Sunday, November 29, 2015

Thoughts on the Paris climate summit

Delusional zealots, power-seekers, and leaders of various nations who feel obliged to attend so that they can try to prevent their countries from bearing the cost of whatever is agreed to are all flying in now and checking into their hotels.

And re: those national leaders thinking about the cost: I'll bet a few of them, even if they can't admit it publicly, know that incurring it is utterly pointless:

A new peer-reviewed paper by Dr. Bjorn Lomborg published in the Global Policy journal measures the actual impact of all significant climate promises made ahead of the Paris climate summit.
Governments have publicly outlined their post-2020 climate commitments in the build-up to the December’s meeting. These promises are known as “Intended Nationally Determined Contributions” (INDCs).
Dr. Lomborg’s research reveals:
  • The climate impact of all Paris INDC promises is minuscule: if we measure the impact of every nation fulfilling every promise by 2030, the total temperature reduction will be 0.048°C (0.086°F) by 2100.
  • Even if we assume that these promises would be extended for another 70 years, there is still little impact: if every nation fulfills every promise by 2030, and continues to fulfill these promises faithfully until the end of the century, and there is no ‘CO₂ leakage’ to non-committed nations, the entirety of the Paris promises will reduce temperature rises by just 0.17°C (0.306°F) by 2100.
  • US climate policies, in the most optimistic circumstances, fully achieved and adhered to throughout the century, will reduce global temperatures by 0.031°C (0.057°F) by 2100.
  • EU climate policies, in the most optimistic circumstances, fully achieved and adhered to throughout the century, will reduce global temperatures by 0.053°C (0.096°F) by 2100.
  • China climate policies, in the most optimistic circumstances, fully achieved and adhered to throughout the century, will reduce global temperatures by 0.048°C (0.086°F) by 2100.
  • The rest of the world’s climate policies, in the most optimistic circumstances, fully achieved and adhered to throughout the century, will reduce global temperatures by 0.036°C (0.064°F) by 2100.
And consider the complete failure of previous pow-wows of this sort, going back to Kyoto.

So there will be tense, round-the-clock meetings in Paris, with the world's media breathlessly reporting each minute signal of the remote possibility of a breakthrough.

Some kind of document - certainly not anything that's legally binding according to the laws of the participating nations - will eventually be hammered out.

The Most Equal Comrade will bring his copy of it back to post-America. By that time, Congress will know enough of the details that those legislators with a lick of sense and at least of modicum of devotion to freedom will insist that it be considered a treaty and voted on.

The MEC will say it's not a treaty and come up with some cockamamie term for it and forge ahead with imposing its obligations on this sad, deteriorating, gravely imperiled nation.

There will be more measures along the lines of prosecuting Exxon for its atmospheric research not drawing regime-approved conclusions,  of outfits like the Children's Trust Fund, which gets kids to file lawsuits against the government to force action on climate change, of imposition of the Next Generation of Science Standards in schools, to make sure that those kids are good and indoctrinated, of astronomically costly EPA ozone regulations , of presidential task forces issuing reports on how communities across post-America can / should / will be forced to "prepare for climate change," of the Union of Concerned Scientists proposing a National Food Policy.

And meanwhile, Iran will be cheating on the nuke "deal," ISIS will be finalizing plans for a catastrophic attack on post-America, tensions between NATO and Russia will continue to build, China will continue its South China Sea aggression, and most of the post-American cattle-masses will distract themselves with sports and entertainment obsessions.

Sound like a dire scenario?

Then fight. Speak up. Argue. Vote. Attend rallies. Persuade your fellow citizens.

It is very late in the day.


7 comments:

  1. Your ilk created ISIS. Read more at http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/did-george-w-bush-create-isis

    ReplyDelete
  2. Here is what happened: In 2003, the U.S. military, on orders of President Bush, invaded Iraq, and nineteen days later threw out Saddam’s government. A few days after that, President Bush or someone in his Administration decreed the dissolution of the Iraqi Army. This decision didn’t throw “thirty thousand individuals” out of a job, as Ziedrich said—the number was closer to ten times that. Overnight, at least two hundred and fifty thousand Iraqi men—armed, angry, and with military training—were suddenly humiliated and out of work.

    This was probably the single most catastrophic decision of the American venture in Iraq. In a stroke, the Administration helped enable the creation of the Iraqi insurgency. Bush Administration officials involved in the decision—like Paul Bremer and Walter Slocombe—argued that they were effectively ratifying the reality that the Iraqi Army had already disintegrated.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I know, I know, you will say this is not the point of this post but you did throw ISIS in there. You blame everything on Obama who Bush and his cohorts created too. Now we got a Republican like Trump running his mouth. And "gesturing." Now that's stirring something up!

    ReplyDelete
  4. If we cannot have fun here with business as usual, the terrorists and you have won. Do you want to revive the Index Libororum Prohibitorum because it is so very late in the day? Would your fearful leader put more of us in jail for poor taste?

    ReplyDelete
  5. There was no ISIS in 2008. Its precursor , al-Qaeda in Iraq, was a dwindling ragtag band.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  7. By all means have fun, but call out horse shit like environmentalism, identity politics, cultural defilement and jihad whenever you encounter them.

    ReplyDelete