JoNova

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


Handbooks

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



Archives

Emissions trading rorted, fraud, but hardly anyone cares if CO2 is reduced, just the appearance of it

Toss any idea that some people actually care about reducing CO2. Apparently the only thing that matters is the appearance of reducing it.

EU carbon markets are being horribly rorted, and almost no one is checking. (Only the silly, honest UK, and even then only about 1% of sites are  audited.)

All up, something like “£14 billion has been lost to fraud”. The system was corrupted at every level — in Denmark at one stage,  4 out of 5 carbon trading accounts were fraudulent. The Ukraine and Russian governments gave away too many carbon credits, which flooded the market (and the price fell from £20 to £4). Credits were also given for things that would have happened anyway and shouldn’t have got them. (How can anyone base a market on “intentions”?) In the end, even though credits were cheap, a lot of companies didn’t bother buying credits, because no one was checking to see if they met their supposed requirements. And then there was the huge VAT Tax fraud across borders.

Where are most Greens, most NGO’s and activists, where is the outrage?

The fakery around the CO2 scare is legion. It is supposedly the evil pollution set to destroy life on Earth but even most climate extremists don’t care if it is actually being reduced. The whole story of the carbon markets is one of neglect — the point of the markets is evidently NOT to reduce CO2.

Emission impossible as EU fails to police main anti-pollution scheme

“The truth about the ETS is that it has completely failed. It has cost business money and done nothing to reduce CO2. It is based on a fundamentally flawed premise and as the latest report shows, all attempts to fix it are doomed.”
–  Raoul Ruparel, deputy director of the Open Europe thinktank

The EU’s main scheme for reducing CO2 emissions is almost never enforced, according to an official report by Brussels’ own spending watchdog.

Only one EU country inspected – Britain – makes on-the-spot visits to factories to check whether they are staying within their carbon limits under the scheme, the EU Court of Auditors found. Even the UK only checks 1 per cent of sites, down from 5 per cent before.

The auditors also said that attempts to stamp out endemic fraud in the EU’s flagship Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), from which billions of pounds of “carbon credits” have been stolen by criminals, are “not adequate” and continue to leave “significant security weaknesses.”

The verdicts will be deeply embarrassing on the eve of the United Nations climate summit in Paris, where European leaders will claim the ETS as their flagship achievement to tackle climate change.

Read the whole sordid story at The Telegraph.

No matter what the question is, fake markets are never the answer.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.1/10 (83 votes cast)
Emissions trading rorted, fraud, but hardly anyone cares if CO2 is reduced, just the appearance of it, 9.1 out of 10 based on 83 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/hta3rzt

135 comments to Emissions trading rorted, fraud, but hardly anyone cares if CO2 is reduced, just the appearance of it

  • #
    doubtingdave

    So we have crooks using invisible traceless money , to make a profit from an invisible atmospheric trace gas .

    373

  • #

    In Britain the last of the steel industry is going bankrupt. An MP tried to ask the Prime Minister about the impact of green taxes. The response the Speaker said

    Order! Order! We do not need to waste time with this. It has nothing to do with Government Policy.

    Only Guido Fawkes gives references as to how those green taxes – of which the ETS is a part – is affecting the high energy-consuming steel industry. Britain is not only imposing job-destroying green taxes. A democratically-elected MP is being prevented from holding the Government to account for those policies.

    310

  • #
    AndyG55

    I strong suggest that people all email a link to this thread to as many Liberal MP’s and Labor and Green, as they can !!

    Maybe only one or two will read it.. but its a start.

    171

    • #

      Unfortunately, I don’t see the point. We now have a PM that’s as genuine as a Chinese Rolex and as conservative, and concerned for the welfare of his country as The Great Obama.

      10

  • #
    RexAlan

    Well for my money trading thin air was never going to work.

    121

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    Some time ago I did a quick estimate of what the banks might get in a year out of the “trading” in carbon Credits.

    It appeared from using a very low commission rate that the banks would get an easy $10 million for the one time addition of each years credits.

    The benefits of holding the accumulated funds and “managing” those and charging a more reasonable commission could see a yearly scoop of perhaps $100 million or so.

    That’s from just handling the cash and recording the transactions. The actual process of confirming and defining the nature of the carbon credits being purchased is a whole other industry with much more “cash” potential.

    A gold mine with sacks of gold.

    Perhaps even GoldMineSacks

    KK

    231

  • #
    Robk

    It comes as no surprise.
    Lousy science assumptions.
    Lousy political deceptive regime
    Lousy remediation to a non issue.
    Lousy compliance.
    Why would anyone except there would be any respect for this contrived scheme. The sanctimonious robber barons are out of order.

    100

  • #
    bleD

    Is this a bit like bitcoins?

    121

    • #
      Peter Miller

      Not really, Bitcoins are something in the ether which have no real value, but do have a perceived value and you can use them time and time again. They are a great favourite with organised crime, drug dealers and those with something to hide.

      European carbon credits have no real value, but do have a perceived value, and you can use them time and again, but only once a year. They are a great favourite with organised crime.

      173

      • #
        Dave

        Bitcoins are an entry on the largest ledger the world has ever seen, backed by the worlds biggest and fastest computer network.

        There is nothing etheral about them. They take energy to mine and secure and minimal energy to store (You can print them on paper or etch them in gold if you like).

        As for the criminal element, I’ll go with System D over the crappy excuse for a free market that is currently being used.

        43

        • #
          Andrew McRae

          I had no idea what you meant and had to look it up.
          As my 2nd act of community service for this year, to save confused Jonovians from the strenuous effort of DDGing for it, System D was defined as:

          inventive, self-starting, entrepreneurial merchants who are doing business on their own, without registering or being regulated by the bureaucracy and, for the most part, without paying taxes, are part of “l’economie de la débrouillardise.” Or, sweetened for street use, “Systeme D.” This essentially translates as the ingenuity economy

          One wonders how a business may take advantage of State enforcement of property rights without awkward questions being asked about the purpose of the property being protected. System D has some appeal, but prison is full of people who thought their plan to be ingenious.

          40

      • #
        Egor TheOne

        CAGW is organized crime !

        71

    • #
      PeterS

      Yes it’s a bit like bitcoins but there are some significant differences. For one, you can buy goods and services with bitcoins as they are a legitimate means of exchange in some places. There are even ATMs including here in Australia where you can exchange money for bitcoins. I doubt that will ever happen with emission trading certs, carbon credits and the like.

      51

  • #
    el gordo

    Tristan Edis in The Australian Business Review just over a month ago.

    Gov’t tried to acquire huge amount of carbon credits with carbon tax money

    ‘News has emerged that the Government will use money raised from the carbon price to acquire a very large number of international carbon credits in order to achieve its 2020 emission reduction target. The initiative makes a mockery of the Environment Minister’s prior claims about his confidence in the Direct Action policy alone to achieve the government’s emission reduction targets. It also shows just how quickly the government has moved to dump prior Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s insistence that such carbon credits were ‘dodgy’ and not to form part of the government’s climate policy.

    ‘A few weeks ago Environment Minister Greg Hunt confirmed that the Government would be using surplus monies collected by landfill operators to meet future, now non-existent, carbon price obligations to purchase international carbon credits to count towards their 2020 emission reduction target.

    ‘However, via an underappreciated loophole, it appears the Australian Government will be able to acquire vastly more carbon credits than had been previously appreciated.’

    90

  • #

    For the Paris COP21 the EU submitted one of the most ambition policy proposals. It is

    .. a binding target of an at least 40% domestic reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared to 1990

    To cut global greenhouse gas emissions to virtually zero by 2100 there are two primary conditions that need to be in place.
    First is to have the policies in place that will achieve that objective. I have shown that the claim that the policy pledges will achieve the major part of that target is not supported by proper analysis.
    Second is to actually implement the policies. The Telegraph article shows that ETS, a central pillar of the overall GHG policy, is not being implemented.
    The only impact of the policies is to destroy jobs and decrease living standards in the countries daft enough to actually implement them.

    150

    • #
      King Geo

      To cut a long story short the EU are committing “hari kari”.

      Who would have thought that 3rd World Countries like China & India would become the Economic Power Houses during the 21st century. Who back in the colonial days of the late 1800′s/early 1900′s would believe this could possibly happen? And to quote George W, “make no mistake” – the Chinese & Indian citizens in the golden age of the 2100′s will be enjoying every minute of the “changing of the guard”. A dream come true – their once masters gone to “rack & ruin” – all because they believed in a myth going by the name of “AGW”.

      180

      • #

        It might have seemed back in the 1970s that China and India would always remain poor. Both had Governments in place stopping economic development. But that changed, first in China and then in India. No one predicted such fast growth, but economists like Milton Friedman were saying in the 1970s that if China copied Hong Kong’s example and liberalized its economy it would develop. China did that in the 1980s and the 1990s. At look at the relative populations (in millions EU 500, USA 320, China 1350, India 1250) would mean that fast growth in the latter two countries would dramatically shift the proportions of global output from the OECD to the Third World. It is the same with global emissions. Back in 1990, when global emissions cuts were first proposed,
        the old First and Second World countries accounted for 68% of CO2 emissions. If the nasty rich countries were to blame. The environmentalist planners forgot about growth in the rest of the world. The shift is continuing. In 2020 that share will be about 33%.

        110

      • #
        Geoff Sherrington

        KG,
        My hand is up. During a series of private, moderately high level visits to west China in the early 1990, I was given data on major Chinese resources in action and about to be. I was hosted at Director level at several important mines.
        This allowed me to compose a number of resources reports on how this info could be used to advantage by relevant Australian miners. After doing the rounds, even with people I knew already, not one expression of interest appeared.
        My simplified argument was a simple “join China in business or go into oblivion in the next couple of decades”. This applied to several metals including tin, with world beating Chinese resources.
        Not a tickle from Australians. I predicted fast growth in China. My projection in general are now being played out 20 years after my visits. Some were wrong, more were right.
        Comprehension is easier when you accept that your Chinese masses are on average are on average rather smarter than Australians like me.

        140

        • #
          TdeF

          The other characteristic is the Chinese view that unstinting, unceasing hard work is the key to success. Unlike Arab countries for example where everyone seems to be sitting down, the Chinese whether at school or work are determined to be successful through hard work. No one sits. They do not have time.

          130

          • #
            King Geo

            Geoff S and TdeF you are spot on. Many of the EU member nation citizens have their hand out – do little work, retire and expect the govt to look after them for the rest of their lives. Good in theory but who pays? No one is earning the tax euros anymore to fund this – the money runs out – “kaput!!!” e.g. Greece. And more to follow. The work ethic of the Chinese is such that this will not occur. In 20 years expect most of the EU member nations to be terminal, ie the PIIGS + more, and China to be an even stronger “Economic Powerhouse”. You see there is a very simple solution to prosperity” “work hard & look after yourself & don’t depend on others” – not what the socialist govts in the EU want to hear, nor Oz’s ALP.

            40

  • #
    ROM

    OK I’m back delving around again in past human history which can always tell us quite a lot on how the current situation, whatever it is, might pan out.
    Whatever it might be, you can probably lay odds that something similar has all been done before, often many times over as a short perusal of history sources can usually tell us.

    You might have to know a little of the history of the Middle Ages for this below plus a working knowledge of the Christian Protestant Reformation but the parallels with the Carbon Credit fiasco are quite marked.

    And so to history of Carbon Credits; err! make that the Middle Age’s Church’s “Indulgences”.

    And as for raising a few tens or hundreds of billions of the whatever for the financial support of those kleptocrats doing Good Works climatically by stopping their nations economic advancement and keeping their populace poor and beggared, well move over guys.
    You been well and truly beaten to the punch on that one !
    In fact well and truly beaten by others some 6 centuries or more ago
    ———–
    Quoted;

    A little history

    The Middle Ages

    Indulgences were originally introduced in the eleventh century and arose in connection with the so-called sacrament of penance, which was claimed to assure the penitent sinner of the forgiveness of sins while making a distinction between the guilt and the punishment of the sin. According to the Church of Rome, the former was forgiven by God through the priest. The latter, however, had to be met through the performance of certain good works such as fasting, the recitation of certain prayers, pilgrimages, or alms.

    In the fourteenth century we find the partial substitution of money gifts for works of mercy and charity, a fact which already laid the train for the Reformation: even notable Roman Catholics such as Juan de Valdez, the brother of the secretary of the Emperor Charles V, admitted the corruption of such practices:

    “I see that we can scarcely get anything from Christ’s ministers but for money, at bishopping money, at marriage money, for confession money – no, not extreme unction without money! They will ring no bells without money, no burial in the church without money; so that it seemeth that Paradise is shut up without money. The rich is buried in the church, the poor in the churchyard. [...] The rich man may readily get large indulgences, but the poor none, because he wanteth money to pay for them.”

    The practice of selling indulgences, with its falsification of Biblical truth as well as scandalous financial exploitation of the populace, thereafter increased significantly until in Luther’s time it led Europe to the brink of revolution and caused the mighty revolt against Rome in the form of the Protestant Reformation.

    The Reformation period

    The event that brought the latent crisis into the open was the public sale of indulgences by a notorious Dominican friar, Johann Tetzel, in 1517. He was the Vatican’s “Apostolic Commissary for all Germany and Inquisitor of Heretical Pravity” during the popedom of Leo X (1513-1521). His indulgence-brokering activities, which soon aroused Luther’s righteous indignation, were part of a corrupt and ambitious ecclesiastical scheme by Leo to provide funds for the reconstruction of St. Peter’s in Rome, the most lavishly expensive mass house of Romanism. It cost £12 million, a colossal sum in 16th-century terms and more than all the money expended on it by successive Popes, and took 111 years to build. Leo was advised by Cardinal Pucci to publish a sale of indulgences throughout Europe for the purpose of replenishing the pontifical exchequer and finishing the work on St. Peter’s begun by Julius II (1503-1513). Little did they realise that the project, paid for by their dupes both rich and poor, would cripple the permanent resources of the Papacy and lead to the decline, if not the downfall, of Romanism.

    Leo was the friend and protector of the artists Raphael and Michelangelo – the splendour-loving Renaissance Pope of the Medici family. He had commissioned Albrecht of Brandenburg, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Mainz, with the task of collecting the money in Germany. Tetzel acted on Leo’s orders and went from town to town, offering varying spiritual benefits to his spiritual dupes in return for the payment of appropriate amounts of money.

    The people were still ignorant enough to believe in the Pope’s power to grant pardons for sins. Thus there was no doubt that they would buy the ‘pardons’, and so gold would flow into the coffers of Rome. Tetzel told them: “You should know that all who confess and in penance put alms into the coffer according to the counsel of the confessor, will obtain complete remission of all their sins.”

    There was one obstacle. Princes were growing jealous of their subjects’ money being taken by the Vatican. Leo X, however, got over this obstacle by giving them a share in the spoil. He offered Henry VIII one quarter of what came from England, but Henry haggled and bargained to get a third! Since kings had made themselves poor by their wars, a share in the Papal spoils on their own subjects was a greater temptation than they could resist.

    Erasmus, in his Praise of Folly (1509), had described indulgences as “the crime of false pardons”. In every letter and book that he wrote since then he bitterly complained that the Pope and the Princes were resorting to them again. “Ecclesiastical hypocrites,” he wrote, “rule in the courts of princes. The Court of Rome has lost all sense of shame. [...] I see that the very height of tyranny has been reached.
    The Pope and Kings count the people not as men, but as cattle in the market

    —————–

    To quote a very old nostrum that covers most situations; “There is nothing new under the Sun”.

    292

    • #
      ROM

      OOPS!
      References for the quote above in my post #10

      Is Tetzel really dead?

      Also; The Church in 1500

      50

    • #
      Peter Miller

      Medieval indulgences = modern day carbon credits.

      Approved by the Establishment, achieve absolutely nothing, either paid voluntarily by the gullible and stupid, or being forced to pay by those totally lacking in integrity and moral fibre.

      Brilliant!

      90

    • #
      TdeF

      The Medicis, like Malcolm Turnbull were rich merchant bankers, the richest in Europe. The papacy was for sale too, for someone with enough money. The popes may have taken vows of celibacy and poverty, but who really cared? It was about money and power.

      The infamous Lucretia Borgia was the daughter of a preceding pope Alexander VI (1431-1503), who kept murdering her suitors. His political enemies made up a story that she was a murderess with poison in her ring. In fact she was treated as a saint in her time but the story stuck for 500 years. Alexander had at least seven children by many mistresses and is the direct ancestor of many of the Royal houses of Europe as well as later Popes. The indulgences were worthless bits of paper created by a merchant banker pope and carbon indulgences the personal favorite of merchant banker PM Malcolm Turnbull. Nothing changes.

      80

  • #
    doubtingdave

    For years as an Englishman i have supported staying in the EU , for no other reason than its better the devil you know , but this is the last straw for me , to say this lot couldnt organise a pish up in a brewery is a understatment, because what this mob get up to would even put FIFA and Sepp Blatter to shame , they even turn the pillaging of the Vikings and the Danegeld into a minor tiff over some spare change , and like my Saxon ancestors i feel like standing on the White Cliffs of Dover banging my spear against my shield and shouting ” out out out ” . Rant over

    110

    • #
      Mike Spilligan

      dd: You usually make such sensible comments so I’m a bit surprised at “..supported staying in the EU….”. As a UKIP member and having seen how this has developed over 40 years, to me the net result of UK being in the EU is that we’ve got an extra layer of government that isn’t needed, except to absorb GBP55 millions per day while taking away our right to control anything. (You must be under 40 years old.)

      121

      • #
        doubtingdave

        Mike , here is a clue to my age ” if 40 is the old age of youth , then 50 is the youth of old age ” I received that “saying” on a birthday card 7 years ago :) . I am the son of a miner and in UK terms a traditional left of centre voter , i saw membership of the EU as a chance to throw off the yoke of the English privileged upper classes , but its clear to me now that i’ve hung on to that dream for too long . Lord Monckton is correct ( as usual ) when he says that the EU is run by unelected commissars , and so they are no better than the medieval robber Barons in Lord christophers ancestry . PS I have been following the debate on climate change , as a skeptic , for around 12 years , its taught me to be skeptical about everything especially about my own views , and that it is a very short step from being an open minded skeptic to a closed minded cynic , and at times i still make that mistake only to regret it later , and Mike i voted Ukip too ( because of other issues not europe ) all the best .

        51

    • #
      Dariusz

      What the Spaniards, the Dutch, the French and lately Hitler could not do, the multiculturalism has done in 20 years. Sadly the great country of yours is stuffed. You will never feel completely secure on your streets wondering if your kids have not been blown up or beheaded on the way to school.
      Australia is going the same way.

      91

  • #
    Ceetee

    “Toss any idea that some people actually care about reducing CO2. Apparently the only thing that matters is the appearance of reducing it”. That Jo is the basis of the art of politics, and this is a political movement. It left the shores of diligent science years ago as you know. I don’t really give a monkeys about reducing CO2 because I suspect it’s been framed. Politicians live for framing issues because they need issues to be relevant. (Not to mention Left/Green activists). Look at Obama, in the cold light of day is it possible for the leader of the so called free world to seem more irrelevant as he does now. He has a fire in the kitchen and he’s checking if the front door is locked. Now that it’s coming home to roost he will do everything possible to defend every stupid decision he’s ever made. Perception is king, there will be no stocktake of his integrity as it is with all these people. Like the side I’m on. It’s based on weight of evidence and undeniable malfeasance on the part of “them”.

    100

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      The problem with aiming only for “appearances” rather than reality is that one delays (but ultimately never avoids) the test of reality. This allows contradictions to accumulate in one’s rhetoric that would be immediately resolved one way or another by a reality check.
      Example: Greenpeace protests coal-fired power and oil drilling, then protests the only other industry capable of providing low-CO2 emission energy reliably.
      http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-05/activists-descend-on-port-ahead-of-nuclear-waste-ship's-arrival/7004088

      Of course my argument is contingent upon the present state of technology and economics, which can change, but that is surely better than an argument disjoint from reality.
      Who knows? Perhaps Elon Musk will wave his LiPo pixie dust over the electricity grid and suddenly zero-subsidy solar power will be as cheap as coal. The Green Dream presently survives on the same “corporate welfare” that the leftists protest in every other sector. It’s more contradiction in unreal rhetoric.

      70

      • #
        Ceetee

        This allows contradictions to accumulate in one’s rhetoric that would be immediately resolved one way or another by a reality check.

        ..and haven’t those contradictions been piling up. My great concern is that there are too few within the LSM to point them out. Theses people believe they can mould reality, a central tenet of their philosophy.

        30

  • #
    pat

    relatively honest reporting, considering where it is published:

    1 Dec: UNDP: Wang Yan: Before National Cap-and-Trade Launch, China Faces Raft of Problems
    Major issues ahead of the planned 2017 launch of a national carbon trading program include a lack of openness, transparency and fairness; a flawed system of allowance allocation which does not reflect real industry conditions; and an inadequate monitoring, verification and reporting system.
    Inconsistencies in the existing pilot programs have manifested in wildly varying prices. During a survey earlier this year, prices for carbon allowances were found to be five times more expensive in one of the markets than in one of the others…
    According to estimates by the ***Paulson Institute, an independent think tank located at the University of Chicago, the cap for China’s carbon emissions may range from three to four billion tons — far higher than the current annual carbon emissions of around one billion tons. The group estimates that the Chinese carbon market’s size may be 64 billion yuan (US$10.1bn) per year.
    China’s National Development and Reform Committee (NDRC) has predicted the national carbon market to cap at two to three billion tons, which still allows China to eclipse the EU as the world’s largest carbon market…
    Hubei Province appears to have traded the largest amount of allowances, but that is only because it allows for intermediary companies to trade allowances between themselves, while the other six pilot schemes do not allow this practice. By contrast, the city of Chongqing has been reluctant to participate, fearing economic impacts, and some days have passed by in that pilot program with very little trading at all.
    When the pilot schemes launched, most of the affected companies had no conception of what carbon trading was…
    http://www.europe.undp.org/content/geneva/en/home/presscenter/articles/2015/12/01/before-national-cap-and-trade-launch-china-faces-raft-of-problems/
    (This story was sourced through the Voices2Paris UNDP storytelling contest on climate change and developed thanks to John Upton from Climate Central.)

    About the author: Wang Yan is a professional reporter from China. She has published over 200 pieces of in-depth environment reports in English and Chinese in China Newsweek and NewsChina Magazine. Some of her publications have won international fellowships or nationwide awards including The Environmental Press Awards issued jointly by Chinadialogue and the Guardian for two consecutive years in 2011 and 2012.

    61

  • #
    pat

    Wang Yan wrote: “According to estimates by the ***Paulson Institute”:

    ***Sept 2015: PDF: 40 pages: Paulson Institute: Carbon Emissions Trading: Rolling Out a Successful Carbon Trading System
    About the Paulson Institute:
    The Paulson Institute is a “think and do” tank that promotes environmental protection and sustainable development
    in the United States and China, while advancing bilateral economic relations and cross-border investment. Established
    in 2011 by Henry M. Paulson, Jr., the Institute is committed to the principle that today’s most pressing economic
    and environmental challenges can be solved only if the United States and China work in complementary ways. The
    non-partisan institute is headquartered at the University of Chicago with staff in Beijing, San Francisco, New York
    and Washington D.C. The Institute focuses on research, programs, and advocacy that promote increased economic
    activity to spur job creation, smart urban growth and responsible environmental policies…
    Co-Authors: Josh Margolis and Daniel J. Dudek, Environmental Defense Fund
    Anders Hove, Paulson Institute
    http://www.paulsoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/5-Emissions-Trading-EN-final1.pdf

    Wikipedia: Henry Paulson
    Henry Merritt Paulson, Jr is an American banker who served as the 74th Secretary of the Treasury.
    He had served as the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs (1974-2006), and is now a fellow at the Harris School of Public Policy Studies and the chairman of the Paulson Institute at the University of Chicago, which he founded in 2011 to promote sustainable economic growth and a cleaner environment around the world, with an initial focus on the United States and China…
    Paulson has personally built close relations with China during his career. In July 2008, The Daily Telegraph reported “Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson has intimate relations with the Chinese elite, dating from his days at Goldman Sachs when he visited the country more than 70 times…
    Questions remain about Paulson’s interest, despite having no direct financial interest in Goldman, since he had sold his entire stake in the firm prior to becoming Treasury Secretary, pursuant to ethics law. The Goldman Sachs benefit from the AIG bailout was recently estimated as US$12.9 billion and Goldman Sachs was the largest recipient of the public funds from AIG. Creating the collateralized debt obligations (CDO’s) forming the basis of the current crisis was an active part of Goldman Sach’s business during Paulson’s tenure as CEO…
    Paulson co-chairs a group called Risky Business (with Michael Bloomberg, Tom Steyer, Robert Rubin, etc) that raises awareness of the projected economic impact of climate change…
    Notable among the members of Bush’s cabinet, Paulson has said he is a strong believer in the effect of human activity on global warming and advocates immediate action to decrease this effect…
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Paulson

    41

  • #
    pat

    4 Dec: GreenLeft: Andrea Bunting: The Greens’ renewables plan: a mixed bag
    [Dr Andrea Bunting's PhD was on the wind power industry. She is a member of Socialist Alliance, Climate Action Moreland and Psychology for a Safe Climate.]
    On November 22, the Australian Greens launched their updated renewable energy plan Renew Australia…
    Emission trading also gets the nod — albeit with a lesser role than the ALP proposes. The Greens recognise that a carbon price would not drive transformation unless it was very high. However, they still want Australia to participate in international carbon trading, despite evidence that this is not working…
    https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/60788

    4 Dec: Bloomberg: Matthew Carr: New Carbon Market Years Away Says Envoy Seeking Paris Allies
    The latest attempt to create an international carbon market will take about four more years and may prompt some countries to press ahead with their own emissions trading rules, according to New Zealand’s climate minister (Tim Groser), who’s seeking to hasten talks on the subject at climate negotiations in Paris…
    Groser is in Paris seeking to ensure that market-based options to combat global warming are included in the UN climate treaty for 2020 being negotiated this month…
    Groser likens the carbon market negotiations with the history of global trade talks. It took almost half a century for the World Trade Organization to emerge from the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade signed by 23 nations in 1947…
    China, the U.S. and the European Union alone could create a transcontinental carbon market that would cover 56 percent of global emissions, according to a study written under a Harvard Kennedy School climate program. A market with 14 participants could cover 85 percent of emissions, according to the “Routes to an Ambitious Climate Agreement in 2015” report published in June…
    The price of emission credits in a UN-overseen market formed under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol has slumped 98 percent since 2008 amid a glut as nations failed to encourage buying. In the European Union’s emissions trading system, the world’s largest cap-and-trade program, permits have fallen about 71 percent in the same period…
    “We are going to pull all this together,” said Groser, referring to the 40 existing carbon markets, the developing-nations keen to win finance via markets and the lack of immediate demand for greenhouse gas credits…
    The latest draft UN climate text published Thursday includes options allowing nations to transfer emission cuts.
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-04/new-carbon-market-years-away-says-envoy-seeking-allies-in-paris

    41

  • #
    Egor TheOne

    ETS = Emissions Trading Scam

    Carbon Credits = Fraud

    CAGW = BS

    U.N. = Unelected Nutters

    111

  • #

    That second line made me proud to be in the UK, but it’s no surprise that there’s so much corruption here, there’s a panic and in times of panic people move to profit

    40

  • #
    Ruairi

    Those claiming the E.T.S.,
    As a flagship of warmist success,
    Are being absurd,
    As failure ‘s the word,
    That skeptics would use for their mess.

    160

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    Follow the money. When lots of money is involved smart folks will figure out how to get a share. A person can use knowledge and support to get greens to promote and politicians to pass carbon trading under a fancy sounding acronym
    [The EU emissions trading system (EU ETS) is a cornerstone . . .]
    and a undeniable imperative (“cornerstone” – no rational person will claim cornerstones are not important). Once created the C. credit has no intrinsic value (not even that of a fancy tulip – look up Tulip Mania) and no limit of the resource.
    What could go wrong?

    From the newspaper link:
    carbon credits do not represent a physical commodity but instead have been described as a legal fiction

    40

  • #
    handjive

    73% of UN Joint Implementation credits deliver no climate benefit (business spectator)

    According to a study from leading global environmental think tank, The Stockholm Environment Institute, 73% of carbon credits created under the Kyoto Protocol’s Joint Implementation program did not deliver “plausible” emissions reductions.

    According to the researchers these projects were going to happen anyway.

    The Joint Implementation program allowed largely eastern bloc countries to create carbon credits that could be used by other countries to count towards meeting their binding emission caps under the Kyoto Protocol.

    40

  • #
    handjive

    The Lazy Persons Guide to saving the Planet – UN

    Things you can do from your couch:

    Offset your carbon emissions! You can calculate your carbon footprint and purchase climate credit from Climate Neutral Now:
    Video – “Reducing your emissions with UN Climate Credits
    . . .
    Government Co- Business model:
    . Create a fake emergency
    . Devise a solution requiring money from uneducated scared people
    . Collect money

    Correct response:
    Man fined for dud doomsday warning

    “may face additional fr@ud charges as prosecutors are investigating claims that he might have cooperated with container businesses to set up a shelter village”

    40

  • #
    el gordo

    ‘The Australian National University economist Warwick McKibbin has supplied the devastating analysis that to achieve a reduction in emissions on this scale Labor would need a carbon tax of $200 a tonne. Imagine the role of this figure in the next election.

    ‘When Abbott became Liberal leader, no one would have predicted that a few years later Australia would embrace the second largest per capita greenhouse gas emissions reductions in the OECD.

    ‘Nor would they have predicted that Turnbull would abandon the ETS approach and reap the ­benefits.

    ‘This has been a sustained masterclass by Hunt in the political possibility of measured reform. Its consequences could shape Australian politics for years.’

    Sheridan / Oz

    50

    • #
      Glen Michel

      Sheridan asserts that Abbott accepts the underlying(as does Sheridan) science is correct;namely CO2 is a pollutant and the prime driver- as well as conflating the gas with particulate carbon.Sheridan is astute in many matters,but on this matter it seems he has not grasped the nuances.

      40

  • #
    scaper...

    Emission Trading Schemes are rubbish! A Turnbull government will never be part of the scam.

    Exactly two months ago I inquired if it was a possibility of introducing a scheme. The answer was NO! I have impeccable sources that go to the very top, not second rate media babble.

    Greg Sheridan (first rate) has an article at The Australian today that is worth a read. Pretty much confirms what I’ve said.

    52

    • #
      el gordo

      Good morning comrade, could you explain this to our worldwide audience?

      ‘A few weeks ago Environment Minister Greg Hunt confirmed that the Government would be using surplus monies collected by landfill operators to meet future, now non-existent, carbon price obligations to purchase international carbon credits to count towards their 2020 emission reduction target.

      ‘However, via an underappreciated loophole, it appears the Australian Government will be able to acquire vastly more carbon credits than had been previously appreciated.’

      Tristan Edis

      ——-

      What are the odds of a disgruntled Dennis Jensen moving to the Nats?

      80

      • #
        scaper...

        WOW! You actually believe what you read from a warmist??? A prime example of ‘second rate media babble’.

        Here is another article from your trusted source to confirm your wayward bias.

        From the Climate Spectator. HAHAHAHAHA!

        24

        • #
          ianl8888

          That exchange with el gordo makes absolutely no sense at all

          So I provisionally conclude that you are indeed the political confidante you claim to be. Only such a person could possibly present no sense so aggressively

          60

      • #
        scaper...

        In relation to Jensen…I don’t care for the person.

        He might as well because Abbott saved him from dis-endorsement before the last election.

        12

        • #
          el gordo

          Jensen is a radical and his own Party doesn’t want him, but there’s ten others in the Party who think this whole carbon reduction business is dodgy.

          60

          • #
            scaper...

            I believe there are more than ten. The probable dis-endorsement of Jensen has nothing to do with his comments on the warming rubbish. Other factors are in play.

            31

            • #
              el gordo

              As I said, the man is outside the box, but I admire him immensely for his battle against overwhelming scientific ignorance on climate change.

              CO2 doesn’t cause global warming and Greg’s clever accounting method doesn’t impress. Lukewarmers are pathetic.

              81

              • #
                scaper...

                Meanwhile, millions of trees are being established, exotic weed infestations are being eradicated, feral animals are being addressed and other programs are in the pipeline.

                Oh…over seven hundred billion dollars worth of projects have received environmental approvals!

                Environmentalism masquerading as warmism.

                Politics is the art of the possible. Funny that.

                23

              • #
                el gordo

                The carbon farming initiative is a good idea (in a political science sort of way) and your observation that its ‘environmentalism masquerading as warmism’ is perfectly apt, but what do you make of this?

                http://carbon-pulse.com/11170/

                30

              • #
                el gordo

                If the government is buying the equivalent of junk bonds then it will dwarf the Khemlani Affair, the political ramifications would be enormous.

                Nest time you have a chat with Greg just ask him what’s the go.

                90

              • #
                scaper...

                I will certainly enquire. A quick Google gets just seven results. It seems that it leads back to Lenore Taylor, The Guardian. A reliable source, not.

                Here’s some questions. If it is as serious as you imply, why haven’t Labor, the Greens, the ABC, Fairfax and the rest of the leftist media run with it?

                If true, surely they would be all up in arms? Why isn’t there a thread here highlighting the sheer hypocrisy of the government?

                Did the dog eat your scepticism?

                21

              • #
                el gordo

                The leftoid media would be happy to see Greg doing this kind of stuff, whatever it takes to save the planet and our grandchildren.

                Mass delusion is amazing to behold. it effects people in all walks of life because of its emotive qualities.

                Bill must be kicking himself he didn’t think of it first.

                70

  • #
    TdeF

    The vilification of Volkswagen is amazing. Protesters with a sign CO2? No one questions CO2 from volkswagen. There was no CO2 fraud. VW are not more responsible for CO2 emissions than any other car manufacturer. What do they want Volkswagen to do, create a car which runs on water?

    The emission tests VW fudged were NO2, but to the science ignorant Greens, the people against everything, they are the same thing. NO2 and SO2 are real villains, responsible for acid rain and convert instantly in water like your lungs into Nitric Acid and Sulphuric acid. SO2 comes from much cheaper South American oil and NO2 comes from incomplete combustion, like a VW under hard acceleration. VW actually passed the tests as specified but cheated by throttling back when cruising. Driven sedately on flat land, the test results are correct.

    Still it is all about protesting and evil manufacturers, miners and farmers. Get rid of the lot and go back to the Dark Ages seems to be the message. Life was terrible then. The fact that it is also utterly impossible to go backwards does not occur to inner city public servants who get paid for turning up at work, get their food delivered by trucks and import their bicycles from China and protest against everything on weekends if they have a job.

    60

  • #
    TdeF

    The vilification of Volkswagen is amazing. Protesters with a sign CO2? No one questions CO2 from volkswagen. There was no CO2 fra*d. VW are not more responsible for CO2 emissions than any other car manufacturer. What do they want Volkswagen to do, create a car which runs on water?

    The emission tests VW fudged were NO2, but to the science ignorant Greens, the people against everything, they are the same thing. NO2 and SO2 are real villains, responsible for acid rain and convert instantly in water like your lungs into Nitric Acid and Sulphuric acid. SO2 comes from much cheaper South American oil and NO2 comes from incomplete combustion, like a VW under hard acceleration. VW actually passed the tests as specified but cheated by throttling back when cruising. Driven sedately on flat land, the test results are correct.

    Still it is all about protesting and evil manufacturers, miners and farmers. Get rid of the lot and go back to the Dark Ages seems to be the message. Life was terrible then. The fact that it is also utterly impossible to go backwards does not occur to inner city public servants who get paid for turning up at work, get their food delivered by trucks and import their bicycles from China and protest against everything on weekends if they have a job.

    171

    • #
      handjive

      TdeF.
      In my travels through the backwaters of the inter webs, I did find a couple of relevant links you might be interested in.
      They don’t undermine your point in any way.
      Please excuse me, I have no wish to contradict you.

      The car giant, already mired in scandal for cheating on nitrogen oxide emissions tests, now warns of a carbon dioxide issue.
      VW: 800,000 Cars Could Have False CO2 Levels

      Now the software is turning up in the more powerful V6 engines commonly found in sports and luxury cars.
      Vehicles named in the latest EPA notice include the 2014 VW Touareg, the 2015 Porsche Cayenne, and the 2016 Audi A6 Quattro, A7 Quattro, A8, A8L, and Q5.

      European Commission – Press release
      Emissions trading: 2014 data shows emissions reduction ?? How’s that happen?

      VW emissions testing scandal shows that environmental governance is in trouble
      If we cannot figure out how to properly test car emissions, we might as well give up on regulating forests, factories or garbage dumps.

      50

      • #
        TdeF

        There is a huge difference. Note the headline says “could” because frankly this is a silly story, a beat up. There is no need to measure CO2 output when you know the fuel input. They are identical. CH2 + O2 => CO2+H2O. The basic equation of all combustion. No special engine or technique changes this. A fixed amount of fuel produces a fixed amount of CO2. That’s all there is.

        So if the economy figures in litres/100km are correct, the CO2 is correct. This cannot be fudged, altered but I suppose it could be misreported but that would be absurd. CO2 comes wholly and solely from combustion. No engine can decrease or increase it.

        However Nitrogen Dioxide, NO2 is a very different matter. This is a dangerous byproduct produced much more by diesels with their higher combustion temperatures and pressures. It is formed in combustion with the 78% of N2 in the air. You cannot produce it naturally like CO2. Ultimately this is a consequence of trying to save petrol/diesel with higher temperatures which in a Carnot engine means higher efficiency and of course the 10% higher energy content per litre of the longer hydrocarbon in diesel.

        So Europe has moved nearly 50% to Diesel cars, which means the really increased risk of dangerous NO2 pollution and this is real pollution and this is the scandal, misreporting. It is now becoming clear that the total amount of CO2 has not changed at all against an equivalent petrol engine. If there is a lie, this is it. Diesels are not much more efficient in reducing CO2, but they are more polluting and I do not mean CO2 which is not a pollutant but what you are outputting as you read this. So no saving in CO2 but a huge increase in NO2. That is the lie which has sold a lot of cars.

        80

      • #
        TdeF

        Again consider the attenting getting headline, but again note the ‘could’.

        VW: 800,000 Cars Could Have False CO2 Levels.

        “Volkswagen says it has found “inconsistencies” in carbon dioxide emission levels which could affect around 800,000 cars – possibly even petrol models.”

        This is the only thing said about CO2 in the whole article. False CO2 reporting? This is meaningless. CO2 and fuel are the same thing. If there was some way you could lower CO2 for the same amount of petrol, that would be special and absurd.

        The other references are not about misreporting of CO2 by Volkswagen but CO2 in general.

        40

  • #
    AndyG55

    OT, but quite interesting.. Basically steady chaotic cyclic temperatures in Patagonia for 600 years.

    http://www.co2science.org/articles/V18/dec/a3.php

    91

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      That’s interesting.

      Despite fluctuations that seem fairly controlled, it ends up basically where it started; No Global Warming, at least not in Chile.

      KK

      20

  • #
    pat

    another inconvenient fact at COP21:

    4 Dec: ClimateChangeNews: Avik Roy: COP21: Climate finance row burning bright as clock ticks on talks
    Over 130 developing countries signalled their anger at the lack of cash on offer from wealthier nations in a series of explosive interventions on Thursday in Paris.
    The head of the G77 + China group, Ambassador Joyce Mxakato-Diseko, blamed a “special group” of developed countries for refusing to negotiate on finance.
    “These are the countries that jumped out of the Kyoto Protocol at the slightest excuse,” she said. “We are tiptoeing around these countries… they bluster without responsibility.”…
    In a separate press conference Pa Ousman Jarju, a Gambian diplomat representing the 48 strong Least Developed Countries group said the quality of finance on offer was insufficient.
    “We cannot take loans. For us it needs to grant-based. We don’t want loans to be classified as climate finance,” he said. “We should have a common platform where we agree on the figures of finance.”…
    Poorer nations want evidence a 2009 pledge to provide them with $100 billion a year by 2020 to green their economies will be met.
    In October, the OECD and Climate Policy Initiative published an assessment report that stated climate finance of $62 billion had been mobilised.
    But some of the finance included – like loans, export credits and private sector contributions – has been fiercely contested…
    “This is standard week one behaviour, it’s important not to over-interpret” said Elliot Diringer, a former White House advisor who heads the Washington DC-based C2ES think tank…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/12/03/cop21-climate-finance-row-burning-bright-as-clock-ticks-on-talks/

    91

  • #
    pat

    4 Dec: NYT: By JOHN SCHWARTZ: Chief of House Science Panel Picks Battle Over Climate Paper
    ***On Tuesday, Mr. Smith (Representative Lamar Smith, a Republican from Texas who is chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology) DROPPED HIS REQUEST for the scientists’ emails, but he continued to press for those from other NOAA employees and officials.
    Scientific organizations have sharply criticized Mr. Smith’s tactics. The American Association for the Advancement of Science, which publishes the journal Science, joined with six other groups in sending a letter to Mr. Smith stating that while “we recognize the oversight responsibility of Congress,” the inquiry “should not be used as a tool to inhibit the ability of federal scientists to fulfill their agencies’ science missions and of agencies to attract world-class scientific talent.”
    Keith Seitter, the executive director of the American Meteorological Society, one of the groups that signed the letter, said science is self-correcting through the process of peer review and subsequent research.
    “You should not go after the scientists because you don’t like the results that they are getting,” he said. “The science will show if what they are doing is correct.”…
    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/05/science/chief-of-house-science-panel-picks-battle-over-climate-paper.html?_r=0

    71

    • #
      ianl8888


      … Lamar Smith … DROPPED HIS REQUEST for the scientists’ emails

      Just as predicted … OBummer will protect NOAA until his door jamb gives way while he’s dragged screaming from the Oval Office in 12 months

      91

      • #
        TdeF

        Two letters removed.. should not be used as a tool to inhibit the ability of feral scientists to fulfill their agencies’ science missions

        61

  • #
    pat

    4 Dec: ClimateChangeNews: COP21: Climate Home speaks to India’s chief climate negotiator
    Susheel Kumar, a key negotiator of Indian delegation opens up to Climate Home’s Avik Roy on what is at stake and India’s determined position at COP21 in Paris
    AVIK ROY: What are the blockages in the issue of Finance? China has already offered $3 billion. So why is adding poorer countries to a donor list problematic?
    SUSHEEL KUMAR: The distinction is between what the convention is doing and what the South-South Cooperation can do. We are negotiating the convention — under the convention and the agreement.
    Now that convention talks about the obligation on part of the developed nations to provide climate finance and the entitlement of developing nations to receive climate finance.
    That paradigm has to remain. China has contributed not to the financial mechanism of the convention. They have contributed to a foundation of South-South Cooperation. That is on the basis of principle of solidarity. India does that too.
    If any developing nation provides some help to another developing nation on the basis of solidarity that cannot be a substitute for the climate finance which developed nations have to provide under the convention. That’s the differentiation…
    AVIK ROY: Is India seeking any financial support from the developed nations to realise its goal?
    SUSHEEL KUMAR: What we have to say we have laid it out in our INDCs. We have said that on a 15-year timeframe our total requirement would be about 2.5 trillion US dollars, part of which will come from our domestic mobilisation and a part has to come from international help…
    AVIK ROY: How do you see the issue of differentiation being applied to all areas of the agreement?
    SUSHEEL KUMAR: We want CBDR to be retained fully in this agreement because that is one of the core principles of the convention. That would mean that under each article whether it is mitigation, adaptation, finance or technology transfer, differentiation exists. We have already inserted that formulation in each of these pillars in the text. We sure they will remain during high level intervention…
    AVIK ROY: Experts say that if India continues to invest in coal-fired energy, like it currently plans to, that the world will blow past 2C. What is your reaction to that?
    SUSHEEL KUMAR: Even developed nations like the US, Japan, Germany are continuing to invest in coal. It is not something which India does alone. Check the data on coal. The US and the west have developed on the back of energy from coal for the last 150 years…They grew 9 times on their coal consumption and back of this low cost energy they made their highways, railroad, and factories and got their people jobs…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/12/04/cop21-climate-home-speaks-to-indias-chief-climate-negotiator/

    41

  • #
    PeterPetrum

    The content of the article is bad enough, but what really gets my teeth on edge in this article, and most articles on “climate change”, are the bl**dy photos that the sub editors insist on putting in an article, even those that are critical of the “consensus”. This one has a picture of a cokeing plant with STEAM coming out of the cooler, one of a picture of smoke coming from a factory in China, one of a Greenie holding up a sign re Volkswagen and CO2 – none of them have got anything to do with the subject of the article and none of them have got anything to do with CO2.

    Wish it was bedtime, I could do with a wee malt!

    140

    • #
      TdeF

      The real problem is in the mass production of the pollutant and major green house gas Oxygen dihydride. It is the one thing common to factories in China, Volkswagens and fossil fuel.

      100

      • #
        ROM

        TdeF@ #29.1

        I believe the chemical formula for the substance under discussion is “Dihydrogen monoxide”, the principle and almost only chemical substance being emmitted in nearly every case from the numerous photos of “smoke stacks” otherwise known as “cooling towers” to those with a smattering of knowledge of industrial processes but which are so lovingly published by deep Green promoting science illiterate media editors and reporters as “Smoke stacks”.

        ——————-
        The following are some of the known characteristics of “Dihydrogen monoxide”:

        *is also known as hydroxyl acid, and is the major component of acid rain.

        *contributes to the “greenhouse effect”.

        *may cause severe burns.

        *contributes to the erosion of our natural landscape.

        *accelerates corrosion and rusting of many metals.

        *may cause electrical failures and decreased effectiveness of automobile brakes.

        *has been found in excised tumors of terminal cancer patients.
        ———
        Despite the danger, dihydrogen monoxide is often used:

        *as an industrial solvent and coolant.

        *in nuclear power plants.

        *in the production of styrofoam.

        *as a fire retardant.

        *in many forms of cruel animal research.

        *in the distribution of pesticides.

        *Even after washing, produce remains contaminated by this chemical.

        *as an additive in certain “junk-foods” and other food products.

        ————–
        Some of the efforts to inform the public of the dangers of Dihydrogen monoxide follow courtesy of Wiki!

        In 1989, Eric Lechner, Lars Norpchen and Matthew Kaufman circulated a dihydrogen monoxide contamination warning on the University of California, Santa Cruz campus via photocopied fliers.[15] The concept originated one afternoon when Kaufman recalled a similar warning about “Hydrogen Hydroxide” that had been published in his mother’s hometown paper, the Durand (Michigan) Express, and the three then worked to coin a term that “sounded more dangerous”. Lechner typed up the original warning flier on Kaufman’s computer, and a trip to the local photocopying center followed that night.

        In 1994, Craig Jackson created a web page for the Coalition to Ban DHMO.[7]

        The Friends of Hydrogen Hydroxide website was created by Dan Curtis Johnson partly as a foil on the Coalition page, claiming to oppose its “subversive agenda”. The site points out that hydrogen hydroxide is “environmentally safe” and “enhances the functionality, growth, and health of many forms of life”.[16]

        In 1997, Nathan Zohner, a 14-year-old student at Eagle Rock Junior High School in Idaho Falls, Idaho, gathered 43 votes to ban the chemical, out of 50 people surveyed among his classmates. Zohner received the first prize at Greater Idaho Falls Science Fair for analysis of the results of his survey.[2] In recognition of his experiment, journalist James K. Glassman coined the term “Zohnerism” to refer to “the use of a true fact to lead a scientifically and mathematically ignorant public to a false conclusion”.[17]

        In 1998, drawing inspiration from Jackson’s web page and Zohner’s research, Tom Way created a website at DHMO.org, including links to some legitimate sites such as the Environmental Protection Agency and National Institutes of Health.

        On April 1, 1998 (April Fools’ Day), a member of the Australian Parliament announced a campaign to ban dihydrogen monoxide internationally.[18]

        In 2001 a staffer in New Zealand Green Party MP Sue Kedgley’s office responded to a request for support for a campaign to ban dihydrogen monoxide by saying she was “absolutely supportive of the campaign to ban this toxic substance”. This was criticized in a press release by the National Party,[19] one of whose MPs fell for the very same hoax six years later.[20]

        In 2002, radio talk show host Neal Boortz mentioned on the air that the Atlanta water system had been checked and found to be contaminated with dihydrogen monoxide, and set about relating the hazards associated with that “dangerous” chemical. A local TV station even covered the ‘scandal’. A spokesperson for the city’s water system told the reporter that there was no more dihydrogen monoxide in the system than what was allowed under the law.[21]
        The idea was used for a segment of an episode of the Penn & Teller show Penn & Teller: Bullshit!, in which actress Kris McGaha and a camera crew gathered signatures from people considering themselves “concerned environmentalists” to sign a petition to ban DHMO.[22]

        In March 2004, Aliso Viejo, California, almost considered banning the use of foam containers at city-sponsored events because dihydrogen monoxide is part of their production. A paralegal had asked the city council to put it on the agenda; he later attributed it to poor research.[23] The bill was pulled from the agenda before it could come to a vote, but not before the city received a raft of bad publicity.[2]

        In 2006, in Louisville, Kentucky, David Karem, executive director of the Waterfront Development Corporation, a public body that operates Waterfront Park, wished to deter bathers from using a large public fountain. “Counting on a lack of understanding about water’s chemical makeup”, he arranged for signs reading: “DANGER! – WATER CONTAINS HIGH LEVELS OF HYDROGEN – KEEP OUT” to be posted on the fountain at public expense.[24][25]

        Occasionally, petitions on the UK Government e-petitions website on this subject have been closed or rejected.[26]

        In 2007 Jacqui Dean, New Zealand National Party MP, fell for the hoax, writing a letter to Associate Minister of Health Jim Anderton asking “Does the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs have a view on the banning of this drug?”[20][27][28]

        On April 1, 2010, Canadian Member of Parliament Andrew Scheer used the DHMO hoax as the basis for an April Fool’s Day “media release” on his web site, in which he claimed to have tabled a bill to ban the substance from all federal government buildings.[29] Scheer became Canada’s speaker of the House in 2011.
        In February 2011, during the campaign of the Finnish parliamentary election, a voting advice application asked the candidates whether the availability of “hydric acid also known as dihydrogen monoxide” should be restricted. 49% of the candidates answered in favor of the restriction.[30]

        In April 2013, two presenters at Gator Country 101.9, a radio station in Lee County, Florida, told listeners dihydrogen monoxide was coming out of their water taps as part of an April Fool’s Day prank and were suspended for a few days.[31][32] The prank resulted in several calls by consumers to the local utility company, which sent out a release stating that the water was safe.[33]
        —————–
        So you still think that the academically educated members of the public are educated and intelligent enough to figure out that Carbon credits are a scam of monstrous proportions ??

        110

      • #
        Annie

        !!! Do you remember the ‘ad’ in Michael Bentine’s “It’s a Square World’… There was a jingle advertising ‘H2O’.

        I doubt most of the population knows the difference between CO2 and CO, let alone the nitrous oxide, etc.

        100

  • #
    pat

    ***SOMETHING VERY FISHY AT COP21!

    yesterday’s 50-page draft suddenly becomes 19 pages?

    4 Dec: ClimateChangeNews: Ed King: COP21: France calls on diplomatic cavalry as climate talks heat up
    France has drafted in a troika of heavyweights to try and thrash out a compromise between countries at the Paris climate talks…
    ***A new draft agreement was published at 10:00 on Friday morning, cut from 23 to 19 pages and complete with suggested areas of compromise…
    EU officials say they could consider inscribing the $100 billion goal in a 2015 deal if all governments submit to regular 5-year climate plan reviews, agree to tougher transparency measures and agree that all countries “in a position to do so” contribute climate funds.
    That phrase met with considerable hostility on Friday…
    On Friday, insurance industry leaders said they would double climate investments to $42 billion, while the organisers of the Montreal Carbon Pledge said 120 companies with $10 trillion of assets had now agreed to measure and disclose their carbon footprints.
    A Yale University study, published on the UN website, said 15 of the world’s largest banks worth $2 trillion had now made pledges to invest in green…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/12/04/cop21-france-calls-on-diplomatic-cavalry-as-climate-talks-heat-up/

    the only other mention I can find so far is this vague mention a NYT:

    4 Dec: NYT: Paris Climate Talks: Clearing the Way for High-Level Negotiations
    ***Negotiators have been assigned by the French presidency (Laurent Fabius?) to unveil a new draft Friday morning of a climate change text that is ***significantly slimmed down from the 50-page document published on Thursday.
    That is before they put forth an even closer-to-final document by noon on Saturday…
    The new documents are intended to clear away the clutter and set the stage for high-level negotiations.
    But as the text becomes more streamlined, the fault lines will become more stark…
    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/climate/2015-paris-climate-talks/paris-climate-talks-clearing-the-way-for-high-level-talks

    i’m reminded of this – url at jo’s philippe verdier thread:

    3 Dec: SMH: Tom Arup/Peter Hannam: Paris UN Climate Conference 2015: 5 things we learnt on day 3
    Environment Minister Greg Hunt created a minor diplomatic incident when he appeared to suggest that the French government had its own version of the text for a new climate deal
    If true, that would be highly controversial. Negotiators are currently trying to prune back the text of a deal that has been worked on for months. If the French tried to impose an entirely new one developing countries would likely be up in arms.
    Having made the suggestion at a press conference, Hunt later called journalists to clarify that he was referring not to a separate, new text. A senior member of the Australian delegation visited the media room to further emphasise the point.
    The French delegation insisted that it did not have a different version of the agreement in its back pocket. There is apparently no plan B…

    61

  • #
    pat

    5 Dec: BusinessStandardIndia: Nitin Sethi: Developing countries unite on CBDR principle
    A full-blown argument between the developed and developing countries over the application of principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) in the Paris Agreement rocked the summit as it drew closer to the end of the first week of negotiations.
    After the developed countries blocked every proposal to incorporate CBDR in the Paris Agreement, developing countries came out with scathing comments in public…
    Speaking for the Like-Minded Developing Countries, including India and China, Gurdial Singh Nijar of Malaysia said, “You (the developed countries) grew to this level of prosperity because you burnt fossil fuel at an unabated rate… You created the problem and now you say that we want you to share—on an equal basis—the responsibility.”
    “You signed on the Convention (UNFCCC). It was in 1992. You acknowledged historical responsibility. You acknowledged differentiation. You acknowledged a way out of the situation, but now you are resiling from your obligations. You assumed legally binding obligations, which you have not fulfilled,” he added…
    “You are trying to freeze the development pace of developing countries. This is the message we want to give you. We don’t want to persuade you. You won’t be persuaded. You talk of countries like India and China. They are big countries. Even if they add a little, it will increase a lot. Do people stop industrialization that meets the needs of the country? Do people stop eating?” Nijar said…
    His statement came on a day when India found support from an unexpected quarter – the Least Developed Countries (LDCs)… ETC ETC
    Ousman’s statement deflates claims of those who had predicted that India would be isolated at the Paris talks for demanding that the Paris Agreement should follow the UN convention…
    http://wap.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/the-rich-versus-poor-debate-singes-paris-talks-115120401222_1.html

    31

  • #
    pat

    4 Dec: ReutersCarbonPulse: COP-21 Roundup: Dec. 4 – Day 5
    FIVE EU NATIONS CANCEL 635 MILLION KYOTO CREDITS: Denmark (3.4m), Germany (228m), the Netherlands (100m), Sweden (51m) and the UK (342.5m) announced Friday they have cancelled – or will soon – a total of 634.9 million surplus AAUs, CERs and ERUs from the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. Further surplus permits for the second period will be cancelled by 2020, they said. “By cancelling surplus units we hope to send a strong positive signal of support for an ambitious global climate agreement here in Paris,” they said in a statement.
    “The cancellation initiative is a welcome step to put the spotlights on the dangers of hot air. We hope to see this initiative extended to all surplus units that could potentially harm climate commitments post-2020,” commented Femke de Jong of Carbon Market Watch…
    CARBON TRADING TEXT COULD FALL VICTIM TO PARIS TALKS STALEMATE: Provisions for international carbon trade risk being squeezed out of the UN climate pact after a week of minimal progress at talks in Paris, although market proponents are adamant this won’t stop the spread of emission markets worldwide…
    CLIMATE RISK DISCLOSURE: The Financial Stability Board (FSB), a global group of national financial authorities, launched a year-long task force to evaluate climate-related financial risks…The initiative will be led by former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg and report to FSB chair and UK central bank chief Mark Carney. Both launched the initiative on the sidelines of the UN talks…
    http://carbon-pulse.com/12849/

    31

  • #
    pat

    unbelievable!

    4 Dec: ReutersCarbonPulse: Former Australian PM Rudd makes push for common East Asian carbon market
    Former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is fronting an effort to build a common emissions trading market spanning China, Japan and South Korea, nations that collectively emit around a third of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. Rudd is now president of US-based Asia Society Policy Institute, an educational organisation with the objective of promoting mutual understanding and strengthening partnerships between the US and Asia, including on environmental issues…
    “If we look carefully at Japan’s commitments on carbon emissions, the existing policy measures introduced will not be sufficient,” Rudd said.
    “The political need for a carbon price in Japan is about to present itself to policy-makers.”…
    But Rudd said even if Japanese policy-makers don’t think they need an emissions market, they are likely to face increasing pressure from those of its neighbours that have one.
    “Do they expect China, South Korea or other competitors to simply wave away Japanese participation? I don’t think so. The pressure will come,” said Rudd…
    Rudd has had initial talks with officials in the three nations, both at high level as well as with more hands-on bureaucrats.
    “So far, so good” he said of the initial response. The project he is spearheading is hoping to present “the possible machinery of what a common market might look like and what the price might be” in around two years…
    “I think Australia might fit in the North East Asian market over time,” Rudd said. “I think within five years we will have a functional market in Australia.”
    http://carbon-pulse.com/12873/

    31

    • #
      markx

      One of the worst things about participating in an international carbon market is that it locks your country’s economy into a foreign currency risk position.

      30

  • #
    Ross

    It must be infuriating to the Greenies that the COP21 reports are being pushed aside by the terrorist attack in California. Just flicking through some main MSM sites the COP reports are not very prominent.

    60

  • #
    TdeF

    Doesn’t the red hander get tired of flagging every single comment and how illogical and obvious and pointless that is? I suppose it is consistent with a closed mind, a bit of leftish vandalism. These are the sort of people who destroyed even the recordings of My Boomerang won’t come back because a single person complained that it was racist instead of funny. Can’t take a joke. Tyranny presented as freedom. The same with an ETS. The fact that it is a fraud and huge money machine is irrelevant to those who believe in it. Often because they don’t understand it. People really believed money could buy absolution from sins and the Pope had this power. A trading system sounds fair and doesn’t have the word Tax in it, so it cannot be a tax.

    62

  • #
    TdeF

    Doesn’t the red hander get tired of flagging every single comment and how illogical and obvious and pointless that is? I suppose it is consistent with a closed mind, a bit of leftish vandalism. These are the sort of people who destroyed even the recordings of My Boomerang won’t come back because a single person complained that it was racist instead of funny. Can’t take a joke. Tyranny presented as freedom. The same with an ETS. The fact that it is a fra*d and huge money machine is irrelevant to those who believe in it. Often because they don’t understand it. People really believed money could buy absolution from sins and the Pope had this power. A trading system sounds fair and doesn’t have the word Tax in it, so it cannot be a tax.

    92

    • #
      ROM

      I’ve got “Lurch”, the red thumbed lurker as my personal red thumbed hoogamelly hobgoblin of very doubtful genetic heritage who lurches out from behind his palisades at the first hint of one of my posts to plant his palsied thumb in the that small square red coloured thingy that Jo so obligingly places in a convientent location where he doesn’t have to get over his recent heavy imbibing of the green whacko juice to be able to hit that small square box with his shaking palsied thumb.

      103

  • #

    Shorten did not seem to see any issue or irony when announcing the latest fantasy targets. He openly sold the notion that any failure to reach 50% cuts would be offset by buying fantasy tickets from the EU. Not achieving any actual cuts was almost irrelevant as far as he was concerned, provided the guilt money was changing hands.

    80

    • #
      Rod Stuart

      I think Shorten must use a device which can be found at the URL called the “New Age Bullsh*t Generator”.
      This handy device is an excellent tool for the purpose of composing “Reception and Detection of Pseudo-Profound Bullsh*t”. If one follows that link, it is possible to download an interesting empirical study of the subject discussed by the “information Philosopher”, Harry Frankfurt, in his epic textbook “On Bullsh*t”.
      Greg Hunt apparently uses the same tool. His latest ploy is to spend a few million of our money on “Climate Resilience”.
      Have these people gone completely insane?
      On another note, I was listening to the “valedictory” speeches from the House yesterday, and no less than three of them could well have been lifted from this very blog. They were Jensen, Maddigan, and someone else. I thought that was at least encouraging.

      20

      • #

        I dont know if you follow Craig Kelly(Libs) on FB but he posts a lot of Jo’s stuff and is a vocal skeptic to the point Im surprised they havnt punted him out of the party. There are glimmers of hope.

        20

  • #
    pat

    4 Dec: ReutersCarbonPulse: Mike Szabo: Negotiators learn lessons for new markets as Kyoto mechanism talks end in Paris
    Decisions affecting the future of the CDM and JI, the Kyoto Protocol’s carbon market mechanisms, have once again been postponed by negotiators at this year’s annual UN climate summit, but some identified progress that could benefit a new global climate pact.
    A review of the CDM’s modalities and procedures, which is to pave the way to an overhaul of the beleaguered scheme, was deferred until next May by negotiators under the SBI track at the talks, after they were allotted just two hours to discuss the matter this week.
    “Every time, this review is taken hostage … It’s a shame because it’s totally relevant to ADP [negotiations on a new global climate pact],” said Jeff Swartz of emissions trading lobby group IETA…
    The CDM has channelled over $300 billion in investment to carbon-cutting projects in the developing world, but funding has dried up as nations failed to adopt new emission reduction targets, causing demand to collapse.
    That led to CER prices crashing from over €20 in 2008 to less than €1, which in turn triggered the CDM-EB to hunt for new buyers, including companies and individuals looking to voluntarily offset their carbon footprint, as well as the aviation sector…
    JI has earned the more ignoble reputation compared to its sister mechanism, after a study by SEI earlier this year found that almost 75% of the ERUs issued – most of those unilaterally approved by Ukraine and Russia – may not have represented actual emission reductions and potentially increased global emissions by some 600 million tonnes…
    http://carbon-pulse.com/12903/

    4 Dec: ReutersCarbonPulse: Stian Reklev: China estimates it needs a 100 yuan carbon price to peak emissions by 2030
    China’s initial estimate had been 60 yuan per tonne, but that had been adjusted up due to recent falling coal prices, according to Chai Qimin, deputy director of the strategy and planning department of government think-tank National Center for Climate Change Strategy and International Cooperation (NCSC)…
    Chai’s comments came during a side event at the Paris climate talks focusing on the need for carbon prices to be high enough to have an impact. “It’s not enough to have a carbon price, it has to be high enough to drive investment at scale,” Nigel Topping, CEO of business group ***We Mean Business, which arranged the event, said…
    Panelists also stressed the need for certainty around price trajectory and market regulations. “Price is a function of ambition,” said Rachel Kyte, the World Bank’s special envoy for climate change.
    “If ambition is turned into a partisan football, you’re going to have problems getting a system that works,” she added…
    Earlier this week, We Mean Business’ Topping said his group would steer a panel of experts to regularly meet to publish a view of what carbon prices globally may need over next 15 years…
    “We are finding more and more that business/investors/policymakers need some idea of what the future trajectory of carbon prices will need to be to be on track,” Topping said.
    http://carbon-pulse.com/12859/

    ***reminder: We Mean Business is Prince Charles’s Corporate Leaders Group, which includes Unilever, EDF, Sky, GSK, etc. University of Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership (CISL) provides their secretariat.

    41

  • #
    John Watt

    Fake market based on fake data. Looks like some of us just love a good GFC.

    61

  • #
    pat

    4 Dec: ReutersCarbonPulse: Carbon trading text could fall victim to Paris talks stalemate
    By Ben Garside, Stian Reklev and Mike Szabo
    Provisions for international carbon trade risk being squeezed out of the UN climate pact after a week of minimal progress at talks in Paris, although market proponents are adamant this won’t stop the spread of emission markets worldwide…
    As the fortnight-long talks near the half-way stage with scant signs of tangible progress, some observers and negotiators told Carbon Pulse that they fear that potentially contentious text on markets could be removed as the big nations come under pressure to seal an overall deal.
    “There are a limited number of countries that see these elements as ‘crucial’, some think they are important but have other priorities, and others don’t want them at all,” said Jeff Swartz of pro-carbon trade business group IETA…
    One country giving access to international trade a very high priority is New Zealand, which made its INDC goal dependent on access to foreign units and accounting rules…
    “What we want to do is be very clear that there will be a role for markets in the future. That’s the signal we will send out,” she (Jo Tyndall, New Zealand’s lead negotiator) added…
    Yet the development of international carbon trade faces uncertainty and potential delay if there is no language or provisions for international carbon trading in the Paris agreement…
    ***“Obviously the UN is the best place to create global carbon markets, and will always be because they will be open, transparent, easily accessible. But it’s becoming increasingly difficult to create them here,” said IETA’s Swartz.
    “If those markets get first created outside of the UN process, then that’s the next best-case scenario after getting something under an agreement, because markets are going to develop and grow no matter what.”…
    http://carbon-pulse.com/12880/

    31

  • #
    pat

    4 Dec: ClimateChangeNews: Ed King: COP21 diary: Envoys meet in open, fearing rooms are bugged
    Three negotiators have told Climate Home they are holding sensitive meetings in noisy areas outside their main offices.
    The envoys – two from developing countries and one from from an EU nation – say there are genuine fears rooms have been bugged and that larger countries may be listening in on meetings.
    Former UN climate chief Yvo de Boer, now with the Global Green Growth Institute told Climate Home he was’t shocked by these rumours.
    “No, it wouldn’t surprise me. If we’re getting to the point where climate negotiators need to be bugged, it’s a sign we are finally getting somewhere.”
    According to documents passed to Wikileaks by Edward Snowden, the US National Security Agency monitored communication between major countries at the 2009 Copenhagen summit.
    The Snowden leaks suggested the climate talks became a “serious intelligence priority” for the UK government from 2011…
    In Vogue
    These talks are now so mainstream that not only does Vladimir Putin turn up, but Vogue does a profile of some of the top women involved.
    Here is the très elegante international climate lawyer Farhana Yamin…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/12/04/cop21-diary-envoys-meet-in-open-fearing-rooms-are-bugged/

    30 Nov: Vogue: Climate Warriors
    Today, more than 190 countries are gathering in Paris for the world’s largest summit on climate change, with the hope of reaching a historic agreement to address global warming. These 13 women are on the front line.
    “Climate change is a choice.”
    CHRISTIANA FIGUERES
    The United Nations’s top climate change official, Christiana Figueres, is not afraid to cry at work, covertly practices a dance routine to Beyoncé’s “Move Your Body” with her staff, and has played an instrumental role in turning out what is likely to be the most successful climate negotiation in history…
    It is a choice about what we do with our finance. It is a choice for corporations about the kinds of goods and services that they produce. It is a choice of policy. It’s an institutional choice. It’s a political choice. It’s a technological choice.”…
    RACHEL KYTE
    “We happen to be the last generation that can end climate change.”…
    Her mission is to incorporate climate change, “the ultimate curveball,” into all of the World Bank’s growth agendas. The most difficult aspect of her job? “The hardest part of the job is not getting shrill, not getting angry, because people don’t listen when you’re shrill and you’re angry,” Kyte says. “The hardest part of the job is not being contemptuous of those who don’t listen to the science or don’t want to hear the arguments. The hardest part of the job is not walking out of the meeting when, for the 55th time, the same person raises the same nonevidence-based argument in the face of the evidence. You have to stay in the room. You have to stay and fight.”…
    http://www.vogue.com/projects/13373340/climate-change-summit-women-cop21-warriors-global-warming/?mbid=social_onsite_twitter

    41

  • #
    Ross

    Meanwhile China pledges US$60 billion in aid to Africa. While the “West” is pontificating about carbon credits, China is stealing a march on them over “control” of what is obviously the next huge growth area for the next few decades.
    They, like Russia, are making enough of the right noises to fool the idiots in Paris into thinking they are on side , but in reality they are getting on with what is best for them ( like any good Government should !)

    60

  • #
    pat

    as with so many who talk of the $100 billion per year, Kyte talks of being half way there, as if it’s a one-off amount, tho she does mention the World Bank’s “pledge” of $29 billion per year from 2020, which wasn’t all it was cracked up to be:

    4 Dec: AUDIO: 19mins26secs: ClimateChangeNews: The Emissions Factor: COP21 Podcast: Who pays for a global climate deal?
    Ed King is joined by the World Bank’s Rachel Kyte to discuss the vexed issue of climate finance, the $100 billion goal and future investments in clean energy
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/12/04/cop21-podcast-who-pays-for-a-global-climate-deal/

    9 Oct: World Bank: World Bank Group Pledges One-Third Increase in Climate Financing
    LIMA, Peru, October 9, 2015—The World Bank Group today announced it will increase climate financing to potentially $29 billion annually with the support of its members…
    The World Bank Group now provides an average of $10.3 billion a year in direct financing for climate action. If current financing levels were maintained, this would mean an increase to $16 billion in 2020.
    In addition, the Bank Group plans to continue current levels of leveraging co-financing for climate-related projects; at current financing levels, that could mean up to another $13 billion a year in 2020. The direct financing and leveraged co-financing together represent an estimated $29 billion…
    http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2015/10/09/world-bank-group-pledges-one-third-increase-climate-financing

    31

  • #
    michael hart

    Remember, the accounts of the EU itself have not been given a passing grade by their auditors for 20 years.

    If Sepp Blatter and FIFA were appointed to run the European carbon market, few people would be surprised.

    30

    • #
      ianl8888

      The EU rules on membership list a number of parameters on budgetary matters that ALL member countries are required to follow (debt to GDP ratio, budgetary deficits etc)

      ALL member countries break these covenants constantly. France and Germany are the most persistent offenders. Nothing ever happens about it. Classic EU fudge, from one crisis to the next.

      Perhaps the greatest irony is seen in the behaviour of Brussels, which issues never-ending, binding, stuntingly bureaucratic edicts on all EU member countries (eg. limits on the power of vaccuum cleaner motors, which peat deposits that Ireland may develop … on and on) but has to call in its’ army to control its’ own suburban streets while in lockdown … an astonishingly stupid contrast

      30

  • #
    pat

    2 Dec: Financial Times: Letters: Time to walk away from once credible theories now shown to be untrue
    Sir, Bjorn Lomborg’s analysis of emission-cutting pledges made by rich and poor countries before the current UN climate summit in Paris has been comprehensively discredited, yet he continues to flog a dead horse and the Financial Times, surprisingly, continues to print articles based on it (“Wasting trillions on carbon curbs is immoral”, December 1)…
    Yes, implementing the pledges will cost money; but again, properly conducted economic analyses suggest the costs of not doing this would be far higher, even in strictly economic terms. When one adds in the hard to quantify but undoubtedly rising risks of conflict, ill health, inequality and air pollution associated with unchecked greenhouse gas emissions, the case becomes unanswerable…
    I have worked in global development for more than 30 years, and I can tell Dr Lomborg that he does not speak for the majority in the developing world. Many developing countries are already building a low-carbon economy. They plan to skip the carbon-intense phase from which more developed nations are endeavouring to escape…
    Dr Lomborg has had a good run with his theory that tackling climate change would harm developing countries. But it is now time for him to walk away and admit that he was wrong, because reality has now demonstrably left him behind.
    Camilla Toulmin, Senior Fellow, International Institute for Environment and Development,
    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/7270fc40-9842-11e5-95c7-d47aa298f769.html

    Camilla last year:

    Nov 2014: UK Independent: Camilla Toulmin: If the coal industry really cared about helping poor countries, it would shut itself down
    Coal companies are in complete denial — the developing world doesn’t need more pollution or expensive new grids, but renewable energy sources
    The latest attempt at salvation comes in the form of a specious campaign aiming to persuade us that the poor people of this world need coal in order to develop. Blame is laid at the door of rich countries for forcing the poor away from coal. Organisations such as IIED, which exist to support the poor in their drive to develop, are accused of being complicit in this conspiracy to deprive…
    This is a half-baked narrative at best. But it is gaining traction – not least in Australia…
    Coal is on a slow path to elimination. China, which uses half of the world total, has halved imports in the last two months and is on course to see overall coal consumption peak this year…
    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/if-the-coal-industry-really-cared-about-helping-poor-countries-it-would-shut-itself-down-9865257.html

    51

    • #
      Ross

      Pat
      All I can say is, the lady is a nutter.

      40

    • #
      TdeF

      “the developing world doesn’t need more pollution or expensive new grids, but renewable energy sources”

      Perhaps not but it could do with 220,000 windmills currently put where they are least needed in very rich countries with plenty of power from gas to coal to nuclear. So it isn’t about the climate or the people is it? Just about insurance for the rich and who cares about the poor developing countries anyway? Typical self indulgent Green hypocrisy. It’s all about them.

      41

  • #
    pat

    Camilla’s Institute:

    International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED): Board of Trustees
    Rebeca Grynspan (Chair), Costa Rica
    Rebeca Grynspan is a UN Under-Secretary-General and associate administrator of the United Nations Development Programme. She was Vice-President of Costa Rica between 1994 and 1998…

    Lisa Beauvilain, UK
    Lisa Beauvilain joined Impax Asset Management, an environmental investment firm, as an investment manager in 2010. Impax invests globally in companies and projects within renewable energy, energy efficiency, pollution control, waste management and water…Prior to that, she worked for eight years at Goldman Sachs International as an executive director within the Investment Management Division… Lisa holds a M.Sc. in Environment and Development from the London School of Economics and Political Science…

    Fatima Denton, The Gambia
    Fatima Denton is currently the coordinator of the African Climate Policy Centre of the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. Prior to this, she led one of the largest adaptation research programmes as part of a joint initiative of Canada’s International Development Research Centre (IDRC) and Britain’s Department for International Development (DFID)…She is a coordinating lead author for the Working Group II Fifth Assessment of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and was lead author for the IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy and Climate Change Mitigation (SREEN)…

    Frank Kirwan, UK (Treasurer)
    He was successively director of strategy for the Royal Bank of Scotland Group…

    Tara Shine, Ireland
    Tara Shine currently works as head of research and development at the Mary Robinson Foundation – Climate Justice (CMRC). She previously worked for CMRC from October 2009 when she was awarded EPA research fellowship as part of the Climate Change Research Programme… She is also a former member of the UNFCCC Consultative Group of Experts, the EU Expert Group on Adaptation and the Irish Impacts and Adaptation Steering Group.
    http://www.iied.org/board-trustees

    32

  • #
    pat

    Jessica’s text is double the size of Ed King’s! but now we’re told it was proposed by Reifsnyder and Djoghlaf:

    4 Dec: BusinessGreen: Jessica Shankleman: COP21: Negotiators hunker down for a long night of talks over new text
    Countries work to agree new draft text, as EU hits back over claims it is seeking to dodge finance responsibilities
    ***Countries are today and tomorrow debating whether to adopt a new slimmed down 38-page text proposed this morning by COP co-chairs Dan Reifsnyder and Ahmed Djoghlaf, which includes so-called “bridging proposals” from the week of negotiations so far.
    If the text is agreed tomorrow, the French presidency could potentially put it forward for ministers to debate on Monday when they arrive in Paris. However, if no deal is reached tomorrow, they will be forced back to the drawing board…
    But today, the EU hit back, accusing China and the G77 of using the finance row as a delaying tactic for the negotiations.
    Elina Bardram, the EU’s top negotiator, said the lines were becoming increasingly blurred between developed and developing nations on finance, particularly as China today pledged to mobilise $60bn of development funding in Africa.
    She also argued officials had a mandate from world leaders to deliver an agreement. “If you look at the leaders’ speeches and what they expect to deliver, there is not that much divergence in the views,” she said.A “credible” deal must contain a number of elements that reassure businesses and individuals that countries are working to limit global temperatures to below 2C,” she added. “If that message is not transmitted we miss an opportunity.”…
    Meanwhile, a separate source from a developed country accused China and the G77 of using the talks as an opportunity for rhetoric on climate finance. “There’s obviously some theatre going on here,” they said, arguing that rich countries were fully committed to delivering on their goal to provide $100bn in climate finance per year by 2020 to poor nations…
    However, the source said there were no plans to draw up criteria to provide a definition for “those countries that are in a position to do so”, arguing the proposal merely reflected the changes in the world economy since the convention was drawn up more than 20 years ago and the fact some emerging economies are already providing climate funding.
    http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2437992/cop21-negotiators-hunker-down-for-a-long-night-of-talks-over-new-text

    Reuters’ Doyle has 38-page and 48-page texts!

    5 Dec: 7News: Reuters: At halfway, chance of U.N. climate deal higher, but ambition lower, than in 2009
    (Additional reporting by Emmanuel Jarry and Bate Felix; Writing by Alister Doyle; Editing by Kevin Liffey and Ralph Boulton)
    With seven days of negotiations left before the conference closes on Dec. 11, two alternative draft texts are circulating, which all nations agreed on Friday to accept as the basis for talks.
    At 38 and 48 pages long, they have shrunk from above 50 at the start of the week. At the same stage of Copenhagen, the drafts ran to 300 pages.
    “I’m optimistic,” said Robert Stavins, director of Harvard University’s Environmental Economics Program. “It’s drastically different from Copenhagen.”
    But the text still has hundreds of brackets…
    “It’s hugely frustrating,” EU chief negotiator Elina Bardram said.
    But she said there was no comparison with Copenhagen as China, the world’s biggest emitter was determined to be part of the deal and the presence of 150 heads of state at the start of the talks on Monday had shown strong political will.
    The idea is that the text will be cut and sent to French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius by midday (1100 GMT) on Saturday. After that, it will be up to ministers to try to hammer out a deal next week…
    Still, many say the price of this relative harmony is the conference’s lack of ambition to set steep, binding emissions limits and create the legal tools to enforce them…
    U.N. climate chief Christiana Figueres said on Friday that a similar surprise text this time was “completely ruled out”. So were the talks looking more promising than Copenhagen at this stage? “Definitely.”
    https://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/30280783/at-halfway-chance-of-u-n-climate-deal-higher-but-ambition-lower-than-in-2009/

    22

  • #
    pat

    5 Dec: Bolt Blog: Don’t believe what Mark Scott says about the ABC’s “plurality”, just look at who he hires
    Harmer campaigns for the global warming faith:…
    Bowditch is also a global warming campaigner:…
    from Gerard Henderson column:
    This is how The Australian reported Mark Scott’s response to the evidence at the Senate Estimates:
    Mr Scott said that the ABC was not obliged under its charter to provide equal time to both sides of a “contentious” debate, only to present divergent views.
    “There is nothing in the editorial policies that say a stopwatch needs to be out on this matter, or climate change, or a range of contentious issues in the community,” he said, adding that the ABC had “robust” processes to ensure its editorial coverage was balanced…
    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/dont_believe_what_mark_scott_says_about_the_abcs_plurality_just_look_at_who/

    PIC OF STRANDED(?) POLAR BEAR: Gifford at 30mins in – climate deniers, climate deniers; Irwin Jackson: solar and wind excite him. CAGW scepticism is a deception, vested interests. Natasha: follow the money, as they say.

    AUDIO 54mins57secs: 4 Dec: ABC Life Matters: Natasha Mitchell: Turning down the temperature: your say on climate action
    So what contribution should Australia make to global efforts to contain warming to two degrees? How difficult is it to transform your lifestyle to be carbon-neutral?
    Guests:
    Professor Robert Gifford, Environmental psychologist University of Victoria
    Erwin Jackson, Deputy CEO The Climate Institute
    Dr Tas van Ommen, Australian Antarctic Division Program Leader Antarctica and the Global System
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/turning-down-the-temperature/6999518
    COMMENTS:
    Pamela Clements: Can your panel please answer this question? Climate sceptics say there have been ice ages before, therefore climate change is a natural process. So how do we know that human actions can cause climate change or that we can make any difference? It would be great to have a clear, short answer to this!
    Tas van Ommen: The fact that climate changes can occur naturally doesn’t mean humans can’t also cause changes. There are several things that we know well enough to be sure that most or all of the warming in the last century is because of humans:
    - We know that CO2 has increased because of our burning fossil fuels
    - We know that CO2 in the air traps heat: the basics have been known since the late 1800s when ‘greenhouse warming’ was first predicted as a result of fossil fuel burning.
    - From observing past climate (from ice cores) we know that CO2 increases cause temperature increase.
    - Researchers have looked carefully at other potential causes for the warming over the last 100 years, such us the sun, changes in volcanos or the slow changes in seasons that drive the ice ages. None of these factors can explain the warming we have seen.
    More CO2 in the air causes more warming, so we can make a difference by reducing fossil fuel reliance and moving to renewables.

    23

    • #
      ianl8888


      - From observing past climate (from ice cores) we know that CO2 increases cause temperature increase

      A good enough reason not to bother with these people anymore. Just a straigh-out lie

      Temperature increases precede atmospheric CO2 increases by ~800 years (which seems to be about the time for noticeable oceanic out-gassing)

      72

  • #
    pat

    a very lengthy taste of Professor Gifford:

    16 Aug: SouthChinaMorningPost: from New Scientist: 33 reasons why mankind isn’t acting to stem global warming
    Most of us realise how devastating climate change is likely to be, yet do very little to slow the process. Robert Gifford taps into mankind’s primal tendencies to explain our potentially life-threatening inertia
    A few years ago, I began researching this problem. It quickly became apparent that many of the barriers to action are not structural, but psychological. They are what I call the “Dragons of Inaction”…
    DRAGON FAMILY ONE:limited cognition Humans are far less rational than once believed – which is also true when it comes to thinking about climate change. This family, the largest, includes 10 species of dragon…
    24. Denial Uncertainty, mistrust and sunk costs can easily lead to active denial of the problem. This may include denial that climate change is occurring at all or that it is caused by us – something believed by substantial minorities in most countries. Those holding this view tend to be outspoken. One newspaper reader’s comments on an article about research by environmental psychologists is typical of the emotional intensity felt by some deniers: “It figures that a bunch of psychologists need to mess with people’s heads to get them to fall in line with this ‘eco-friendly’ nonsense.”
    25. Reactance Mistrust and denial lead to what psychologists call “reactance”, the tendency to struggle against whatever appears to threaten one’s freedom…
    We need to better reward those whom I affectionately call the mules: people who are carrying the load for the rest of us by already doing everything within their power.
    We also need to smile upon others – I call them honeybees – who engage in climate-positive behaviour for non-climate reasons, such as the cyclist who rides for health or the person who chooses not to have children.
    Finally, we need to aid understanding of those who oppose policies and tech for limiting climate change…
    This must be done expeditiously, though: we may not have four or five decades to ease our profligate spewing of greenhouse gases and return to a balanced climate.
    http://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/article/1848858/33-reasons-why-mankind-isnt-acting-stem-global-warming
    COMMENT:
    by mercedes2233: My guess is that not many people will be interested enough to read this very long article. I do not accept that there is evidence of global warming, and certainly not that mankind is responsible for it. The writer says that he believes that climate change deniers have a vested interest in their stance. My take it is it is the climate change proponents who have a vested interest. Research grant funding is one example…

    72

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Dragons, Mules and Honeybees…what happened to the Unicorns?

      Also he will face the firing squad for saying that there are substantial minorities in most countries against the scam. Doesn’t he know that the sceptics are supposed to be a small number of people in the pay of Big Oil? 3% maximum.

      61

  • #
    Egor TheOne

    The Paris CON21 opening comments with Jake Elwood as Malcom Turn(true B’lver)Bull with his promise of 1 billion dollars of our money >>>

    can you u see the light?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO-_rX4FG_M

    30

  • #

    Radius of Earth 6,371 km. Active atmosphere Δ11 km. Total atmosphere Δ200 km, with the same mass as the ‘active atmosphere’! Everything about this Earth’s atmosphere, is grand nit picking! No science is needed!

    31

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      An interesting point Will. but are there operating differences between the two levels?

      ie does the first 11 behave differently to the second 200 or so?

      20

  • #
    The Carbon Serf

    Shock, horror, how could this be?? Should we be stunned and amazed?
    [Chortle] I’m not surprised! I have always disparaged emissions certification capping-and-trading as a mechanism for discouraging CO2 emissions.

    Is the EU aiming to be the ultimate sustainable regulatory rentier macro-economy? And, in aspiring to this, will it ultimately fail as have major rentier social economies have failed in the past? A historical precedent might have been the pervasive system of contractual management by skilled businesspeople of aristocratic estates in medieval Poland-Lithuania – the system of arenda (meaning ‘rent’), under which the yeomanry and serfs perpetually paid rent to the estate managers. This unsurprisingly created deep suffering and resentment amongst the vast majority of the people – the landless artisans and serfs, and even the yeomanry equivalents, thence eventually rebellion – the Ukrainian Cossack wars of the mid-17th century.

    The report findings by the auditors of EU’s ETS justifies my deep concern that the law-making to enact and operate licensing for carbon emissions cap-and-trading schemes which are ineffectual, and carry the risks of creating perennial and indefeasible contractual rights for licensees to extract huge rents from the national economies, i.e. us! Such rights might only be legally reversed with sovereign compensation of the holders of emissions certificates. This, in effect would be akin to a legislated taxi licensing scheme, but on a huge scale. Only a system of sovereign-determined and controlled taxation-by-legislation of carbon emissions could (but with problems) avoid the insidious risks of ETS.

    I think that the disparaging term “carbon arenda” accurately reflects the deep flaws of carbon ETS schemes, with the ordinary people and industries becoming the “carbon serfdom” in paying carbon emission rents to license holders! And, hence my sardonic moniker in these debates – “The Carbon Serf”.

    Cheers, the Carbon Serf

    50

  • #
    Clint

    Given the bankrupt economies of the USA and Europe, I fail to see how adding further constraints against growth and prosperity in the form of the ETS is sustainable. No one can afford the Green eco-marxist Nightmare. Societies and governments must inevitably wake-up and embrace a painful reality that requires sustained hard work and sanity. This means ditching Green policies and eco-shackles completely and irreversibly.

    50

  • #
    Rod Stuart

    Here is a story which our friend Tony from Oz might well use beneficially. The Auditor General in teh Province of Ontario has determined the cost of reliance on “renewables”.
    It is a large bit of pocket change.
    Dependence on renewables can be a very costly game, as Tasmania has discovered. As always, the ABC doesn’t provide the whole picture. This facility can be very competitive due to the take or pay gas contract which would supply fuel until mid-2017. However, as always is the case when government attempts to run a business, the stupid fools chose to on-sell the gas on the spot market and, more to the point, contracts for differences.

    50

    • #

      “Here is a story which our friend Tony from Oz might well use beneficially. The Auditor General in the Province of Ontario has determined the cost of reliance on “renewable”.
      It is a large bit of pocket change.”

      In US Ozark AR. Propane price is up a bit from September, A dime/(Spanish galleon), to US $1.20/US-gallon with a heat/mass ratio the same as gasoline at $2.75/US-gallon (6/4) as mass.
      Which is the better buy to stay warm till March?

      20

    • #

      As you would know Rod defaults in elec bills have sky rocketed in Tas in the past few years. Also even though we allegedly have 100% capacity in renewables, the Bell Bay power facility that I can see out my window right now, runs 24/7/365

      10

      • #
        Rod Stuart

        You would see three facilities from your window, across the estuary.
        a) Bell Bay Power……built 1972, decommissioned in 2009, fuel tanks removed in 2013, about to be dismantled.
        b) Tamar Valley Power (AETV) combined cycle base load facility, commissioned September 2009, in storage since July 2013, GT offered for sale for two years but no bites. Being readied to run again aws.
        c) Tamar Valley Power peaking plant….3 P&W twinpak turbo/generators all with only one operational gas generator. Currently configured as synchronous condensers for voltage and frequency control. As such they consume power rather than generate it, but are an anchor for sporadic windmill power generation. The plant includes one 60 MW Rolls Royce WLE60 turbine/generator currently away for major maintenance and possible sale.
        None of it has operated 24/7/365 since July, 2013.

        30

  • #
  • #
  • #
    terence

    Face it. Most people propounding AGW are probably lucid, intelligent.
    They know the human species can do little to effect the climate.

    They know they have a story, protected by virtual censorship through vilification of ‘sceptics’ who cannot
    logically be answered. They abuse mathematics and science via cash for the naïve and the not so naïve.
    They have the (now recognised, even by the public) horror story to push the agenda.

    Their interest is not climate. It is all about progressive’s agenda involving ‘limited’ resource availability,
    growing populations, distribution of wealth, ignoring governance, warfare, violence and dictatorship behaviours.

    It ignores depopulation as wealth increases, resource recycling and savings via computerisation, energy from the atom,
    increased food production from CO2 (which they know will continue as CO2 rises which they know they can’t stop).

    There is a huge worldwide money racket which silences powerful voices and governments, but the big pay-off for the
    story makers is the POWER to come, foreseen from centralising governance ( watch our pollies out for UN jobs post parliament)
    The promise of such undemocratic power is payoff enough to the already powerful to drive the rest back to the energy starvation
    of history, almost to the prefire stone age. How often do you see the picture presented for our futures coming via the greens.
    Never. Paint that picture and most of humanity would rise from its slumber and send these carpetbaggers to their own stone age.

    No folks. We are seeing the biggest legal heist in history playing out before our own, dumb eyes.

    70

  • #
    Dennis

    Are we going to remain silent about this admission?

    The alarmists keep telling us their concern about global warming is all about man’s stewardship of the environment. But we know that’s not true. A United Nations official has now confirmed this.
    At a news conference last week in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.
    “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” she said.
    Referring to a new international treaty environmentalists hope will be adopted at the Paris climate change conference later this year, she added: “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”
    The only economic model in the last 150 years that has ever worked at all is capitalism. The evidence is prima facie: From a feudal order that lasted a thousand years, produced zero growth and kept workdays long and lifespans short, the countries that have embraced free-market capitalism have enjoyed a system in which output has increased 70-fold, work days have been halved and lifespans doubled.
    Figueres is perhaps the perfect person for the job of transforming “the economic development model” because she’s really never seen it work. “If you look at Ms. Figueres’ Wikipedia page,” notes Cato economist Dan Mitchell: Making the world look at their right hand while they choke developed economies with their left.

    Read More At Investor’s Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/021015-738779-climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism.htm#ixzz3tQq6usl2
    Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

    41

    • #

      Dennis December 5, 2015 at 6:28 pm

      “Are we going to remain silent about this admission?”

      Mostly YES! Best to remain silent, while carefully honing the tips of your pitchfork!

      50

  • #
    ROM

    Just a passing thought so its right at the bottom of the pile.

    Now just lets assume that after all the holding of hands by the High and Mighty for the peanut gallery photos and all the zillions of words in the major 100 languages on Earth [ out of some 6000 to 8000 spoken languages ] and all the high sounding promises of reducing emmissions to Save the Planet all over again until the next COP, the departing Heads of State and their lackeys will know damn well that nobody of any consequence is going to take the slightest notice of any promises to reduce those nefarious “carbon” emmissions.
    Particularly if as is increasingly common , the national treasuries have a quiet word in their responsible minister’s ear, that there ain’t no money left or at least there soon won’t be any money left for the luxuries like spraying it around on some useless climate modellers and useless climate NGO’s who have never done a bloody thing to improve the economy or help the improve the economy.

    Just the opposite in fact as all their talk and predictions are about disasters and financial ruin and destruction and none of that of any help whatsoever in getting the populace to think positively and start spending and investing to get the economy rolling again and making sure Mr Minister that you will get re-elected.

    And around the cabinet tables and in the corridors of power, there will be a lot of hawing and snorting over the fact that as nobody else seriously intends to do anything about emmissions then what the hell is the point of continuing to pour money into climate modelling that the skeptics are showing don’t predict a damn thing and never have.
    And whats the point in pouring money into climate research when my constituents need that goat track the bureaucrats call a Highway to be fixed up so that they can at least drive on it with a little comfort [ we've quite tidy selection of the aforesaid goat tracks / highways around here in western Vic ands we ain't even supposed to be "remote" ].

    As an American senator once said , “a billion here and a billion there and soon you are talking real money”.

    So the odd few tens [ AUD$ ] or hundreds of millions [ US$] of dollars and another road is fixed up and another water pipeline completed and another hospital and a few new schools built or refurbished.

    Somehow if I was a climate modeller or an academic up to my ears in climate change grants I would be making damn sure that I had a back door open, a bolt hole that paid its way to shift too, when the climate public funding largesse just dries up.

    And it invariably will and as is always the case, there will be huge backlash against climate research and an over reaction that will affect all of science that was in any way remotely connected to anything climate.
    Thats just the way the world works and always has. 

    The impact on the big time climate troughers will be devastating but they will wear it entirely on their own as everybody at street level will be of the opinion they had it coming to them so they wear it!

    And a VERY big percentage of the populace will smile and just quietly say to one another, well they had it coming.
    And the employers will say, There is no damn way I’m going to employ one of those useless climate B’s after all the BS they’ve been handing out over all these past years.

    Some will survive.
    Aa few will still prosper.
    The rest??They might find they are to all intents and purposes they are permanently unemployable particularly if the economies and national exchequers are in deep poo.
    After all, what is a climate modeller and a climate researcher good for outside of their closeted little world of climate modelling and climate doomstering and their pathological desires and need for regular media obeisance to their vastly superior scientific expertise ?

    And then no job.
    And then?

    30

  • #
    Cookster

    I read Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop is in hot water for a “gaf” she made in Paris about the wrong pacific Island “disappearing”. But which Pacific Island is irrelevant – everyone who is being honest with the truth knows these Islands are sinking due to natural causes and have little or nothing to do with human CO2 emissions causing sea level rise. But of course when we read these stories in the main stream media such facts of these Islands are never mentioned.

    http://www.smh.com.au/environment/un-climate-conference/paris-un-climate-conference-2015-julie-bishop-to-face-music-on-climate-gaffe-20151205-glgfxc.html

    30

    • #

      But no one has the “duh” moment to ask…. How could sea level rise be responsible if one island is untouched and the other is underwater when they are “quite close” to each other?? Why has the bull$hit alarm been disconnected in the MSM?

      30

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    No matter what the question is, fake markets are never the answer.

    Well, not completely true. They always seem to be the answer to the wrong question, don’t they? ;-)

    And maybe that’s not as sarcastic as I thought at first. :-(

    10

  • #
    itsnotco2

    All climate change – yes ALL – is 100% natural and has nothing to do with carbon dioxide. It’s obvious that rising CO2 levels have not affected temperatures this century, and there is absolutely no valid physics that any of you can produce to show why climate should be affected by CO2.

    The global mean temperature varies in cycles that appear to be regulated by planetary orbits and variations in solar intensity, cosmic rays etc which probably also relate to planetary orbits. For example, the eccentricity of Earth’s orbit has a cycle of about 100,000 years which is thought to relate to the spacing of glacial periods, this being because the annual mean distance of the Sun varies over that 100,000 year cycle. There are numerous cycles, but the two dominant ones in the space of a few thousand years have periods of about 1,000 years and 60 years. Both were rising in the 30 years to 1998, but now we have slight net cooling for 30 years, and probably about 500 years of long term cooling due to start within 100 years.

    Solar intensity can also vary because of variations in cloud cover. Reflections from clouds affect the albedo by about 20%. For each 1% change (for example to 19% or 21%) there is a temperature change of about 0.9 degree. So all the climate change in the last few thousand years could have been due just to such changes in cloud cover. Clearly there are also other changes in sunspot activity, and you have to ask yourselves whether than could well explain the 1,000 year cycle. What regulates these long term cycles in sunspot activity? Well, the only things that are “regular” are planetary orbits, and it could well be that planetary magnetic fields which reach to the Sun have some effect on sunspots and possibly cosmic rays intensities which, in turn, may affect cloud formation.

    It’s ALL natural and you have no proof that it could not be.

    Until you understand that planetary surface temperatures are not established by direct radiation reaching such surfaces you have failed to pay due diligence. The explanation as to what really determines such temperatures on all planets is there to be read and studied here. It all started with an explanation by the brilliant 19th century physicist Josef Loschmidt who has now been proven right with modern day experiments which show that force fields do indeed create temperature gradients that are the state of maximum entropy.

    21