The UN admits that the Paris climate deal is hot air

Posted: November 5, 2017 by oldbrew in climate, Emissions, Politics, propaganda
Tags: , , ,

Political posing in Paris was pointless propaganda about planet
preservation, as this GWPF report shows. Obsessing about carbon dioxide is futile, but no doubt lucrative for the few.

Here’s a United Nations climate report that environmentalists probably don’t want anybody to read. It says that even if every country abides by the grand promises they made last year in Paris to reduce greenhouse gases, the planet would still be “doomed.”

When President Obama hitched America to the Paris accords in 2016, he declared that it was “the moment that we finally decided to save our planet.” And when Trump pulled out of the deal this year, he was berated by legions of environmentalists for killing it.

But it turns out that the Paris accord was little more than a sham that will do nothing to “save the planet.”

According to the latest annual UN report on the “emissions gap,” the Paris agreement will provide only a third of the cuts in greenhouse gas that environmentalists claim is needed to prevent catastrophic warming. If every country involved in those accords abides by their pledges between now and 2030 — which is a dubious proposition — temperatures will still rise by 3 degrees C by 2100. The goal of the Paris agreement was to keep the global temperature increase to under 2 degrees.

Eric Solheim, head of the U.N. Environment Program, which produces the annual report, said this week that “One year after the Paris Agreement entered into force, we still find ourselves in a situation where we are not doing nearly enough to save hundreds of millions of people from a miserable future. Governments, the private sector and civil society must bridge this catastrophic climate gap.”

The report says unless global greenhouse gas emissions peak before 2020, the CO2 levels will be way above the goal set for 2030, which, it goes on, will make it “extremely unlikely that the goal of holding global warming to well below 2 degrees C can still be reached.”

Not to worry. The UN claims that closing this gap will be easy enough, if nations set their collective minds to it.

But this is a fantasy. The list of what would need to be done by 2020 — a little over two years from now — includes: Boosting renewable energy’s share to 30%. Pushing electric cars to 15% of new car sales, up from less than 1% today. Doubling mass transit use. Cutting air travel CO2 emissions by 20%. And coming up with $1 trillion for “climate action.”

Oh, and coal-fired power plants would have to be phased out worldwide, starting now.

Continued here.

  1. Jim says:

    And so we reach the dark ages of environmentalism. We are all born of original sin and are unworthy of the life that government has blessed us with. WE MUST REPENT! REPENT FOR OUR SIN OF FOSSIL FUEL CONSUMPTION! We all must yield to the will of the UN Inquisition, for it is the voice of ultimate morality and salvation in this cursed world. REPENT! REPENT FOR YOUR SALVATION DEPENDS UPON IT!

  2. ivan says:

    As Jim says climate alarmism and environmentalism has degenerated to a religion with climate ‘scientists’ as the high priests and the UN as ‘papa’.

    There is no way they can forecast what next years average world temperature (is there even such a thing?) is going to be so how can they state as fact the temperature for 2100.

    It is all pie in the sky with the UN demanding that all the little people buy indulgences through green taxes and power bills.

  3. oldbrew says:

    We are offered a false dilemma i.e. save the world or not.

    Among the assumptions made are that it needs ‘saving’, and that there’s a ‘solution’ at hand, neither of which is true. It’s all blarney.

  4. p.g.sharrow says:

    Ecoloons want to condemn humanity to a short and miserable existence to ensure the creation of their vision of a pristine, non-human, Earth. Theirs is a religion as nefarious as any cult created by evil people to loot and enslave the population…pg

  5. tom0mason says:

    Science, especially ‘Climate Science™’ has been deflected from studying, researching and, explaining real ‘testable’ observed phenomena, and it has become a ‘high confidence’ belief system depending on the output of unreal computer models.

    ‘Climate science™’ has been hijacked by purveyors of perverse computerized virtual world and become a political tool of the left — Lysenkoism in aces.

  6. Stephen Richards says:

    so if paris is a waste of paper and no country will meet their pledge, lets’s stop the taxpayer robbing COP merry go round and all subsidies on energy

  7. stpaulchuck says:

    “Oh, and coal-fired power plants would have to be phased out worldwide, starting now.”
    as China builds five more gigantic units and India is spooling up to build more

  8. oldbrew says:

    More from the report:
    There are currently 273 gigawatts of coal capacity under construction around the world, and another 570 gigawatts in the pipeline, the UN says. That would represent a 42% increase in global energy production from coal. Does anyone really think developing countries who need coal as a cheap source of fuel to grow their economies will suddenly call it quits?

    Simple-minded climate cultists need to wise up.

  9. oldbrew says:

    Steve Koonin: A Deceptive New Report on Climate
    Posted on November 3, 2017
    by Judith Curry

    Steve Koonin has a new op-ed in the WSJ: ‘A Deceptive New Report on Climate’ that clarifies the need for a Climate Red Team
    = = =
    Tony Heller looks at some real data…

  10. oldbrew says:

    Sea level rise has got stuck since late 2015? See NASA graphic…

  11. oldbrew says:

    Ian Plimer: ‘As soon as the words emissions, climate change and Paris are used, you know you are being conned and that the world’s biggest scam will continue.’

    Quoted from: Misguided renewable energy policies will ruin nation
    The Australian
    Ian Plimer
    23 October 2017

  12. tom0mason says:

    It could be worse if Jørgen Randers, professor of climate strategy at BI Norwegian Business School has his way —
    “If people don’t want my preferred solution, then people are stupid, shouldn’t be allowed to decide their fate, and we should install a climate dictatorship instead.”

    A green dictatorship! This is the true face of the Club of Rome (CoR) at work. The CoR are rich and powerful bunch of loony green activists that all too often have the ear of the UN.
    The idea is actually from Anders Wijkman, who’s spokesperson for the CoR, of which Jørgen Randers is member of their executive committee.

    Read more of these truly horrific proposals at

  13. oldbrew says:

    Jørgen Randers, professor of climate strategy at BI Norwegian Business School

    If there was a fake job of the year contest, ‘professor of climate strategy’ would be a contender 😆
    = = =
    More hot air, debunked by Dr Roy Spencer

    Trump Wrongly Blamed for Destroying Sea Ice Satellite
    November 6th, 2017 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.

    No, Our Ability to Monitor Sea Ice Has Not Ended

    Yesterday, The Guardian ran a story with the headlines:

    Donald Trump accused of obstructing satellite research into climate change
    Republican-controlled Congress ordered destruction of vital sea-ice probe

    But as NASA’s leader of the U.S. Science Team on one of the best satellite instruments developed for monitoring sea ice, I can tell you we will not lose our ability to monitor sea ice.
    – – –
    The Daily Caller says the newspaper’s claim that Trump is being blamed for the lapse in a polar satellite program is less than accurate.

    One scientist The Guardian quoted Sunday pointed out a major error in the report — Congress voted to defund the satellite program before Trump took office.

    “The Trump administration had nothing do with this as the decision was made by Congress in September of 2016,” David Gallaher, a scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

    “I have no idea where the Guardian got their headline,” Gallaher said.

  14. oldbrew says:

    The Cost Of ‘Climate Action’: $5.2 Trillion To Avert 0.2 Degrees Of Warming

    At least $5.2 trillion – and any result is a guess anyway. No way of knowing exactly why any changes occurred, or even if they occurred i.e. not just short-term variation.

  15. Jon-Anders Grannes says:

    Erik Solheim, Norwegian Marxist, and now head of UNEP tells it all. He is just trying to “save” the World with international neomarxism. Actually he is saying that we need to destroy the World in order to save it?