Tuesday, December 05, 2023
Global emissions at record highs as world continues to overspend on 'carbon budget'
This is essentially non-news. Global CO2 levels in the atmosphere have been gradually rising for many decades. At the same time temperatures have increased in annual amounts measured only in hundredths and thousands of one degree. Such slow change is no challenge to cope with, if coping is needed
Global carbon emissions from fossil fuels have increased over the past year despite most of the world committing to net zero targets, according to new research.
The Global Carbon Project releases its carbon budget each year, with this year's figures showing a 1.1 per cent increase in emissions across the world.
The report found there was no sign of the rapid and deep decrease in total emissions needed to prevent dangerous climate change.
CSIRO chief research scientist and executive director of the Global Carbon Project Pep Canadell said despite a slowdown in emissions growth, the world was not moving fast enough to reduce emissions.
"We need more renewable energy, we need it faster, we need it bigger, we need it everywhere, we need everything," Dr Canadell said.
"But we will not solve the climate problem unless at the same time we bring fossil fuel emissions down very, very quickly."
There was some good news, with emissions falling in some regions, including Europe and the United States, but it was not enough to offset the increases in places such as China, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and Australia.
The fall in the US was driven largely by a decline in the use of coal, with emissions from coal dropping to levels last seen in 1903.
But emissions from coal globally were at record highs and they are expected to grow as India and China continue building new coal-fired power stations.
The carbon budget report found atmospheric CO2 levels were projected to average 419.3 parts per million in 2023, 51 per cent above pre-industrial levels.
Global fossil CO2 emissions are now 6 per cent higher than they were in 2015, the year the global community committed to keeping warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius under the Paris Agreement.
"We continually see record growth in clean energy, but we have failed to put sufficient controls on the growth of fossil fuels and therefore CO2 emissions just keep rising," said Glen Peters, a senior researcher at the CICERO Center for International Climate Research.
"Net zero has become the common catchphrase for doing something on climate but at its core is the necessity to reduce CO2 emissions to near zero."
"If countries and companies are not radically reducing CO2 emissions, then they are in no way consistent with the scientific concept of net zero emissions."
Emissions from land-use change such as deforestation are projected to decrease slightly but they are still too high to be offset by current levels of reforestation.
While emissions from bushfires contributed to the global increase, due to an extreme wildfire season in Canada, where emissions were six to eight times higher than average.
Technology-based carbon dioxide removal was a drop in the ocean, amounting to just 0.01 million tonnes of CO2, more than a million times smaller than current emissions.
The study also estimated the remaining carbon budget — how much the world can emit before breaching the 1.5C target.
It found the world was overspending on its emissions budget consistently over multiple years, with a 50 per cent chance global warming would exceed 1.5C consistently in about seven years.
While those estimates are subject to uncertainties the report said it was clear time was running out fast to limit the worst impacts of climate change.
*********************************************
The Cult of Climate Change Convenes Church in Dubai
Until December 12, leftists worldwide will meet in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, for COP28, the 28th annual meeting of the “Conference of Parties” of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Initially, the conference attracted only 5,000 attendees; however, 70,000 will attend this event. Ironically, many attendees will be flying into Dubai on their private jets. According to the Institute for Policy Studies, private jets emit ten times “more pollutants than commercial planes per passenger.”
One presenter who could not attend in person was Pope Francis due to “inflammation of the lungs.” His speech was given by his representative, Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin. Once again, the Pope lamented the evils of nationalism and capitalism and stressed that the road forward needed to be one of “multilateralism.” He declared that he could hear “the cry of the earth” for a “decisive acceleration of ecological transition” and “the elimination of fossil fuels.”
With all the problems in the Catholic Church, it is sad that the Pope is such a leftwing ideologue, focused on a political agenda of open borders, socialism, and climate change. Instead, the Pope should be focused on saving the souls of the faithful, growing Church attendance and donations for worldwide missions, dealing with the damaging pedophilia scandal, and recruiting devout people to join the clergy and laity to ensure the future survival of the Catholic Church.
Another famous leftist who presented in Dubai was the king of climate alarmism, King Charles III. He arrived at “Green Davos” in a private jet. The King preached about “transformational action” and “warned…we’re seeing alarming tipping points being reached.” The King claimed that “the Earth does not belong to us; we belong to the Earth.”
It is disgusting to hear such demands from the wealthy and privileged King, who enjoys a huge staff of sycophants, a massive fleet of cars and aircraft and a personal train at his disposal. Most workers around the world are struggling during these tough economic times. To reach the King’s unrealistic “net zero” goal, which is the complete negation of greenhouse gases produced by human beings, the additional costs placed on average citizens worldwide will be significant.
The dream for King Charles and his fellow “climate change” fanatics is for meat to be removed from our diets, nitrogen fertilizer to be drastically reduced, and methane emissions from cows to be significantly curtailed. Such changes to our agriculture and diet will lead to “worldwide famine,” but the “climate change” zealots believe it is necessary to combat the dangers of taking no action.
One of the theoretical pieces of evidence of “climate change” is the increase of extreme “weather emergencies.” However, a study by four Italian scientists shows that the number of cyclones and hurricanes occurring worldwide has not increased in the last fifty years.
The “climate change” devotees also claim that wildfires are occurring in greater numbers due to this supposed crisis. Yet, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported that wildfires mostly occur due to human activities such as arson and improper land management. In addition, science researcher Roger Pielke, Jr. discovered that global wildfires have decreased in the last twenty years.
The “doom and gloom” reports from “climate change” alarmists are not sufficient to support the change in lifestyles that they want to enforce on humanity. Not only will economic activity be curtailed, but trillions of dollars in wealth will be transferred from the middle class to the elitists.
No wonder there is no mass popular movement for these changes. In the last annual Gallup survey of Americans, “climate change” did not list the top 14 problems facing Americans. Instead of worrying about something that may or may not be man-made or impact them in the decades to come, the poll indicates Americans are more concerned about the problems we face today: dissatisfaction with government, high inflation, the poor economy, and the massive increase in illegal immigration.
Regardless of Americans' true concerns, the Biden administration is investing heavily in the “green agenda.” The U.S. Special Envoy for Climate, John Kerry, promised that the United States will “stop building new unabated coal power plants.” President Joe Biden has already committed to replacing all coal plants in the country with “wind and solar.” A study by the Institute for Energy Economics and Finance Analysis estimated that 173 coal plants would close by 2030.
While the United States moves away from coal toward more expensive energy sources, China is massively increasing its “coal power capacity,” permitting 106 gigawatts in 2022, a 400% increase from the previous year. Instead of attempting to rein in China, delegates at the Dubai conference were circulating a petition demanding the United States and other Western nations end the construction of new natural gas infrastructure projects. Those who signed the anti-natural gas petition must have overlooked that natural gas is very efficient, producing only 117 pounds of “heat-trapping carbon dioxide per million BTUs of energy produced,” much less than gasoline or coal.
For the “climate change” radicals, the facts do not matter; they are obsessed with eliminating fossil fuels. Not surprisingly, the Biden administration is fully supportive of this effort. At COP28, Vice President Kamala Harris announced that the United States will contribute $3 billion to the U.N.’s Green Climate Fund, supporting poor countries' transition from fossil fuels.
Fortunately, not all world leaders subscribe to this radical agenda. Former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott blasted the “green cult” and said these climate goals are “ahistorical and utterly implausible.” Abbott noted, “10,000 years ago, we had an Ice Age, that was rather dramatic climate change, but presumably that had nothing to do with mankind’s carbon dioxide emissions.” Well said, Prime Minister.
**********************************************
Fury as COP28 head and UAE energy tsar Sultan Al Jaber says there is 'no science' to suggest phasing out fossil fuels will limit global warming to 1.5C - and doing so would 'take us back to caves'
There is 'no science' behind phasing out fossil fuels and the policy will take the world 'back to caves', according to the head of COP28.
The president of the Dubai climate change summit, Sultan al Jaber, made the comments during an online question and answer session at a She Changes Climate event.
As well as running Cop28, Al Jaber is also the chief executive of the United Arab Emirates' state oil company, Adnoc.
His appointment as head of the Cop28 was branded 'completely ridiculous' by eco-warrior Greta Thunberg.
In the recently emerged video, obtained by The Guardian, the sultan was responding to questions from Mary Robinson, the chair of the Elders group and a former UN special envoy for climate change.
Ms Robinson said: 'We're in an absolute crisis that is hurting women and children more than anyone... and it's because we have not yet committed to phasing out fossil fuel.
'That is the one decision that Cop28 can take and in many ways, because you're head of Adnoc, you could actually take it with more credibility.'
Al Jaber replied: 'I accepted to come to this meeting to have a sober and mature conversation.
'I'm not in any way signing up to any discussion that is alarmist.
'There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what's going to achieve 1.5C.'
He added: 'Please help me, show me the roadmap for a phase-out of fossil fuel that will allow for sustainable socioeconomic development, unless you want to take the world back into caves.'
Video of the question and answer session took place on November 21 but it only emerged on Sunday.
More than 100 countries already support a phase-out of fossil fuels.
It is believed that cutting out fossil fossils will stop the world's temperatures rising by 1.5C.
The video emerged days after UN secretary-general Antonio Guterres called on the world to cut emissions to 'save' the planet.
Mr Guterres told the conference: 'The science is clear: The 1.5C limit is only possible if we ultimately stop burning all fossil fuels.
'Not reduce, not abate. Phase out, with a clear timeframe.'
Climate leaders have since reacted with fury over the sultan's controversial remarks.
Chief executive of Climate Analytics Bill Hare said the comments were 'verging on climate denial'.
Meanwhile, Mohamed Adow director of Power Shift Africa said: 'The recent comments from the COP28 president show how entrenched he is in fossil fuel fantasy and is clearly determined that this COP doesn't do anything to harm the interests of the oil and gas industry.'
When the United Arab Emirates announced in January that Sultan Al Jaber would lead this year's COP28 climate talks, the news was met with high praise and harsh criticism in equal measure.
For some, Al Jaber - who earned his PhD in business and economics from Coventry University - was a fantastic choice.
In 2006, he was put in charge of Masdar, the UAE's renewable energy vehicle, and set off on a global fact-finding mission to assess obstacles and opportunities.
The UAE has since invested heavily in its nuclear and solar sector, building a massive state-of-the-art nuclear power plant, and Masdar has made shrewd investments in technologies in over 40 countries - moves which have earned Jaber a reputation for getting results.
But for others, there's one incontrovertible problem.
Because for all his work on renewable energy, 'Dr Sultan' also happens to be the CEO of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company - a giant producer of fossil fuels which plans to up its output to 5 million barrels of oil per day by 2027.
And Amnesty International has accused him of being responsible for instituting a stringent media censorship programme when he served as chairman of the National Media Council (NMC).
The backlash following the announcement earlier this year was significant, with some campaigners comparing the decision to 'appointing the CEO of a cigarette company to oversee a conference on cancer cures'.
Teresa Anderson, the global lead on climate justice at ActionAid, made a similar comparison, likening the appointment to 'putting the fox in charge of the henhouse'.
There have also been accusations that he plans to hash out new oil and gas deals on the sidelines of Cop28.
They are the latest claims to cast doubt on whether the talks will boost efforts to cut emissions of planet-heating gases, or are more akin to a public relations exercise for the Gulf petro-monarchy.
The Cop28 is the United Nations Climate Change Conference or Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC.
This is the 28th conference and it is being held from November 30 until December 12 at Epo City, Dubai.
Cop28 is to serve as a formal meeting to negotiate and agree on action about how to tackle climate change.
The event has attracted such big names as King Charles III and Pope Francis. US President Joe Biden is however skipping the talks.
More than 70,000 officials, campaigners, and experts are expected to attend COP28 in Dubai.
**************************************************
Green Groups Are No Longer Promoting a Cleaner Environment
The late, great humorist P.J. O'Rourke used to quip that everyone wants to save the world, but no one wants to wash the dishes.
Well, now that can be said for traditional environmental groups that seem to have lost their way.
Green groups are supposed to be about keeping our rivers, lakes and streams clean. They are supposed to be about fighting litter and keeping toxic chemicals out of the air. Their job is to maintain the beauty of our national parks and save elephants and tigers.
Not anymore. The New York Times recently reported in a disturbing headline: "Environmental Groups Cut Programs as Funding Shifts to Climate Change."
In other words, the Left's climate change hysteria and its campaign to end fossil fuels is interfering with a commonsense green agenda. Worse than that, the climate agenda is in some ways making the condition of the environment worse.
According to the Times story: "A significant shift in donor contributions to nonprofits fighting climate change in recent years has left some of the nation's biggest environmental organizations facing critical shortfalls in programs on toxic chemicals, radioactive contamination and wildlife protection."
The Natural Resources Defense Council, "the Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife and the Environmental Working Group, which have been at the forefront of efforts to clean up waste water, regulate pesticides and adopt tougher standards for atomic power plants, are facing similar financial problems," said Times reporter Ralph Vartabedian.
This is all being driven by a mad pursuit of billions of green dollars for stopping global warming. That is, they are chasing and spending money on a cause -- changing the planet's temperature -- that they can have almost no impact on.
How much money are we talking about? In 2022, environment groups spent and raised $8 billion on climate change activities. That doesn't fully include the tens of billions of dollars that central governments are spending on climate issues. All of this money has funded scores of ritzy climate change conferences around the globe, as well as virtue-signaling protests, propaganda campaigns in schools, and a war against oil, gas and coal, cars, stoves and air conditioners. And now eating meat is verboten.
Yet, the climate agenda is often pushing policies that destroy the planet rather than save it. In poor countries, the war against fossil fuels has meant that villages are burning wood, or even feces. Instead of spending money on ensuring the world's poor have safe drinking water, we are spending billions of dollars pushing windmills and solar power.
These "green energies" use 10 times more land than a coal or gas plant. The landscape of America is being paved over and industrialized by our pursuit of zero-carbon policies. How is that a pro-environment policy?
Moreover, raising the cost of energy makes people poorer, which is counterproductive if we want to keep the planet clean. The richer a country, the more money they spend to clean the air, the water and to preserve wildlife.
The bigger question environmentalists should be asking is: What has the half-trillion dollars that have been spent on climate change bought? No measurable results.
Fossil fuel use reached an all-time high in 2022 and 2023, and carbon emissions have been climbing rather than receding. The more governments spend, the more money the United Nations insists we need to spend. The U.N.'s latest report says more than $4 trillion needs to be spent each year until 2030 to stop global warming.
With that much money, we can end global hunger and illiteracy.
Instead, the fanatics in the Biden administration and the billionaire donor class demand that we save the planet from carbon emissions at any cost, and if that means diminishing funds for fighting real pollution that kills people, so be it.
***************************************
My other blogs. Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM )
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Jim Hansen and his twin
No comments:
Post a Comment