wow! Hard to believe isn’t it?

BobM
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 26, 2022 7:17 pm

50% of the time you’re lucid, spot on. 50% of the time you’re nuts.

rhs
Reply to  BobM
August 26, 2022 7:55 pm

Plum nucking futs that is..

Reply to  BobM
August 26, 2022 9:51 pm

You’re not smart enough to know which !

Mark BLR
Reply to  Richard Greene
August 27, 2022 3:26 am

Ed Berry is a climate science fraud

Ed Berry is, and will remain, a fool.

Anyone who is a member of his cult is also a fool.

Mr MacRae appear to follow Ed Berry.

Therefore Mr. MacRae is a fool.

Paul Graham came up with a “Hierarchy of Disagreement”, AKA his “Debate Pyramid”, which lays out one possible way of analysing “robust, or even heated, (scientific) debate”.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg

For some obscure reason you appear to be unaware that it is possible to skip “Level 7 : Name Calling (and/or Abuse)” entirely.

Here on WUWT people who don’t skip, or remain stuck at, that level tend to get (heavily) downvoted.

It’s the people who stick to level 3 (and higher) who attract upvotes.

Hint : The key phrase is “… and then backs it up with reasoning and/or supporting evidence“.

Last edited 1 month ago by Mark BLR
Dave Andrews
Reply to  Peta of Newark
August 27, 2022 7:41 am

Re the dry and arid east of the UK, Sprags et al (2015) evaluated droughts in the east of the UK from 1798 – 2010 and found the most severe droughts were 1854 – 60 and 1893 – 1907 with “contiguous dry winters and summers”.

n.n
August 26, 2022 11:32 am

To be fair, western nations profited from China’s labor and environmental arbitrage, and State’s Choice to keep women affordable, available, and taxable, and men free from intrusive “burdens”.

BobM
Reply to  n.n
August 26, 2022 7:20 pm

Keeping women affordable and available is eminently desirable. But taxable?

Richard Page
Reply to  BobM
August 27, 2022 12:38 pm

Labour only contractor at standard tax rates.

M Courtney
August 26, 2022 11:39 am

I would also question China’s assertion that the USA mind-tricked Russia into invading Ukraine.
Russia has invaded Crimea, Georgia and Chechnya since the fall of the CCCP. It seems unlikely that these actions were all at the behest of the USA. Or that this case was any different to the others.

Frank from NoVA
Reply to  M Courtney
August 26, 2022 12:11 pm

Chechnya was very analogous to our forays into Afghanistan and Iraq, except it didn’t take the Russians 20+ years and cost them trillions of dollars to ‘pacify’ the place. As for Crimea, Georgia and Ukraine, they’re all the result of US intervention / NATO expansion directed by the same deep state that gave us Afghanistan and Iraq.

M Courtney
Reply to  Frank from NoVA
August 26, 2022 2:18 pm

And was Rocky the reason Ivan Drago beat up Apollo Creed?

Richard Page
Reply to  M Courtney
August 27, 2022 12:42 pm

Yes, didn’t you see the film? Rocky was exactly the reason why Apollo Creed took on Ivan Drago with the inevitable result. Apollo Creed knew his facing Drago was the only way to force Rocky back into the ring.

MarkW
Reply to  Frank from NoVA
August 26, 2022 2:58 pm

Chechnya invaded its neighbors? Chechnya harbored criminals that launched terrorist attacks on Russia?
As to quickly pacifying the country, when you are willing to blow up everything is sight and kill anything that moves, it doesn’t take long to pacify a country.

As to the US forcing Russia to invade it’s neighbors, Putin has been declaring since the fall of the Soviet Union his intentions to rebuild the Russian empire. Secondly, NATO was just an excuse the idiot left uses to try and justify their hero’s murderous urges.

Reply to  MarkW
August 26, 2022 4:25 pm

“Putin has been declaring since the fall of the Soviet Union his intentions to rebuild the Russian empire.”

Most of what politicians say is empty promises

Reply to  M Courtney
August 26, 2022 4:24 pm

US weapons in Ukraine sent by Trump did not help.
US and UK not helping Ukraine defend Crimea in 2014 did not help.
US and all other nations ignoring the Donbas Civil War since 2014 did not help. 11,000Russian speaking Ukrainian civilians were killed by the Ukraine military. A genocide was in progress and was ramping up in 2022. About one third of Ukrainians in the Donbas region wanted to be an independent nation. Not part of Russia. They would have lost a vote. But Kiev never allowed a vote, for them to lose, preferring a civil war instead. The current war is the result of two corrupt leaders, Putin and Zelensky, both more interested in themselves than in their people.

Jon R
Reply to  M Courtney
August 28, 2022 12:55 pm

Amazing so many climate realists are also NATO WEF fanbois. Fanboi on fanboi’s.

fretslider
August 26, 2022 12:54 pm

“Meanwhile, China is heading toward its goal on carbon neutrality steadily.”

Is it, by Jove.

There’s net zero chance of getting anywhere near net zero.

Editor
Reply to  fretslider
August 26, 2022 3:17 pm

China’s goal on carbon neutrality, as stated in the various agreements, is to increase its CO2 emissions as much as it possibly can until 2030, when it will try to stabilise at that new level. It is successfully heading to the first stated goal. Whether it tries to achieve its second stated goal remains to be seen. Let’s face it, if it achieves its less explicitly stated goal of world domination then it won’t need to worry about any stated goals at all.

Reply to  Mike Jonas
August 26, 2022 4:29 pm

China’s goal is to produce enough electricity to meet demand and to reduce air pollution over all major cities. Both are tough goals. Windmills and solar panels will not be the answer. Although manufacturing wind turbines and solar panels, and selling them to other nations, provide funds to build more coal power plants and nuclear reactors.

Barry Malcolm
Reply to  Mike Jonas
August 26, 2022 5:45 pm

Excellent point Mike!

Mark BLR
Reply to  Mike Jonas
August 27, 2022 4:03 am

It is successfully heading to the first stated goal.

This, in a “something I prepared earlier” graphic I’ve posted elsewhere.

China-USA-India_CO2e-numbers_1.png
tgasloli
August 26, 2022 4:11 pm

It is a priority of the government of Beijing that western democracies take Climate Change seriously enough to destroy their countries & economies.😃

Tom Abbott
Reply to  tgasloli
August 26, 2022 6:46 pm

Yes, I think that is the real motive of the Chicoms. They don’t want any slowing of the self-inflicted destruction of the West.

John Sandhofner
August 26, 2022 5:10 pm

“the day when nobody even pretends anymore to take climate action seriously draws ever closer.” That come soon enough. This fake science has to go.

Yooper
August 26, 2022 5:11 pm

Stole this from Cal Allon, but Hmmm….
NOAA Charts Reveal Global Cooling Is Intensifying
NOAA shows that the rate of Earth’s cooling has increased during 2022
The agency’s ‘Global Time Series’ temperature tool plots the current ‘Land and Ocean’ rate of decrease as 0.19C per decade, up from a decrease of 0.11C per decade at the start of the year:

Selected month: Jan (Feb 2016-Jan 2022) decrease of 0.11C per decade
Selected month: Feb (Mar 2016-Feb 2022) decrease of 0.13C per decade
Selected month: Mar (Apr 2016-Mar 2022) decrease of 0.16C per decade
Selected month: Apr (May 2016-Apr 2022) decrease of 0.18C per decade
Selected month: May (Jun 2016-May 2022) decrease of 0.18C per decade
Selected month: Jun (Jul 2016-Jun 2022) decrease of 0.18C per decade
Selected month: Jul (Aug 2016-Jul 2022) decrease of 0.19C per decade

So, in six months the rate of decrease in temperature has increased by 73% over the January figure.Not only is the Earth cooling, it is cooling at a faster and faster rate.

Reply to  Yooper
August 26, 2022 6:59 pm

Data mining nonsense

Mark BLR
Reply to  Yooper
August 27, 2022 4:47 am

So, in six months the rate of decrease in temperature has increased by 73% over the January figure.

Whereas if you take the standard series of “72-month trailing trends” instead of your ” 6 sets of ‘Month X+1 of Year Y-6’ to ‘Month X of Year Y’ numbers” cherry-picking you get a completely different result !

Done “properly” you (or, rather, “I” …) get an increase in the trend from -0.14 (°C/decade) for [ February 2016 to ] January 2022 to -0.02 for July 2022.

I believe Mark Twain’s astute observation about “lies, damned lies and statistics” is applicable here … to BOTH of us !

NCEI_6-year-trends_1.png
Mike Maguire
August 26, 2022 8:20 pm

They’re retreating because the commitments were based on a fake green fairy tale.

They made all sorts of verbal and written promises to generate the imposition of the early stages of the green energy schemes on human societies.

However, the Junk science and ignoring of physical energy principles that they used to base their commitments on have to be reconciled with the real world eventually.

Since those green energy schemes are so fatally flawed, it hasn’t taken much time to expose them in the real world.

This was destined to happen from the get go.
Even many of those reaping massive financial benefits from these flawed, fake green energy schemes know it.

Are all these people getting rich off of wind power, ignorant in science and energy. Are they unaware of the massively negative environmental impacts about their own business?

They don’t know that millions of birds/bats will be killed, including some on the endangered species list? Landscape’s and habitats destroyed?
Massive mining raping the earth, then going into landfills in 20-25 years? All the massive real pollution?

They absolutely understand the consequences better than anybody because they are the ones doing it.

They aren’t doing it for charity. They aren’t environmentalists. They aren’t trying to save the planet.
Governments have specifically designed policies to enrich people in these industries with subsidies and financial benefits that has resulted in deals much too lucrative for them NOT to take.
In an honest/fair world based on solid science/energy and free market principles without government intervention, wind energy would get no traction from big investors.

Crony capitalism.

Green Energy Scores a 76X ROI for Their Lobbying Efforts

https://www.transparencyusa.org/article/green-energy-lobby-roi

Garboard
Reply to  Mike Maguire
August 27, 2022 5:07 am

Not a single study on the effects of saturating large expanses of endangered right whale habitat with powerful low frequency sound from offshore wind turbines . Whales are very dependent on acoustics .

Bob
August 27, 2022 5:05 pm

“A lot of what the CCP has said on this occasion is true, except in my opinion the part about China ever taking climate action seriously.”

Excuse me! How on earth can you claim a lot of what the CCP has said is true?

“The record heat waves, alongside an energy crisis partly caused by the US-instigated Russia-Ukraine crisis, have forced some European countries to row back on their climate goals. Meanwhile, in the US, one of the world’s biggest emitters, climate change has descended to an issue for partisan struggle, and most recently, a topic to demonize China after Beijing suspended communication on this matter with the US after US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s provocative visit to the island of Taiwan.”

You don’t have to read any further than this to realize it is trash.

%d bloggers like this: