U.S., EU want U.N. to stress low cost of climate change fight – draft
(Reuters) – The United States and European Union want the U.N. to stress the low cost of fighting climate change in a draft handbook on the issue that it is compiling, a leaked document showed on Tuesday.
The United States wants the handbook to do more to show that the costs of action “will be almost insignificant relative to projected growth”, the document showed.
— http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/10/21/uk-climatechange-ipcc-idUKKCN0IA15620141021
It mentions a pause slowdown.
Saudi Arabia said that the period of the slowdown should be extended to 1998-2014 from 1998-2012 in the draft.
Wonder if we can prise a copy of the document out of anyone?
The US riding on a shale gas boom, exporting oil again, talks about negligible cost? Or perhaps this really is a paper tiger, fight meaning no more than a lot of jaw and noise, no real action. Talk is cheap.
I note the Norwegian link (By … OSLO), a frequent source of material on AGW, some of it dubious.
Seems to me the use of the word “fight” says a great deal about those involved, a nothing word in the UK, fight this fight that, anger and abuse where rationality and quiet thought ought to be.
Oh well, can’t fight them all.
Post by Tim
Tallbloke's Talkshop 
Is this the beginning of the face – saving climbdown?
The eco-green won’t be happy. The “slowdown”, the politically acceptable replacement of “pause” or “hiatus”, note. Still, admitting 1998 to 2014 admits to 16 years of non-IPPC warming. With the October agreement in Paris of no commitment or binding plan, seems like the wheels are falling off the CAGW wagon.
We can only hope.
Since 100% of the money spent to fight GW is wasted, even damaging in its effects, there is no such thing as “cheap”.
23,000 people die of cold each year. More are dying because they cannot afford to heat their homes because of the green taxes foisted on them by crocodile environmentalists who all have good jobs and plenty of money.
And they say their actions are cheap – YES? cheap if you think someone else’s life is cheap!
Oops, I was annoyed by the hatefilled statement from these people. Thats 23,000 extra deaths during colder months. Causality can only be suggested not stated.
The socialists and corporatists who wrote this have no understanding of the true cost of governmental intervention into the market. Given a laissez-faire market we would see people much more well off than with today’s governmental control. So, any intervention is damaging and never “inexpensive”.
~Mark
“The 32-page draft drawn up by top climate scientists…”
and
“The United States also said many tables in the draft report were “remarkably dense” and “may be impenetrable to the policy-maker or the public”.
Not knowing what they said, they said it.
Meanwhile ill-conceived government intervention is wilfully demonising carbon dioxide while driving up energy costs. There is NO better way to make everything more expensive. Then they have the gall to claim the costs will be low.
As I tried to show last year, in 2 Climate Change Policy Choices, mitigation of climate change can only be justified if there are low-cost, high-impact policies available. That is low-cost per tonne equivalent of CO2 mitigated. Most policies have either zero impact, or are high-cost, low-impact. If there were LC-HC policies available, these would be proclaimed widely to constrain global emissions growth.
This sounds like one of those “watch the pea” stories. Fighting climate change the way the UN proposes just might be a statistical bargain. For example: We each have a net worth of $1,000. Our average worth is $1,000 and our combined worth is $2,000. If I give you $500, our average worth does not change nor does our combined wealth. Yet something has changed – your net worth is now twice mine.
Oops – should read more than twice mine. The hazards of trying to post and chew gum at the same time.
Breitbart reports: The co-founder of the Weather Channel is making waves among meteorologists by saying “climate change” is “nothing but a lie.”
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/10/23/Top-Meteorologist-Says-Climate-Change-is-Nothing-But-a-Lie
Coleman insists that there is no credible evidence of man-made warming, nor has there ever been. He also says that the theory that carbon dioxide is a pollutant has not been substantiated scientifically.
“There has been no warming over 18 years,” Coleman said.
He’ll be popular with the UK Met Office climate alarm crew 🙂