Wobbly Warsaw Warming Worriers Wrangle While World Watches

Posted: November 20, 2013 by tallbloke in alarmism, Carbon cycle, climate, Idiots, Politics, propaganda

Roundup of  COP19 Warsaw climate conference stories from Benny Peiser of GWPF

Representatives of most of the world’s poor countries have walked out of increasingly fractious climate negotiations after the EU, Australia, the US and other developed countries insisted that the question of who should pay compensation for extreme climate events be discussed only after 2015. The orchestrated move by the G77 and China bloc of 132 countries came during talks about “loss and damage” – how countries should respond to climate impacts that are difficult or impossible to adapt to, such as typhoon Haiyan. –John Vidal, The Guardian, 20 November 2013

“The EU understands that the issue is incredibly important for developing countries. But they should be careful about … creating a new institution. This is not [what] this process needs,” said Connie Hedegaard, EU climate commissioner. She ruled out their most important demand, insisting: “We cannot have a system where we have automatic compensation when severe events happen around the world. That is not feasible.” –John Vidal, The Guardian, 20 November 2013

The devastation wreaked by Typhoon Haiyan has become a rallying cry at UN climate talks, where the Philippines and other developing nations are demanding aid guarantees for future damage from global warming. The demand has created another deep fault line in the divided negotiations, for rich nations see it as a potential trap, locking them into a never-ending liability for compensation. More than 130 developing states are now calling for an international “loss and damage” mechanism, bankrolled by wealthy nations, to be embedded in a 2015 global pact on climate change. —Agence France Press, 20 November 2013

Africa faces costs to adapt to the effects of climate change that will rise to $350 billion a year by the 2070s if governments fail to rein in runaway emissions, according to a report today from the UN Environment Program. The costs of adapting Africa’s infrastructure to the rising seas and stronger storms caused by global warming will likely total $7 billion to $15 billion by 2020 and “rise rapidly” thereafter because of ever-higher temperatures, UNEP said today in a report released at UN climate talks in Warsaw. –Alex Morales, Bloomberg 20 November 2013

The proposal, advanced by the G77 plus China, that the US and other nations should pay tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars to poor countries that suffer disasters, is a central theme of the climate negotiations now taking place in Warsaw, Poland. Yet partial responsibility for the emergence of a debate on historical reparations lies squarely with President Obama. Despite the scientific evidence to the contrary, President Obama declared in his 2013 State of the Union Address that “Heat waves, droughts, wildfires, floods – all are now more frequent and more intense. We can choose to believe that Superstorm Sandy, and the most severe drought in decades, and the worst wildfires some states have ever seen, were all just a freak coincidence. Or we can choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science.” –Roger Pielke Jr., The Guardian, 19 November 2013

Long drawn arguments through two days of almost continuous negotiations broke out over the key decisions that the Warsaw meeting would make. A draft of the decisions brought out on Monday became the new battleground as developed countries tried to remove any difference in the responsibility thrust upon the developing countries from that of the rich nations. –Nitin Sethi, The Hindu, 20 November 2013

20% of the EU’s budget will go towards fighting climate change, climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard announced in Warsaw today. This equates to €180 billion on climate spending between 2014 and 2020. Much of this will be spent on domestic projects, helping with the development of climate-smart agriculture, energy efficiency and the transport sector. Speaking at a press conference in Warsaw today, EU climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard said that if the world is successfully going to tackle climate change “one of the things we need is to change is the whole economic paradigm, including the way we construct our budgets.” She added that Europe is the first region to construct its budget in this way. –Sophie Yeo, Responding to Climate Change, 20 November 2013

Poland’s prime minister Donald Tusk dismissed environment minister Marcin Korolec on Wednesday as part of a government reshuffle. Korolec will be replaced by Maciej Grabowski, former deputy finance minister responsible for preparing shale gas taxation. “It is about radical acceleration of shale gas operations. Mr Korolec will remain the government’s plenipotentiary for the climate negotiations,” Tusk told a news conference. His dismissal raised questions over Poland’s position in the negotiations. —Reuters, 20 November 2013

  1. AlecM says:

    Interesting times indeed! This is because the likes of Hedegaard and Davey who have made careers on phoney IPCC Climate Alchemy and International Aid are now risking immense damage to their budgets when they know very well by now that global warming has stopped, that the World is getting colder and their careers are stymied.

    The simple fact is that CO2 climate sensitivity is very low indeed, I estimate it to be <0.1 K. The reason is that the atmospheric temperature control system which minimises the effects of solar variation, change of EUV and magnetic field which change cloud area, also biofeedback which controls low level cloud albedo, uses CO2 as its working fluid so to a first approximation the effect of change of its concentration is fully compensated.

    No significant CO2-AGW means that most change of climate is natural** so there can be no requirement for compensation.

    **The real AGW was Asian industrialisation which through increased aerosol production reduced low level cloud albedo. This is why the oceans and the atmosphere heated so much in the 1980s and 90s, superimposed on the warming ENSO and the solar grand maximum of the 20th Century.

    If we did not have Asian industrial emissions now, we'd be a lot colder.

  2. johnbuk says:

    So, climate change wailers meet reality coming the other way – what a shock for these self-appointed guardians of the world’s (oops sorry, Gaia’s) conscience.

    We in the so-called democracies of the west need to ask why the usual suspects like Greenpeace, WWF and their spawn are allowed to have such a large presence at this type of jamboree – who are they and when did they get voted in? If a satisfactory answer isn’t forthcoming then we need to advise our own governments to stop funding these organisations and to start questioning why the UN favours their input so much.

    We are in danger of allowing GP WWF etc to have power without accountability and we know where that ends.

  3. c777 says:

    I believe the term is “making a rod for your back”.
    Cough cough………..

  4. A C Osborn says:

    c777 says:
    November 20, 2013 at 3:24 pm

    I believe the term is “making a rod for your back”.

    Also, Hoist by your own Petard.

    This could really be the end game for AGW, I can see the “Rich” nations suddenly realizing that AGW is no where near as bad or dangerous as it has been touted to be.
    They will instruct their own Scientists to refute the UN IPCC science so that they can show that they are not to blame for Natural Disaster and hence need not give anyone “Compensation” for past misdemeanors.
    Bring it on.

  5. Joe Public says:

    “…….. costs to adapt …….. will rise to $350 billion a year by the 2070s …….. according to a report today from the UN Environment Program.”

    So, the IPCC founded only 25 years ago has, in its lifetime, consistently failed in its climate predictions. But a UN program boasts of being able to predict 60 years ahead. Righhhhhhht.

  6. c777 says:

    Yes @A C Osborn
    Its a game changer.

  7. ren says:

    People already suffering from the impact of cold currents far south.
    An example is Sardinia and U.S..

  8. oldbrew says:

    ‘20% of the EU’s budget will go towards fighting climate change, climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard announced in Warsaw today. This equates to €180 billion on climate spending between 2014 and 2020’

    Who remembers voting for that?

  9. Brian H says:

    Pielke Jr. is reverting to type: “overwhelming judgment of science” is pure bushwah. Every extreme weather indicator is down, even taking “Superstorm (!) Sandy” and drought last year in a few US locales into account. F’Gawd’s sake, warming reduces the clash of warm and cold air masses that produce extreme events! It’s the opposite of every Alarmist claim.

    We will soon enough wish that GW was occurring.

  10. Roger Andrews says:

    It’s the height of hypocrisy for China, which presently holds $US3.7 trillion – repeat TRILLION – in foreign reserves to align itself with the “poor” countries. With this much money China could pay the paltry few billions the other G77 nations are asking for all by itself without even noticing.

    If China is serious about cutting CO2 emissions it might also consider doing something about its own, which are now approximately twice as large as those of the USA.

  11. Chaeremon says:

    The Green Climate Fund (deputy Manfred Konukiewitz, surprisingly also Commissioner for Climate Policy of the German Federal Ministry ) is also in the news of today in Germany, selling The Energiewende made in Germany (this label introduced in Britain by the Merchandise Marks Act 1887).

    I wonder what, exactly, will make these autocrats realize that democratically elected governments cannot be blamed for Natural Disaster, except as a matter of witch-hunt. Either the Green Climate Fund is stillborn or else the murder of democracy as we used to know it.

  12. Brian H says:

    The worse Greenpeace likes it, the better it is.

  13. michael hart says:

    Brian H,
    I thought something similar for a few seconds, but I think the structure of the text is misleading. I actually think that Pielke Jr. is actually quoting President Obama saying those words, and saying it is partly Obama’s fault for making incorrect assertions about the attribution of extreme weather events.

    If I recall correctly, the AR5 SPM actually played down the significance of hurricanes, typhoons, tornadoes and plagues of raining frogs, and Pielke Jr. is on record as saying the same thing more emphatically. Obama (or his speech writers) simply chose to ignore this, or simply never read/listened at all.

  14. michael hart says:

    I would also add that given such a reading of the Pielke Jr. quote, it’s made harder to construct a working conspiracy theory about the whole charade.

    Gross contributory ignorance and incompetence are always the favourite horses in my book, especially when it comes to environmentalists’ extremes.

  15. michael hart says:

    And thirdly, there is an awfully long way to go yet.
    (Schadenfreude is a dish best taken cold 🙂 )

  16. oldbrew says:

    The conference has gone even further downhill with a mass walk-out in the middle of a session.

    ‘133 countries walk out of UN climate meeting over global warming compensation row’

    ‘Poland’s envoy Marcin Korolec, chairing negotiations, commented saying that the discussion was “challenging”.’

    Like being confronted by 133 Oliver Twists – or 132 plus China. Meanwhile climate alarmist Obama’s ratings have fallen to an all-time low. Letting the EPA crush whole industries in the name of climate policy doesn’t help.

  17. From twitter-

    Conservatarist: appropriately alliterative anti alarmist annotation

    Chairman Al: coal costs cheap, climate change catastrophe con could collapse?

    Me: Pushy Poland preachers promote political propaganda

  18. Brian H says:

    Pushy preachers in Poland, perhaps. Poles puncture propaganda purveyors, principally.

  19. michael hart says:

    Strange day or two. The more I think about this story from Poland, the more bizarre it becomes.

    The Poles ‘invite’ (if that’s the right word) all these delegates to seal-the-deal (as Obama would say) on another jamboree celebrating a political idea that is already holed below the waterline.

    The poorer nations who are really only there for the $$$, fire some extra torpedoes. Probably emboldened to do so by the US administration’s schizophrenic statements-vs-actions regarding collective Western culpability for global weather, they demand their promised $$$, knowing that they were never likely to see much of it. But hey, why not give it a shot, and they were (sensibly) never intending to make any efforts on their part either…Handbags at six paces commences…

    Greenshirts start crying, and flounce out…presumably there is a sufficiency of aeroplanes to fly them home early?

    Then, in the middle of the debacle, the Polish PM fires the home-grown delegate so that the Polish government can explicitly get on with doing what so many of the greenshirt attendees are there to explicitly prevent.

    Reuters, who I’ve not noted for their skepticism towards global warming, reports “His dismissal raised questions over Poland’s position in the negotiations.” No kidding? If that wasn’t a two-fingered salute, it’s difficult to imagine what is.

  20. Chaeremon says:

    michael hart said: … and they [poorer nations] were (sensibly) never intending to make any efforts on their part either …

    Strange two days indeed. But I’m not so sure about the nature of their efforts (please don’t accuse me of paranoia, just thinking out loud).

    10000 people were initially reported dead in the central Philippine province, instead of evacuating them to safer places. But we live in the 21st century with very, very [did I already say: very!] high gear international warning systems, don’t we?

    Sardinia residents complained about not receiving civil protection warnings from agency chief Franco Gabrielli; same sort of issue as previous.

    What’s up next? Making apocalyptic events truly happen does not require any effort! Just omit (or understate) the civil protection warnings, and then: Bang!

    Sorry tallbloke if my comment seems too far on this blog.

  21. tallbloke says:

    Chaeremon: the ‘poorer nations’ are kicking out a lot more co2 than the ‘rich nations’ these days.

  22. tchannon says:

    The BBC have reported the enviros flounced out, naming FoE, Greenpeace, Oxfam.

    I would have produced a transcript but the BBC web site is so inaccessible I could not even get to first base. Bastards.

  23. Zeke says:

    I am still taking Craig Rucker’s view (CFACT):

    “Can the UN climate summit stage a comeback in the next two days?

    At this point it seems unlikely, but there’s always the traditional marathon overtime session in the waning hours. That’s when the backroom deals get done.

    Never underestimate what a gathering of bureaucrats and carbon profiteers might accomplish when after your money.”

  24. tchannon says:

    I forgot to mention the BBC stated “Global Warming”. Really dropping the charade?

  25. johnbuk says:

    tchannon says “The BBC have reported the enviros flounced out, naming FoE, Greenpeace, Oxfam.”
    As Donna says at No Fracking Concensus – “Why are they there in the first place”?

  26. Andrew McRae says:

    As a fan of alliteration I just had to congratulate you on the title of this post.

    Sorry, let me say that a different way.

    Roger’s Repetition Received Really Resoundingly, Relates Remote Reader.

  27. tchannon says:

    It is rather good in’it?

  28. Brian H says:

    I suspect the Poles of plotting a deliberate debacle, and then getting on with an anti-suicide agenda.

  29. […] Wobbly Warsaw Warming Worriers Wrangle While World Watches (tallbloke.wordpress.com) […]