Wednesday, November 30, 2011

COP: U.N. Needs To Stop, Reassess

Craig Rucker

Executive Director, The Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow

With the science anything but settled and the proposed solutions incredibly harmful to world economies, the world will be far better off if no new climate treaty comes out of Durban.

The good news is that the prospects for a new commitment period in the model of the Kyoto Protocol seem slim. The differences between the developed and developing world's negotiating positions are too great. Couple this with a U.S. Senate that will not ratify a new treaty (our allies have made clear that they do not want to go it alone again) and a full out, binding treaty, would surprise everyone. However, there is much at stake in Durban for carbon profiteers who bet their financial futures on an endless flow of global warming cash. Kyoto's carbon markets are set to expire in 2012 which could send would-be carbon traders out in search of gainful employment. Alternative energy corporations also face lean times ahead if the developed world's appetite for subsidies and guarantees continues to dry up (a drought which will only accelerate in the absence of a treaty). The public is catching on to plants that are more designed to generate subsidies than power. At some point (if we want the lights to stay on) energy generation has to be about the power, not the freebies. Let's certainly not forget the researchers, climate campaigners and third world bureaucrats all whom have developed an unhealthy sense of entitlement to the productive world's tax dollars.

With billions and hoped for trillions at stake, Durban remains of crucial importance whether a full treaty emerges or not. The climate powers that be may wish for a treaty, but aim to keep their cash flowing by any means necessary. They retooled after the UN's massive failure at Copenhagen and now use simpler tactics such as smaller more specific agreements (a neat way to bypass the U.S. Senate) to accomplish their ends. Recent conferences created new ways to cash in. The REDD program has western speculators buying up land in developing nations in the name of forestry, but in fact to cash in on huge subsidy payments. This is a shameful example of eco-imperialism (as CFACT adviser Paul Driessen would put it). The “Green Climate Fund” is the darling of the developing world. UNFCCC Secretary Christiana Figueres and others recently expressed their hope to expand it from $100 to $400 billion. At a recent conference in Bonn one developing world delegate (upon learning that CFACT's staffer was an American) wanted only to know, “when are you going to send us our money?”

This week saw the disclosure of a huge new batch of emails in what is being called “Climategate 2.0.” These emails provide a shockingly candid look at the machinations of the high priests of global warming. No open minded reader can review those emails and fail to see an insular cadre of climate scientists coordinating efforts to place advocacy ahead of science, stifle dissent and conceal any information which detracts from a preconceived, ideologically driven, global warming narrative (full details at

It is clear that climate science is not settled. Couple that with policies proposed to address global warming that are ineffective, economically devastating and already open to the worst kind of looting of the public purse. The only conclusion is that the UNFCCC should call an immediate halt to climate propagandizing, throw the profiteers out of the tent, stop, reassess and come back with sober, disciplined proposals, or none at all.

No comments: