The United Nations could [but didn’t, thanks to threats from President Trump] approve a new tax on carbon-dioxide emissions from shipping as early as today. Their goal is to raise at least $10 billion a year and put it in a new “Net Zero Fund” to “mitigate negative impacts” on nations supposedly suffering because of climate change. This may be only the beginning: an unelected United Nations ruling over the entire globe with the power to levy direct taxes as it sees fit. The United States—and every country that values representative democracy and individual liberty—must oppose this with every tool at their disposal.
AND IT’S DEAD – STATEMENT FROM ANTHONY:
The collapse of the UN-backed shipping emissions deal is not the disaster portrayed by climate activists—it’s a victory for sovereignty over what amounted to taxation without representation. The International Maritime Organization, an unelected UN agency, was preparing to impose binding carbon targets on the world’s shipping industry—essentially a global fuel tax that would have raised costs on every product moved by sea. Shipping may account for 3% of global emissions, but it moves 90% of global trade; taxing it in the name of “net zero” would have punished consumers and developing nations alike while enriching bureaucrats and consultants in Geneva and New York.
By standing firm, the United States and its allies reminded the world that no unelected body has the right to dictate energy policy or trade costs to sovereign nations. President Trump was right to call the plan a “Global Green New Scam Tax on Shipping”—a top-down climate levy pushed by an unaccountable organization. If the UN wants to tax the world, it should first face the voters. Until then, free nations have every reason to reject global mandates disguised as environmental virtue.
On Episode #178 of The Climate Realism Show, we’ll dig into this disturbing and likely illegal [and now failed] UN power grab and cover the week’s Crazy Climate News. Is climate change giving dolphins Alzheimer’s? What the heck is “carbon butter,” and how does it taste? Is Bill Gates the most dangerous man on the planet? And the mother of all “children’s climate lawsuits” has just crashed and burned.
Join The Heartland Institute’s Anthony Watts, Sterling Burnett, Linnea Lueken, Jim Lakely, and special guest Steve Milloy of the E&E Legal Institute LIVE at 1 p.m. ET on YouTube, Rumble, and X.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
That is pretty much how I described it a violation of each countries sovereignty and I can’t believe that any politician couldn’t see that. It begs the question are the politicians that stupid or is it corruption.
We owe USA and President Trump thanks for stopping the green blob.
“It begs the question are the politicians that stupid or is it corruption.”
Both!
Both
+100
How likely is it that so many people at the very top of a job where so much power and money is involved and that has an exceptional high number of psychopaths ends end with many stupid people?
That’s absolutely impossible.
Therefore bribery and blackmail are the reason for such an impossible uniform level of “stupid” behavior.
UN is the most corrupt organization on the planet just ahead of the Russian mafia…
Or the American Democratic party-they would roll over in orgasmic joy at this tax, if passed.
Biden/Obama would have voted for it. How an unelected entity would have collected it is questionable. Especially the UN which is unaccountable. The Marxists are pushing their agenda full force and the USA needs to get out of it and maybe even start a body (read that Western Democracies) that would defend Democratic principals, among them free trade.
It’s been estimate that there were up to 60 million bison in North America prior to European colonization. All of which would be emitting methane, Also there were other large herds of other ruminate animals emitting methane. Up until the late 19th century there vast expanses of wetlands emitting methane. Many of these were filled in.
Harold The Organic Chemist Says:
At NOAA’s Global Monitoring Lab., the concentration of methane in the air is currently reported as 1.93 ppmv. The reason the concentration of methane in air is so low is due to the initiation of its combustion by discharges of lightning. Everyday there are millions of lightning discharges especially in the tropics (See Wikipedia).
Methane is slightly soluble in ice cold water. One liter of cold water can contain ca. up to 35 milliliters of methane which is ca. 9 mg. Large amounts of methane are absorbed by cold polar waters. The methane slowly diffuses to the cold ocean floor where under high pressure, it is concerted to a clathrate known as methane ice.
Discharges of lightning generate ozone which will readily oxidize methane to carbon dioxide and water.
All combustion processes that uses air will burn up any methane in it. For example, jet planes with really big jet engines are flying incinerators for methane.
We really do not have to worry about the emissions of methane.
I’m a chemist too, retired,. I’m well aware of that.
I post that comment now and then here and elsewhere, because most lay people have been led by the IPCC to believe that methane is “menacing molecule” about 80 times more dangerous carbon dioxide.
It is our obligation as scientists to educate the people about basic everyday chemistry and the greenhouse effect so they can learn that the claims by the IPCC and the unscrupulous collaborating scientists that carbon dioxide causes “global warming” and is the “control knob” of climate change are fabrications and lies.
The purpose of these lies is to provide the UN the justification for the distribution of donor funds, via the UNCCC and the UN COP, from the rich countries to the poor countries to help them cope with alleged harmful effects of global warming and climates change. At COP29 in Baku, the poor countries came clamoring not for billions but trillions of restoration funds. Unfortunately for them, the rich countries pledged no funds and they left empty handed.
I agree amen
Your name rings a bell for me. Did I mention a while back that you should definitely go to the late John Daly’s web site:
“Still Waiting For Greenhouse” available at: http://www.john-daly.com? Shown below is the home page. If you click on the image, it will expand and become clear. Click on the “X” in the circle to return to comment text.
Cows DO NOT add any carbon to the carbon cycle..
This is physically and chemically impossible.
They cannot give out more Carbon that they take in.
COWS ARE CARBON NEUTRAL !!
A calf is carbon sink until it grows up to an adult.
BTW: Gold is now over US$4,000 an ounce. Are Aussie placer miners pouring into the western gold fields?
Veal… Hummm !!
The Loony Left has a thing about cows. Bovinephobia. It’s a neurosis.