The UN’s Impossible Climate Action Pyramid

Posted: December 4, 2019 by oldbrew in climate, Critique
Tags:

.
.
Hands up if you’re willing to give up your modern lifestyle for the dubious promise of an effect on global temperatures in some distant future, based on a much-criticised 19th century theory. Hello? Anyone there?

PA Pundits - International

By David Wojick, Ph.D. ~

Every year the UN produces a climate action report just before the annual climate summit (this year COP 25 in Madrid). This time the UN greens have outdone themselves, but not in a good way for them. The UN Environmental Program has produced a report that graphically demonstrates why what they want to happen is impossible.

I call this graphic the Impossible Pyramid. It is starkly simple and worth careful contemplation, especially by the 20,000 climate action negotiators in Madrid and their bosses at home. Yet, the people who should really care are the ones who would be clobbered.

The report is titled “Emissions Gap Report 2019”, which sounds like there is a gap of some sort to be filled. This turns out to be a gross understatement, to say the least.

See https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/30798/EGR19ESEN.pdf?sequence=13 for the UNEPnreport.

The graphic is Figure ES.4. “Global GHG emissions…

View original post 757 more words

Comments
  1. hunterson7 says:

    When a pyramid shaped plan is inherently unstable and ends up only profiting those at the top, it is considered a special form of crime called “Ponzi Scheme”.
    https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/ponzischeme.asp

  2. Gamecock says:

    Their figure ES.4 shows virtually direct correlation of human CO2 emissions and changes in Global Mean Temperature.

    1. Changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration and changes in GMT over the last 50 years* show absolutely no correlation.

    2. Human emissions of CO2 are <4% of CO2 emissions. Our emissions are DWARFED by nature.

    3. 'This report presents an assessment of global emissions pathways relative to those consistent with limiting warming to 2°C, 1.8°C and 1.5°C'

    Their use of decimal points shows they have a sense of humor.

    *Any GMT declared for before 1979 is a gross estimate. Pre-satellite era, there simply weren't enough data points to know.

  3. oldbrew says:

    Pre-satellite era, there simply weren’t enough data points to know

    That’s where the temperature proxies come in 😎
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_(climate)

    Or, how about “pseudoproxies” 🤔
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_(climate)#Pseudoproxies

  4. tom0mason says:

    As the oceans contain at least 50 times more CO2 than the atmosphere and about 20 times more than the land biosphere.
    As CO2 moves between the atmosphere and the ocean by molecular diffusion when there is a difference between CO2 gas pressure (pCO2 for a given temperature) between the atmosphere and oceans, and vents CO2 when the waters are warm. Then maybe UN backed science should do the ultimate in CCS (carbon capture and storage) by cooling the oceans on a massive scale.
    🙂
    Nature controls the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere not humans!

  5. p.g.sharrow says:

    @tom0mason says:
    you are so right! any good engineer would know that. Too bad climate scientists are not educated in reality. Their field seems to be better described as a philosophy rather then science. Gas pressure laws do not require philosophy to work as you wish, they just are as any refrigeration tech. knows…pg!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s