JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Global Carbon Market Hits $176 Billion in 2011

Global Carbon Market trading climbed to $176 billion in 2011 according to the The World Bank, which has just released it’s annual State and Trends of The Carbon Market in 2012. That makes it about the same value as total global wheat production — which supplies about 20% of the calories consumed by the 7 billion people on planet Earth.

The global carbon market disguises itself as an angel against the greedy corporates. Yet it is, itself, a giant corporate playing field. The mainstream media remains largely silent on the “vested interests” represented by this major industry that did not even exist 10 years ago.

Global Carbon Markets are worth billions

Was 2011 the peak of global carbon trading? Looks all downhill from here.

A record number of emissions products were traded in 2011, even though prices of EU carbon permits and international offsets fells well below $10 a tonne late in the year. The prices have fallen, but the volumes have increased. Look out, the average price in 2011 was $18.80US, but the prices in 2012 are  less than half that. It will take a monster increase in volumes in 2012 to keep raising the total market value.

The Global Carbon Market was still growing in 2011, but not exponentially like it was from 2005 – 2009. The bad news (for carbon traders) is about to hit the fan in the next report in 2013. There is a hint of it in the page announcing the report: “the market for primary CDM has dropped to its lowest level since 2004.”

Global means “EU”

The EU is 80% of the total market. Everywhere else is piddlingly small:

The rise in volume lifted the value of the EU market to $148 billion from a revised $134 billion in 2010, even though average EU carbon prices fell 4 percent year on year to $18.80 a tonne.

But front-year EU carbon prices are averaging under $10 a tonne so far this year as the bloc’s sluggish economy dampens demand for carbon permits in a market that analysts say has accumul1ated a surplus near the equivalent of 1 billion tonnes.

Other national and regional carbon schemes showed mixed results. New Zealand’s carbon market value tripled to $351 million, while the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative in North America nearly halved to $249 million, the bank said.

Primary project-based transactions in the voluntary offset market were valued at $569 million in 2011, up 37 percent, the bank said. ($1 = 0.7977 euros)

[Reuters]

Remember that someone somewhere is paying this money that is poured into a trading scheme we don’t need to solve a problem for which there is no supporting evidence. The voluntary market is one three hundredth of the total. Without forced legislation this market would vanish. (Let the people vote, eh?). This is $176 billion of economic activity wasted, mostly in the economic disaster zone that is the EU. People are rioting in the streets. That’s blood, sweat and tears to build things and do things the people on this planet would not choose to do if they were not forced to.

Read on to find out more…

Prices peaked in 2008 but have fallen a long way.

The State of the Market in 2011 – Prices average $18, but are falling fast.

Most of the market has become “futures” for both EUA’s and CER’s

The spot contract is for carbon emissions that have already been saved (if only that was useful), but the futures and options market is for emissions that might be saved… one day. In other words, only the smallest part of this market is actually referring to real present day reductions in CO2, and even that part is hard to assess, prone to fraud, difficult to audit, and subject to government whimsy about which savings “count” and which don’t.

There is barely any commodity in this commodity market and it’s becoming less so.

The CER market peaked in 2007 and has never recovered.

Certified Emission Reductions (CERs)

A CER is a Kyoto Protocol unit equal to 1 metric tonne of CO 2 equivalent. CERs are issued for emission reductions from CDM project activities. Two special types of CERs, called temporary certified emission reduction (tCERs) and long-term certified emission reductions (lCERs), are issued for emission removals from afforestation and reforestation CDM projects. [Source]

Climate Alarmism is Big-Business for The World Bank

In 2010 the World Bank was managing $2,388 million dollars worth of projects. It’s not like the World Bank has a vested interest in this market… What bureaucrat would like to give up the power to hand out these funds?  The patronage and favors, the status gained from wheeling and dealing with these funds is enormous. It’s an example of why governments of all kinds grows and grows, and why common rational sense, the push-back, can only come from independent citizens, possibly helped by the sectors of the economy that suffer from poor policies.

[Source: World Bank]

 

Hat Tip to Scott the carbon trader.

 UPDATE 2013: The World Bank canceled the State of The Carbon Market in 2013. All indicators suggest the market collapsed. The numbers would have broken the upward trend and not “helped” the PR.

 

REFERENCES:

Global Wheat supplies 20% of calories. It’s price is $260 per metric ton and nearly 700 million tons is produced world wide, making it a $182 bn global enterprise.

World BankState and Trends of The Carbon Market in 2012.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.7/10 (54 votes cast)
Global Carbon Market Hits $176 Billion in 2011, 8.7 out of 10 based on 54 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: Error

79 comments to Global Carbon Market Hits $176 Billion in 2011

  • #
    John from CA

    Great post Jo!

    The “Global” Carbon Market is clearly nothing more than a roulette wheel and an excuse to gamble. The UK loves penny arcades, lets hope Australia doesn’t join the foolishness.


    Report this

    10

  • #
  • #

    Carbon trading is the plaything of Environazi groups such as WWF, Greenpeace, Environmental Defence Fund among others.

    These groups have the EU in a headlock and together are reaping billions from the EU citizens who are paying the price with unemployment, increased energy prices and political instability.

    Don’t believe me? Heres is one simple link

    Who we are

    The Gold Standard is an award winning certification standard for carbon mitigation projects and is recognised internationally as the benchmark for quality and rigour in both the compliance and voluntary carbon markets. We certify renewable energy and energy efficiency carbon offset projects to ensure that they all demonstrate real and permanent greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions and sustainable development benefits in local communities that are measured, reported and verified.

    Established in 2003 by WWF, The Gold Standard is the only certification standard trusted and endorsed by more than 80 NGOs worldwide, including Care International, World Vision Australia, Forum for the Future and Mercy Corps. It is also the standard of choice for multiple governments and multinationals such as H&M, DHL, Swiss Post, Nokia, Virgin Atlantic, Panasonic, TUI Travel and FIFA. United Nations agencies use the Gold Standard for the development of their own carbon mitigation and sustainable development projects.

    Global Warming, Climate Change, call it what you will, is a scam set up by the UN agencies WMO and UNEP (fully populated by environmentalists) and backed by EU bureaucrats.

    It’s a scam, it has nothing to do with science (though science is used as a vehicle) and it has nothing whatsoever to do with saving the planet.


    Report this

    10

  • #
    gofer

    There is zero tangible value in so-called carbon markets. Scams have reached a new level when people are actually trading air. Who said they could never tax air? They have created an imaginary product to solve an imaginary problem. Some actually live in a “wonderland” world of pretending. They just as well trade unicorn gas. Billionaires flying around the world on “carbon credits” created by some kid in Asia using “treadle” pumps to irrigate rather than a diesel pump is the height of immorality.


    Report this

    10

  • #
    brc

    It’s amazing that the same people who scream, rant and protest about the CDO and CDS markets on Wall street will turn around and speak in glowing terms of the carbon market, which is going to save the planet.

    Derivatives trading on a synthetic market is guaranteed to end in disaster. It is essentially a gambling scheme built on top of a market forced into being by government dictat, based on a pseudo-scientific scare.

    At least all the financial instruments that brought down Lehman Brothers and the rest were somewhat based on something real – although interest rates on fiat money are barely any more real than carbon certificates – how anyone can pretend this is not going to end in tears is beyond me.

    30 years ago, if the Soviet Union had done something like this, we would have all fallen about the place laughing at their blatant ponzi scheme. Yet the Russians are the ones laughing at the rest of us now.

    On the bright side though – it takes serious market crashes and wealth destruction in order for old ideas to die. Perhaps the coming crash in the carbon market is just the type of reality shock people need in order to open their eyes.

    I feel for those people who are in an industry super or government pension fund, and who have been placed unwillingly and unwittingly into ‘clean energy’ investments. This will make the dot-com implosion look like a teddy bears picnic, because it’s playing with the foundation of society – affordable energy.


    Report this

    10

  • #
    MadJak

    Ok, Let me be perfectly clear here:

    Buying and selling imagined permits representing a trace gas does not constitute a Good service or commodity.

    As a result, this is not a Market at all. It’s a misguided communist idea of what a market is. I am struggling to come up with the correct term for this, but a market it most definitely is not.

    Here is the defininition of a market from Dictionary.com:

    1.an open place or a covered building where buyers and sellers convene for the sale of goods; a marketplace: a farmers’ market.
    Nope. They’re not selling goods. They’re trading regulation and leverage with the technocrats.
    2.a store for the sale of food: a meat market.
    Nope. in fact one could argue the opposite.
    3.a meeting of people for selling and buying.
    Nope. What – Rgulaory permits? You’re joking right?
    4.the assemblage of people at such a meeting.
    Nope. i doubt many of these people buying these trace gas permits ever meet each other.
    5.trade or traffic, especially as regards a particular commodity: the market in cotton.
    Nope. Carbon Credits are not a commodity. They’re imagined regulations.

    This is an imagined solution to an imaginary problem which is has been constructed by ignorant communists to allow the most undeserving rent seeking opportunists the opportunity to siphon massive amounts of money from real markets. All with the bonus of being able to make things up as they go.


    Report this

    10

  • #

    We must pray that the worsening economic conditions in the EU loosen the headlock that Carbon (Dioxide) Trading has on Europe. Billions are siphoned off from the pockets of the EU citizens every week. I am praying for more and more declines and failures in the CO2 trading Markets. Most of them are down, but they need to be down and out! There is nothing like losing money to convince people that they are on the wrong track.


    Report this

    10

  • #
    JohnV

    Mmm, I wonder whether carbon might not be the ultimate currency, well in the sense that energy is perhaps the ultimate currency. At least it has some real value unlike gold which is a pretty useless metal in a lot of ways. Maybe it wouldn’t be so bad if we used it as such and thus taxed it as a more efficient way for governments to fund themselves. It would just need to be a sliding scale so the poor end of society weren’t unfairly punished.
    Just a thought.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    I know I may harp on this, and you may think it’s not related, but note specifically how all of this Carbon Credits thing has been corrupted into something that was not really the original intent.

    In 1997, at the COP3 meeting, the UNFCCC implemented the Kyoto Protocol. It was meant to reduce emissions of dangerous Greenhouse gases, CO2 being the largest of them. 192 Countries signed up, and were hived off into two categories, basically the haves and the have nots.

    40 Countries were considered already developed, and from that 40, 23 Countries were further culled as being those able to pay the way for every Country, and yes, Australia is on that short list. This ability to pay was actually made plain in the text for the Protocol, and I’ve mentioned it before in Comments here where I have linked into a Post of my own from November of 2010 having already mentioned it as far back as four years ago when I first started out.

    Those 23 Countries would work towards lowering their emissions at their own cost, introduce renewable energy at their own cost, shut down emitting entities at their own cost, and on top of all this, pay ALL THE COSTS of those other 152 developing Countries.

    As part of the explanation as to how those 23 Countries would pay their way, the UNFCCC explained that those 23 should instigate an ETS mechanism, and the money raised would then be diverted to pay all those costs for those remaining 152 Countries to lower their emissions and introduce renewable power.

    Individual emitting entities would then pay Government for their emissions and they could trade credits as long as they handed back at the end of the year credits totalling their emissions. Individually, those emitting entities could then invest in (approved) ‘green’ or renewable power schemes in those other Countries and gain extra credits for doing so, adding to their total, whether to trade or hand back in to offset their own emissions. Each year the cap would be lowered.

    Altruistically, this was the mechanism that UNFCCC hoped would lower emissions. Also altruistically, this was how those 23 Countries as a whole would fund ‘clean development’ in those Developing Countries.

    Scroll forwards to right now, and see how this original intent has been totally corrupted, and at every level.

    Credits are bought and sold for one purpose only, to make money.

    Individual emitting entities have no real concept of what it really means.

    And here in Australia, the Government is ‘pricing Carbon’ but in actual fact it is just to help their ‘bottom line’, with a tiny and absolutely useless portion diverted to minute renewable power, with nothing to actually reduce emissions, and the rest given away as a bribe, and there’s no other word for it.

    Elsewhere, as you can see in the main text of Joanne’s Post, it’s used as a money making ‘Bubble’, so far removed from its original intent as to seem completely unrelated.

    Now, I’m nor standing up for the UN here, because this was never going to work, right from the start, but note how quickly when monumentally humungous amounts of money are involved the ‘sharks’ move straight in, and surely, the UN must have seen this, leading me to believe that all this altruistic stuff of the Kyoto protocol was just a red herring right from the start, something for the green masses to point to and say that something really is being done.

    No, as I have said ad infinitum, this has nothing whatsoever to do with the environment. It’s just about the money.

    Always was, Always will be.

    Tony.


    Report this

    10

  • #
    CraigR

    Follow the money ! the scary thing is….. it’s in its infancy. Wow talk about capitalism, why aren’t the “left” shouting!


    Report this

    10

  • #
  • #
    RoHa

    I knew from the start of the “carbon market” that it would be just another scam by the Big Money boys to rip off the rest of us.

    Young sharpies with nasty haircuts and no morals would work complex fiddles to enrich themselves and their bosses, while said bosses would push governments for more deregulation so that they could commit even greater frauds.


    Report this

    10

  • #

    Germany appears to be heading towards the Notausgang (emergency exit).

    Pierre Gosselin has an article on Germany’s new President Gauck is, in front of a conference of the eco-lobby, calling for reason, objectivity, an end to excessive subsidies and a free-market approach to solving environmental problems.

    Sustainability does not mean restriction or going without. Rather it means reason and responsibility.

    Gauck was responsible for cleaning up a major part of the shemozzle created by those running East Germany. His new role as President is markedly less potent, but nevertheless influential.


    Report this

    10

  • #
    crakar24

    I like the way that whenever we talk about the money and the futility of the whole thing it is a one sided conversation but when we talk about the statistical significance of a 0.001 C increase in the temps etc we are inundated with white noise.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    crakar24

    BRC,

    Your 4 comments 6.2/8.2/11.1 and 14.2 are all excellent thoughts thankyou for sharing them with us would it be alright if i plagiarise the crap out of them on other sites :-) ))?

    regards

    Crakar


    Report this

    00

  • #
    crakar24

    We need this ETS so we can stop weather like this

    http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/coldest-may-in-50-years-20120529-1zgcr.html

    We need this ETS so we can pay for our own stupidity

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345439/Customers-face-huge-wind-farms-dont-work-cold.html

    We need this ETS so we can tell everyone to shut up

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/9311365/Bribe-residents-to-accept-wind-turbines-says-Tim-Yeo-MP.html

    But most importantly we need this ETS so the money junkies can make even more money.


    Report this

    10

  • #

    O/T: UWA’s Lewandowsky gets a Jubilee spanking from Ben Pile on Lewandowsky’s “reformulation” of the Precautionary Principle.

    The precautionary principle — risk analysis without numbers, and without a sense of proportion — gives greater weight to speculation than to knowledge. That is the nature of the politics of fear: you can’t rule something out, so in order to survive, you have to assume that anything you can speculate about is actually the case, and act accordingly.

    P.S. Note that our failed (Fabian) Premier Carmen Lawrence is on the editorial board of the “Shaping Tomorrow” blog which is funded by a grant from UWA’s Vice Chancellor and Murdoch’s Institute of Sustainability and Technology Policy. Curtin Uni’s banner is also on the blog. It’s so wonderful to see the pull factor for nincompoops being so clearly advertised by what are supposed to be the premier institutes of education in Western Australia.


    Report this

    10

  • #

    Great post Jo. Follow the money, as always:

    I posted this in December last year. The day after, the police turned up at my home with a warrant citing anti terrorist legislation to seize my computers…

    http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2011/12/12/climategate-2-follow-the-money-to-see-who-calls-the-shots/


    Report this

    10

  • #
    handjive

    O/T but of maybe of interest to readers here:

    Discovery of Historical Photos Sheds Light On Greenland Ice Loss
    June, 06 2012

    A chance discovery of 80 year old photo plates in a Danish basement is providing new insight into how Greenland glaciers are melting today.

    In this week’s online edition of Nature Geoscience, Ohio State University researchers and colleagues in Denmark describe how they analyzed ice loss in the region by comparing the images on the plates to aerial photographs and satellite images taken from World War II to today.

    Taken together, the imagery shows that glaciers in the region were melting even faster in the 1930s than they are today, said Jason Box, associate professor of geography and researcher at the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State.

    A brief cooling period starting in the mid-20th century allowed new ice to form, and then the melting began to accelerate again in the 2000s.

    cO2 to blame?
    No clean energy future?

    Now that is inconvenient.


    Report this

    10

  • #
    MudCrab

    Now without trying to sound flippant or silly, I am an engineering professional (which is down the food change from a professional engineer but thanks for asking) and never really studied ecconomics at school.

    However, as I understand it, here we have a market that is effectively trading in promises and the vast majority of those promises are only there due to government legislation.

    So if the legislation was weakened to the extent that the owners of said promises just told the market to GFI… then… well, should I be scared?

    Just how much of the real world is going to get dragged down when this farce collaspses?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    observa

    One of my favourite sites for dispelling one particular Green myth about reshiftable energy.
    Have a play with the time series output graphs and it will whack the solar fanatics over their tinfoil hats, not that any scientific output data like this will make any difference whatsoever to their religious beliefs.

    The RECs,direct subsidy, etc on this solar system, just like mine and so many others, will be one small phoney bill in the Morgan/Sachs/Macquarie Monopoly money game. The left are such disgusting hypocrites over thin air derivatives trading.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    Years ago the first of the large Russian cruise liners berthed in Sydney to refit for Australian tourists. The Russian captain was protesting the installation of poker machines. Why? “Because I can see no value in a machine where you put money in ome end and get less money out of the other. It’s stupid!”
    The vacuous nature of the Ponzi carbon credits scheme was equally visible as flawed from the outset. I’ve tried to chase down somew of the racketeers, but they have more money than I do and they cover their tracks well. Time will expose them as the tide goes out. Keep an eye on big German banks and their senior advisors.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Joe's World

    Jo,

    You should follow the money of bonuses and the amounts these swindlers receive each year. Staggering amounts for these inventive schemes that need no actual physical capital. And yet when they collapse, the salaries and bonuses have made these executives filthy rich on transactions that have no actual worth. Bankers get political policies changed in order for these schemes to flourish through “keeping the markets self regulating”
    Ya riggggggght!!!!!


    Report this

    00

  • #
    mfo

    The EU, however unlikely, may be beginning to experience a dose of reality as it starts to dawn on their bureaucratic minds that apocalyptic anthropogenic global warming is a crock. Coupled with this is the fact that they are trying to hold together a political project, the EU, which the Euro is pulling apart.

    EU carbon permits peaked at 34.40 euros ($45.17) per metric ton in 2008 but have since lost over 80% of their value. So the EU B’crats are realising that a market solution to the non-existent anthropogenic global warming hypothesis, is unworkable, however much they try to rig it.

    Economic activity in the EU is stagnant as a result of the recession and there is therefore a huge oversupply of carbon allowances. The US Senate very sensibly has not passed cap-and-trade legislation. So the EU carbon trading fandango is the largest in the world.

    Carbon trading in the EU has been hit by the theft of carbon allowances and tax fraud, which undermined the trading bubble that was being created. I would have simply said caveat emptor, but a lot of unknowing people may have had their pensions invested in carbon permits.

    What’s just as concerning is that the International Energy Agency said, in April, that the amount of additional investment required for renewable power, energy efficiency and cleaner transport by 2020 is $5 trillion.

    Presumably this would pay for windmills, mercury filled light bulbs, golf carts and luxury lifestyles.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Kakatoa

    Thanks for the great summary of the “market”.

    I can’t wait for the first CO2 auctions here in CA- that are schedule for the end of this year- NOT! I assume that the powers that be are keeping track of the administrative costs of this market. I wonder what the true effect on CO2 is when you subtracted out the CO2 generated by all the activities put in place to administer this market……….


    Report this

    00

  • #

    [...] Jo Nova Share this:PrintEmailMoreStumbleUponTwitterFacebookDiggRedditLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This entry was posted in Cap & Tax, Carbon trading and tagged carbon scam, climate fraud, government cash grab. Bookmark the permalink. ← Robert Rapier: If We Only Had a Stable Energy Policy [...]


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Leo Morgan

    Why are they called ‘markets’ or ‘permits’? When the Mafia does it, it’s called ‘insurance’.
    “Nice little business you’ve got here. We’d hate to see anything happen to it. Pay us money and we’ll let you stay in business.”
    Various Governments take the role of the Mafia in that analogy. Governments are as addicted to other people’s money as any branch of organized crime. The collapse of the Carbon Market does not mean they’ll stop their money grab any more than the Mafia would.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Bill

    It’s not like the World Bank has a vested interest in this market…

    Might be: It’s not like the World Bank has novested interest in this market…


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Peter Miller

    Australians will shortly be able to enjoy all the benefits of their own carbon taxes, which is precisely nothing. The cost will be horrendous and the long term economic damage incalculable.

    On at least one occasion before, I have compared the payment of carbon taxes to paying a hooker for her services. In both cases:

    1. The seller is selling something intangible and of no material use.
    2. Having sold it once, the seller can sell it again and again and again and…………….
    3. The buyer may, or may not, have a fleeting sensation of satisfaction.
    4. The buyer has acquired absolutely nothing of any value and is poorer for the experience.
    5. Both are extensively exploited by organised crime.

    The European Union has grown famous for its goofy/green policies, which provide no benefit except to the bloated egos of certain politicians, but inflict a heavy, pointless, economic burden on a system already buckling at the knees.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Jake

    The link below leads to a new book called “the Green Illusion” sounds like it will make CO2 look like what it is: harmless. But it also shows that the production of solar cells creates a range of real man made products way worse than what is currently being traded or taxed, depending on where you live.

    http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/738098

    A solar rethink seems advisable if humanity is to survive.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    CarolKay

    Given the huge sums of money involved here what I am about to ask is not really that off topic.

    Heard BBC radio this morning interviewing their reporter who is here to observe an experiment being conducted by University of Western Sydney academics to raise CO2 levels in a eucalypt forest to those expected by 2050 to see how the trees respond.

    He described the apparatus pumping out the carbon dioxide and interviewed the head researcher who said while not everyone agrees that CO2 is damaging everyone agrees that CO2 is definitely continuing to rise. He also said 2050 levels are expected to be reached in 6 months.

    The cynic inside my head is saying that any observable damage to these gums by December will be music to the ears of all the rent seekers and the current Australian government. That same cynic also wonders whether there is another odorless, invisible gas that is not quite so benign as CO2 where a teensy percentage introduced to the mix being pumped out might produce results that would stop the sceptics in their tracks?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    crakar24

    OT,

    Farmers in areas of Pakistan are in deep trouble as the river waters from snow melt are 35% below normal here is the link

    http://tribune.com.pk/story/389319/climate-change-slow-melting-of-glaciers-to-delay-crop-sowing/

    Let me repeat that headline

    climate-change-slow-melting-of-glaciers-to-delay-crop-sowing

    WTF!!!

    Enough is enough.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Barry

    One of the lead authors is from NYSE / Bluenext the global carbon exchange. Shame on the World Bank. This report does not have any credibility. Don’t take my word for it just search on the authors. This should be investigated it is just plain wrong.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Streetcred

    Sorry, couldn’t find anywhere to post this BUT … Gergis et al gets trashed at Climate Audit:

    Gergis “Significance”


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Gowest

    I copied this from the “Barnabyisright.com” to outline just how scary this market will become now that the ALPGreen fools (Useful idiots!) has given our banks exactly what they want. A Ticking Time Bomb Hidden In The Carbon Tax called “derivatives”.

    Carefully buried in 1,000+ pages of legislation, just 2 tiny, opaque clauses (109A and 110) have been included that allow the banks to immediately begin creating and trading unlimited quantities of unmonitored, unregulated carbon “securities” (another term for “derivatives”).
    Australia’s banks already trade in derivatives. Most of their derivatives bets are on movements in Interest Rates and Foreign Exchange Rates . And they have a total exposure to just these forms of derivatives, that is a truly mind-boggling $17.93 Trillion. The value of all Australians’ superannuation savings combined, is about $1.3 Trillion. As is the claimed annual “GDP” of the Australian economy.

    Almost everyone incorrectly believes that no trading will happen until 2015. But the truth is, the banks can begin creating and trading in carbon derivatives from Day 1. Even though the scheme is supposed to be a “fixed price” scheme for the 3 years up to 2015. The $10 billion that the government will raise from forcing companies to buy carbon permits – the basic mechanism for “putting a price on carbon” – is almost nothing compared to the value of derivatives that banks will create and trade.
    Our government has followed the lemming-like lead of Ireland, by explicitly and implicitly putting taxpayers on the hook for the deeds (and misdeeds) of the banks, by placing the nation as guarantor for the solvency of the Australian banking system. Meaning, just like the rest of the West, our banks are Too Big To Fail.

    And from July 1, thanks to the Clean Energy Future scheme and those two little clauses, the government has handed the banks a licence to print.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    crakar24

    Kind of OT

    from Bolt

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/dam-their-flood-of-mistakes/story-e6frfhqf-1226386752134

    I just want to highlight one statement from the story

    Now look at your water bills, ramped up to pay for Labor’s desalination white elephant, which will produce hideously expensive water we won’t need for years, but are contracted to pay for regardless.

    You were fooled, maybe even lied to – about global warming, the “permanent drought”, the cost of the desal plant.

    And now you must pay.

    But learn the lesson. You actually believed these preachers and their green faith.

    Don’t make this mistake again.

    Oh, wait. Too late. The carbon tax.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    Apologies, the site will be down today for a while to try to restore those 100,000 comments that went missing. Here’s hoping it is successful.

    Jo


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    All the extreme Green and other comrades warnings against fossil fuels and promoting very inefficient and expensive so called “green” alternatives is crazy, Google: Helium-3 or what China refers to as the perfect fuel that Earth has very little of but on the Moon enough to provide a clean energy future here for thousands of years, renewable in the the Sun deposits it into the Moon soil. Several nations are working on plans and systems to recover it and bring it in liquid gas form to Earth, one space shuttle load would power the US for a year via reactors. NASA are well advanced, China and Russia and others are in the race.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    The left have many ways of self-funding, union superannuation funds in Australia are primarily businesses created on the superannuation guarantee levy against employers for employees and bonus of unions having more influence in the board rooms of public companies via fund shareholding on behalf of fund members. Bottom line: manipulation and control


    Report this

    00

  • #
  • #
  • #

    [...] trade (C&T) is in the news again: Global Carbon Market trading (practically all EU) climbed to


    Report this

    00

  • #
    freespeechnfacts

    Carbon Traders amongst us ?

    check this website very very interesting

    http://www.capitalalternatives.com.au/australian-carbon-credits/


    Report this

    00

  • #

    [...] Global Carbon Market Hits $176 Billion in 2011 [...]


    Report this

    00

  • #
  • #
    Gary Clyne

    Please direct me to the update of this story. Thanks.
    ——

    REPLY: Good question. I’ve added a note to the post. The 2013 report was so bad it was canceled. It shows how impartial the World Bank is. – Jo


    Report this

    00

  • #
    MadJak

    You just beat me to it brc…


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    On the other hand, it may not be all bad. Employees of the BBC for a start have a lot of their super invested in “green” projects. Life will be hard for them in future, but perhaps they will learn the advantages of a more balanced approach.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    MadJak

    Baa Humbug:

    These groups have the EU in a headlock

    Yep. And it sure looks like the EU has stopped breathing and appears to be going to sleep.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whakaaro

    I am not close to this – it makes me too angry.

    But I am reliably informed that well over half of the EU trading actually originates in Germany. It seems the German Greens are all over it, but nobody else is wanting to sing along, so the Green groups are trading with each other. This implies that the figures quoted may well be turnover (churn?), rather than new investment funds entering the market.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Speedy

    World Vision Australia??! If they were caring about feeding the poor, they wouldn’t be doing this. Carbon dioxide feeds crops, biofuels starves people.

    World Vision. Their hypocracy is disgusting.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    John in France

    Boondoggle?

    Will that do?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    brc

    Well, it’s not even trading co2, it’s trading the permission to release co2 (or equivalent) into the atmosphere.

    You have people wanting to buy the permission to emit co2e into the atmosphere, and people wanting to sell a credit they’ve been given for allowing that.

    But do they actually take co2 out of the atmosphere? Well, in most cases, no they don’t.

    What most credits are, are actually promises to not cut down trees. Or promises to generate power in a way other than emitting co2. So if you purchase a solar panel instead of a petrol generator, you’re generating credits – this is how the subsidies for solar panels exist, by the way.

    As for promising to not cut down trees – anyone can see the blind madness of this scheme. For one, how do we know the tree isn’t cut down? The promises to leave the tree alone go for something like 30 years. A 30 year contract not to cut down a tree. It’s utter madness. How do you know if 5 years time a fire isn’t going to go through and destroy the forest? Or the government of that country get overthrown and the new dictator decides to clear-cut the forest. Do you get your money back? No. Or maybe the dictator sees that is is easy money and sells the promise for the same tree 10, 20, 100 times over? How are you going to audit that? Send an auditor to hack through a jungle and check the trees are still there? How are you going to track all the certificates? It’s a ridiculous fantasy.

    And note – not one gram of co2 has been removed from the atmosphere. It’s lopsided – a farmer growing wheat takes out tonnes of co2 to form the carbon in the wheat. Yet they don’t get a credit – unless they sell the wheat to someone to brew into ethanol, which somehow transforms the growing into ‘environmentally friendly’.

    As Jo has said before – when a coal bulk carrier turns up in a port and there’s actually no coal in it, the buyer knows they have been swindled. But when a carrier turns up with a load of electronically generated carbon credits, it’s an empty hold whether you have been ripped off or not. You cannot expect a market trading on purely mandated synthetic goods to possibly last any longer than the regulatory regime enforcing it. And if that underlying regulatory regime is a democracy, the rules can (and do) change at any minute. Carbon trading will not happen in Australia in 2 years time. Anyone who seriously thinks it will is not to be trusted with any money at all.

    But lets’ say, through the magic of the UN and the world bank, that somehow they do manage to overcome all these problems and get it going. Then what? The individual governments can mint themselves currency at any time just by creating carbon credits and handing them out to their industries. Each credit has a face value in their local currency. Export Steel market struggling? Just print off a couple of billion carbon credits and hand them to your steel mills. Either they don’t have to purchase permits on the market, or they can sell them and pocket the cash. Hey presto! Problem solved. Can’t happen, won’t happen? Don’t make me laugh. It already has – this is the main reason why the market keeps failing, because governments can mint credits whenever they like.

    You have to be certifiably insane to voluntarily take part in this mess. Yet indirectly, we’re all forced to.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    In fact, those individual emitting entities are the (middleman) pawn. They provide a service for the public who pays, and then money is extracted from that pawn, so in effect the public is being fleeced. The point is that this whole scheme will, by design, kill off the goose that laid the golden egg, that middleman pawn.

    Tony.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    Gold is quite useful.

    Notably as an electrical conductor, radiation and largely-inert chemical barrier.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    brc

    If you want to trade energy, then trade energy. You can buy oil, gas, uranium – all types of energy sources.

    It’s no coincidence that the oil/gold ratio always trades in a certain range – it’s because they’re both real things that real people want, and they can’t be inflated away.

    However, energy doesn’t qualify as a currency because it is not easily divisible, durable or storeable. While you *could* pour out a liter of crude in order to purchase some bread, it would be pretty messy. Transferring gas would be even harder.

    But in a way oil/gas/uranium storage is just as vital to underpinning a paper currency as gold, silver and platinum are. They are all useful stores of value that cannot be meddled with by a central government.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    crakar24,

    and how obvious it is too!

    I wonder how many others have noticed this as well.

    Tony.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    brc

    Indeed. I could care less about arguing science, it’s not my main interest, and people love to get bogged down on minutae and ignore the big picture completely. Sure I read about it and comment occasionally, but it’s not really where the action is. Scientist can freely believe whatever they want to believe – the problems only come when fools and power seekers try and use their science to their own ends.

    Bring up the real policies that this madness compels, and nothing from the alarmists. Crickets chirping. Not even the Federal government is willing to bring it up – they have reduced their grand policy to a pointless charade of handing out cash and hoping nobody will notice the reason why.

    It’s an especially dishonest intellectual position to spend all day arguing that we’re all going to die because the Earth is going to heat up a few 10ths, but then run like startled rabbits when it comes time to discuss the futility of the policies that the ‘science’ apparently compels.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    brc

    Most of the USA doesn’t participate in carbon trading schemes, so any fall in co2 output is likely to have no effect.

    Except, of course, that as people wake up, and if the US can get rid of it’s current anti-business and anti-energy administration, future energy and heavy industry projects will probably open up in the non-carbon taxed US states. The California exodus will only increase and increase, as their state finances seriously start to swirl the drain, and they start slapping on more taxes and promising more entitlements to try and make up the difference.

    The USA is the key to escaping all this. It needs a Reagan-esque character to jolt them awake and break their economy free of shackles. And then everyone can look at the growth and realise that a lack of socialism is the cause of growth.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pattoh

    The Left is not shouting beacuse the “Rabid Green Left ” which is pushing for this in their arrogant self deluded, self-righteous way HAVE NOT realised that they ar really in fact the useful idiots ( cannon fodder) in the “City’s” push to maintain economic domination.

    When we are living on rabbits cooked on the fire & Kev is happily ensconced in a nice important chair in the UN, a large chunk of our current batch of Green Warriors will probably be in the vanguard of the the mob with the pitchforks & slogans.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    I met a retired farmer from WA who said that some of his neighbours survived the multi-year drought in the wheat belt by planting trees every 2 years. Photos of empty paddocks before, and tree cuttings after were enough to generate cash flow.
    The trees didn’t survive the first summer, which left the paddocks ‘fallow’, ready for the next lot.

    Of course this was only anecdotal evidence, not peer reviewed, so it will be ignored.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Jaymez

    Another good post, but you omitted to mention all the carbon credits granted to industries for free by the EU. If those companies do not use those credits, they can sell them. So a business which suffers a decline because of poor sales, which would not have emitted the CO2, can sell the right to emit CO2 to a company which may not have otherwise emitted CO2.

    Such carbon credits should be non-transferable! But that would be too logical.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    brc

    yeah go ahead I don’t mind. They aren’t fact checked just working on my memory and knowledge so buyer beware!


    Report this

    00

  • #
    brc

    Graeme – true, in a way. But the inevitable fallout will be blamed on ‘free markets’. The irony is that a bunch of socialists inventing a synthetic market with price floors and caps and government-issued certificates was supposed to sell the idea to a skeptical public, because it’s ‘a free market solution’. Then, when this synthetic pastiche of a market collapses, as it will, the people who lose their shirt, like employees of the BBC, will turn around and say ‘see, free markets are bad’.

    It’s the same refrain we’ve heard about the GFC – the US federal government invented a series of institutions and markets for the purposes of getting Americans to buy their own homes. Not all these were bad, particularly the VA loans scheme for returned service personnel. But gradually, any scheme runs out of new participants as every eligible person gets their house. But the people invested in the market want their growth, so gradually standards are lowered, new incentives are put in place, more intervention is done in the market until what is left is just a made-up game of pass the parcel and don’t be left holding the bag when it goes off.

    The US GFC origins were a combination of subsidised home loans for people who were not credit worthy, plus the allowance of ‘too big to fail’ institutions caused by incessant corporate lobbying for less of the kind of regulations that rein in bank profits. By allowing a mixing of regular banking with exotic investment banking, and assuming that derivatives ‘cancel each other out’ a massive critical mess was allowed to build up. One failure and the whole thing comes crashing down, like poorly constructed scaffolding. When you allow too much of your economy to become a giant casino, why bother trying to produce when you could just bet against things and clean up if you win, maybe even pin the loss on the taxpayer if you lose badly.

    The carbon market is no different, but worse because the underlying things are not homes, or businesses, or even piles of gold, wheat, oil or coal. They are a casino built on top of an invented and manipulated instrument. They are a disaster in waiting, and the only thing good about it is that they failed to reach significant size, and appear not to be going to. $176 billion sounds like a lot, but the Facebook IPO was $100 billion. It’s still small fry in the scheme of things. But it will still wipe a lot of people out when it goes.

    And mark my words, when it goes, some halfwit socialist will pen a diatribe against free markets and publish it in The Monthly, completely missing the point once again.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    rukidding

    Unfortunately they have only got Mitt Romney.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Anton

    Germany is commmitted to closing its nuclear reactors, massively reducing fossil fuel consumption, shifting to green energy sources (wind, solar) that are intermittent, while maintaining a competitive industrial base. They cannot have all of these together, however. And this is the Germany that currently bails out the rest of the Eurozone…


    Report this

    00

  • #

    You forgot about reducing its CO2 emissions below 1990 levels.

    Not to worry; Merkel has too. (CO2 emissions from coal-fired power are inexorably rising by 20% over 2010 levels.)

    But, if I’m not mistaken, to dot the t’s and cross the i’s, they’re declaring gas to be a green energy source.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    Social and economic systems are now crumbling in the former “Free West” – and perhaps in the rest of the world.

    World leaders are as worried as everyone else.

    Today I hope to develop a viable solution, based on re-establishing contact with reality that was severed in 1945-46 out of instinctive fear of the “nuclear fires” that:

    a.) Released energy from cores of uranium atoms to vaporize Hiroshima on 6 Aug 1945

    b.) Released energy from cores of plutonium atoms to destroy Nagasaki on 9 Aug 1945

    c.) Convinced world leaders to Unite Nations to save the society on 24 Oct 1945

    d.) Started obscuring energy in cores of the Sun and other stars during 1946

    e.) Climategate documents finally exposed this deception in late Nov 2009

    f.) Still denied by those who led us to the brink of social collapse today

    Here’s the events that led us to this stage:

    http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/#comment-105

    I hope to post a solution below this comment today.

    With kind regards,
    Oliver K. Manuel
    Former NASA Principal
    Investigator for Apollo
    Emeritus Professor of
    Nuclear/Space Sciences
    http://www.omatumr.com


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Jaymez

    If Australia can’t stop people smugglers gaining residency in Australia as refugees, how will our Government agencies stop carbon trading fraud?

    At least with a tangible commodity like iron ore or wheat, someone expects to take delivery of something real, whereas a carbon credit is made up. How can a business check they have purchased a legitimate carbon credit?

    It’s particularly harrowing as the Federal Government legislation specifically states it is the companies responsibility to ensure the carbon credits they buy are legitimate. If they spend millions of dollars buying credits which turn out to be fraudulent that’s their tough luck.

    They will be penalised for not having met their carbon obligations and will also have to purchase replacements.

    The Treasurer Wayne Swan admitted that Treasury had no idea what the compliance costs of the carbon tax for industry would be! How the hell could he therefore have any idea how much prices will go up because of it?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Mike Jowsey

    The article’s main point is how sensitive the glaciers are to climatic changes and it ascribes the cooling of 1943-72 to sulphur dioxide from volcanoes and industry, which after the Clean Air Act of 1963, was cleaned up and the warming resumed. So the AGW meme is preserved. It also says that in the 30s the glacier retreat averaged 20 metres per year and today it averages 50 m/yr.

    However, others note that it shows cyclical variations in line with the AMO. By Exguesstrapolation it could be calculated that by next November the 14th at 2:15am the glaciers will have retreated back as far as the North Pole.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Dave

    .
    Unbelievable!
    So increased CO2 causes increased glacial melt and also slows galcial melt???

    I agree with your WTF comment crakar24!!!
    I am really getting sick of the garbage coming out about CAGW!


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    The High Church of Climate Change will not be swayed because they are on a mission to change the world, evidence is irrelevant to them unless it can be manipulated to suit their purposes.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    I think the plan – since October 24, 1945 – is to unite nations and end national boundaries.

    See: http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/#comment-93


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    They can’t and they wont because they are only interested in control and new world government or as Bob Brown put it to the National Press Club luncheon a few weeks ago, “world parliament”.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    You mean control the states that are now sovereign nations and to end national borders but control people movement everywhere by requiring travel permits to be applied for and restricting how many and who they are issued to. Check out UN Agenda 21


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    The Fabian socialists and their fellow travellers are beavering away all around the globe operating under organisation brands crafted to make gullible target audiences both comfortable and supportive as the web is woven to dictate and control. The evidence of contols already in place are clear to see if you see past their propaganda.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    During the Copenhagen conference on climate change the delegates from China pointed to 3600 years of civilisation and records that show there were three warmer periods than the last that changed to a new cooling around 1998. Each warmer period brought increased prosperity to China with crops and other plant food for animals increasing.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    I agree, the EU is I suspect the prototype for engineering their new world order and the sooner the experiment fails completely or badly enough to cause a stampede to break away the better.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Dennis

    Barnaby Joyce is a wise man.


    Report this

    00