“I believe that we are at risk of not having a success in COP26. There is still a level of mistrust, between north and south, developed and developing countries, that needs to be overcome.”
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, September 16, 2021.
It’s an open secret. COP26 is on its way to a failure, a historic one. The reason can be summarized in two words: energy density or consumer preference.
James Hansen, the father of climate alarmism, and who now needs to dial back the alarm, has stated in regard to the Paris climate accord in 2015 and renewable energies.
“The bad news: we approach the gas bag season – the next Conference of the Parties (COP26) is scheduled for November 1-12. Gas bag politicians … may have been honestly duped about the science and engineering, but many must be blatant hypocrites.” James Hansen, September 1, 2021.
“It’s a fraud really, a fake. It’s just bullshit for them to say: ‘We’ll have a 2C warming target and then try to do a little better every five years.’ It’s just worthless words. There is no action, just promises. As long as fossil fuels appear to be the cheapest fuels out there, they will be continued to be burned.” James Hansen, “James Hansen, father of climate change awareness, calls Paris talks ‘a fraud‘” The Guardian, December 12, 2015.
“But, in any case, as long as fossil fuels are allowed to be the cheapest energy, then all of these meetings do very little good. Until the countries, the United Nations and the big economic powers stand up and face the truth, we can’t solve the problem. In the United States or the European Union or China, someone needs to say: ‘Yes, we are going to have a rising carbon fee.’ And the most likely possibility seems to be China. Because the European Union is still tricking itself to say this emission trading scheme can be fixed. Well, even if they fix it, what good does that do? It’s the global emissions that counts not just the European emissions. And how then, are you going to persuade everyone to have a European emission trading scheme? It’s a very ineffectual way to reduce emissions.”
“The Paris Agreement per se is useful but only if the countries recognise that this doesn’t really do anything, it doesn’t actually reduce emissions. But it is useful for all the country to say “yeah, we agree, there is a problem, we need to do something”. So that is useful. But it’s not the actions that are needed.” James Hansen. Quoted in James Hansen views on climate (in)actions and the Paris Agreement July 31, 2018.
“The fraudulence of the Copenhagen [Summit] approach – ‘goals’ for emission reductions, ‘offsets’ that render even iron-clad goals almost meaningless, an ineffectual ‘cap-and-trade’ mechanism – must be exposed. We must rebel against such politics-as-usual.” James Hansen, “Never-Give-Up Fighting Spirit,” November 30, 2009