“The US withdrawal from UN climate programs may signal a worldwide retreat from Climatism and the push for net zero energy policies. Leading political groups in Australia, Germany, and the United Kingdom appear to be joining the US to move back to sensible energy policy and away from efforts to cut carbon dioxide emissions.”
The Trump administration has issued an executive order that withdraws the United States from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and other international bodies. The order pulls the US back from organizations pursuing climate policies and other efforts that the administration does not consider to be in the national interest. The US abandonment of world climate groups may accelerate a pushback against climate and net zero energy policies.
The Trump memorandum issued on January 6 was titled, “Withdrawing the United States from International Organizations, Conventions, and Treaties that Are Contrary to the Interests of the United States.”…
Continue Reading“… one of the less well understood aspects of the damage Trump is doing is how long it will take to repair it after he’s gone, assuming that he is not succeeded by an equally anti-fact president. You can’t entirely recover from it.” (- John Holdren, below)
The bad news was really good in the New York Times stocktaking, “How Trump’s First Year Reshaped U.S. Energy and Climate Policy,” subtitled “The sweeping changes have affected everything from coal plant retirements to international diplomacy over shipping emissions.” Four Times reporters—Brad Plumer, Lisa Friedman, Maxine Joselow, and Scott Dance—summarized the Trump Administration’s ethics-driven course change. [1] Quotations follow:
… Continue Reading[Trump’s] changes have reverberated far beyond the United States, as the administration has pressured other countries to abandon their own efforts to tackle global warming.
“IREF concludes that the EU’s net-zero plan is effectively dead on arrival. Its internal coherence is unachievable at this scale, across member states moving at different speeds. Persisting regardless will damage prosperity and liberties, repeating the classic failure of grand central plans—what the Austrian economist Friedrich von Hayek once described as ‘fatal conceit’.” (Clintel, below)
“The irony is that the climatic impact [of EU Net Zero] would be negligible. Based on IPCC formulas, IREF deduces that for Europe, reaching net zero in 2100 rather than 2050 would alter global temperatures by only 0.02 to 0.06°C—below any meaningful measurement threshold.”
A recent report by the French think tank, Institut de Recherches Économiques et Fiscales (IREF), “Against All Rationality, the EU Persists in its Net-Zero Delusion,” challenges the false assumptions and erroneous conclusion of “Europe’s 2040 climate target and path to climate neutrality by 2050 building a sustainable, just and prosperous society.”…
Continue Reading