“… has the entire ‘Climate Change’ and Net Zero agendas now moved far away from true environmentalism? And has it forgotten the true sustainability principles of ‘People, Planet and Profit’ to become primarily focussed on one ‘P’ (profit)?” ( – Adrian Hayes, below)
The transparent failure last month of COP30 has been acknowledged by the realists and downplayed by the hangers-on and funding-needy NGOs. Despite the futile, wasteful cause, plans for COP31 have begun.
But realism has become mainstream. And hard questions are being asked. Consider this from Adrian Hayes:
Trigger warning! I’ve spoken at a COP conference two years ago (COP28) and know there’s a lot of good stuff, and developing technology, that takes place on the fringes. But as COP30 finished last week in Brazil, it yet again caused an accusation of hypocrisy.
Over 50,000 delegates travelled to a conference facility built by flattening an area of Amazon rain forest, destroying many farmers’ livelihoods in the process, to hear speakers preach about ‘saving the planet’. Over 400 flew there by private jet – some journalists comparing it to a Cannes Film Festival. And indigenous Amazon tribes even stormed the conference on 11 Nov to protest against exploitation of the rain forests!
The critical thinking questions are: has the entire ‘Climate Change’ and Net Zero agendas now moved far away from true environmentalism? And has it forgotten the true sustainability principles of ‘People, Planet and Profit’ to become primarily focussed on one ‘P’ (profit)?
The stark realities are that ‘climate change’ didn’t cause 99% of the environmental issues we face today. And true environmentalism means reducing the deteriorating pollution in our air – not for ‘climate change’ reasons, but to limit the harms it is causing per se today. It means reducing pollution and waste in our oceans, seas, lakes, rivers and other waters, and protecting our marine life. It means eliminating micro-plastics that are now embedded in our food chain. Reducing pollution and waste on our land. Limiting resource depletion. Protecting all natural habitats, including rain forests, protecting bio-diversity and farmland – not covering it over with resource intensive solar panels. And a lot more.
The COP conferences do address some of these. But much is largely ignored on the altar–-and billions of dollars of subsidies–of ‘Net Zero’ alone…
About the most optimistic statement came from a week-one participant: “Made a few good moves [what?] but we’re yet to tackle the elephant in all the rooms. Fossil fuel phase out.”
Other observations went down from there.
JC Scott (eco designer) pushed back to the rosy view of Kara Hurst, chief sustainability officer at Amazon:
Hurst: Energized. Determined. Hopeful. That’s how I feel leaving COP30 in Belém. Why? Because being in that large gathering of other business leaders, policy makers and advocates made it clear: the climate commitments we’ve made are now translating into action, all around the world.
Scott: People spending well intentioned donations on jet travel producing platitudes that simply proliferate the fossil fuels hegemoney over world governance? I’m glad for you that you feel good but as an environmentalist since 1970, I see COP as an antidote to meaningful change.
Sam Jackson, Director, Climate Science & Impact at Ecologi, wrote:
I saw a disorganised and chaotic conference, with heavy-handed, militarised security. There was broken AC in 34ºC heat, and flooded pavilions when the downpours came. The failure of climate leadership from the US federal government was an elephant in every single room. The COP Presidency calls this the COP of truth, the COP of forests, the cradle of the Global Mutirão – and yet the SBSTA failed to endorse IPCC science, Indigenous forest guardians are violently excluded, and 1 in every 25 delegates is a fossil fuel lobbyist.
On Sunday the Blue Zone entrance courtyard (where we recorded this video) was lively – full of delegates, selfie-takers and journalists. By Friday the same space had totally changed. It was now tense: full of military police, riot shields and army trucks. And swelteringly hot, with no shade whatsoever.
Amy Westervelt (Drilled) opined:
I’m just back from COP30 in Belém and it is making me feel crazy to watch so many climate advocates and reporters declare the final text coming out of it a victory…. And yet, the text is being declared a win because it reaffirmed commitments to the Paris Agreement, created the Just Transition Mechanism (without operationalizing it), and mentioned financing adaptation…while failing to outline how that will work and leaving out finance for loss and damage altogether.
A Guardian headline declared that the COP30 deal “inches closer” to the end of the fossil era, and I saw post after post from climate advocates in my feed celebrating either the inclusion of information integrity or just transition or both.
Nowhere was there mention of the grotesque displays of racism and homophobia in the closing plenary from the Russia-Saudi-India bloc that succeeded in stripping fossil fuel phaseout from the text and attempted to shame the negotiators from Colombia and Panama for objecting to it. Perhaps more to the point, nowhere was there mention that inching forward at a time when great leaps are needed is not a win.
Which left me wondering: what is the point of activism that celebrates hypocrisy? Or of journalism that doesn’t tell the whole truth
Westervelt ended:
The mess of COP highlights once again the importance of both climate litigation and civil disobedience in this moment. If governments are going to continue to dither as the climate crisis worsens and to let fossil fuel executives poison our air, water, and atmosphere with impunity, the only recourse citizens have left is the courts, which are overwhelmingly siding with humanity’s right to live over industry’s right to profit, and the streets. Speaking of which, this week we’ll be bringing you the last two episodes of season 14 on exactly those two topics, with experts who will share what’s working. Keep demanding the actual truth, people!
Climate litigation? That’s losing where it matters most: in the producing countries, leaving the politicized countries with energy poverty for the masses. Civil disobedience? Good luck with that–the hammer has already been thrown down on that one.
Here’s a concise, fictional description of why COP30 is a failure:
1. Major emitters refused to increase their 2030 targets, leaving global ambitions unchanged.
2. Negotiators failed to agree on a binding fossil-fuel phase-out timeline.
3. Climate finance commitments fell far short of developing countries’ expectations.
4. The Loss and Damage fund remained underfunded and stalled by procedural disputes.
5. Adaptation targets were watered down after intense lobbying.
6. Civil society groups were sidelined, raising concerns about transparency.
7. Forest-related pledges were vague and lacked enforcement mechanisms.
8. The final declaration was perceived as symbolic rather than transformative.
Readers get the point. Failure after failure with climate alarmism in retreat intellectually and politically. When will the climate parishioners question the hand that feeds them? The Climate Industrial Complex … the cronies of political capitalism and the central planners (China).
It’s all music to my ears (and the ears of every educated, rational, sentient person). Unfortunately, it took twenty-five years of fraud, scientific misconduct, misallocated time and resources to get to this point.