The Green Paradox: Why unilateral emissions restrictions may actually increase fossil fuel production and will always fail to do anything about atmospheric CO2 levels
The Green Paradox: Why unilateral emissions restrictions may actually increase fossil fuel production and will always fail to do anything about atmospheric CO2 levels
Periodically, journalists realise that our climate policies are doing absolutely nothing to reduce CO2 emissions. The latest entry in this amusing genre of reporting comes from N-tv and the Deutsche-Presse Agentur: The planned global production of coal, oil and gas continue to significantly exceed levels required to mitigate climate change. According to a report by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and leading research institutes, the production planned by countries for 2030 is more than double (110 per cent more) what would be compatible with the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius as agreed in the Paris Climate Accords.
The Green Paradox: Why unilateral emissions restrictions may actually increase fossil fuel production and will always fail to do anything about atmospheric CO2 levels
How about the whole thing is based on one damned great lie? There is no climate crisis, CO2 levels do not control the temperature of the atmosphere. CO2 is a trace gas which is highly beneficial to life. No CO2, no life; less CO2 means less life.
Climate changes, it always has and always will and it is entirely natural. Mankind can do nothing about it except adapt if necessary. There are a host of scientists who broadly agree but their opinions are suppressed.
Therefore why argue about policy details when the whole damned political project needs to be brought down.
My theory is a combination of your 5 great points. A sociopathic, greedy, power-hungry elite is weaponizing fear to convince useful idiots to support policies that enrich them but impoverish all of us.
The 1.5 deg warming target is reminiscent in obvious ways of the 6 foot social distancing mandate. No connection whatsoever with empirical reality, but a nice easily remembered metric around which the bureaucracy can organize as it pretends to be doing something.
I think a lot of this comes down to European political leaders assuming that they have some sort of globally recognized moral leadership. Sure, destroying their economies won't do anything to stop climate change on its own ... but the whole world is watching! Europe's self-immolation will inspire China and India to follow along! Conversations with Swedes when I was living there suggest that the Swedes, at least, have a powerfully warped sense of their own moral importance on the world stage. The sad reality is that most of the human population is only vaguely aware that Sweden exists. Likewise, Europe's suicide is of no interest to the teeming masses of the global south, save insofar as it offers an opportunity to them.
All paradoxes are resolved on the understanding that we are merely dealing with a grift the scale of which has never been seen before in all human history. Nations which have no intention of complying (whether speaking of their populaces or their ruling classes), such as India and China, happily go along with all the BS because it (a) reduces competition for fossil fuels and the relative price they pay for energy; (b) in the case of China, weakens the ability of states they view as enemies, such as the US, to wage war; (c) they benefit from "developed world" deindustrialization because much of that production may relocate inside their borders (d) in the case of China, they control most of the current production/logistics in respect of minerals and other inputs required for "green" solutions (other than nuclear); and (e) in the case of China, creates new opportunities for alliances whilst simultaneously weakening American/NATO alliances which were a threat to China's ambitions.
Basic economics is not necessarily accepted, even by today's economists. That is not because they are unable to grasp the concept, but because they are caught in a narrative.
Even in my own field of economics, I was shocked when, in April 2020, cascades of high-ranking economists all threw their unmitigated support behind lockdowns. Virtually none argued for a careful balancing of benefits and risks. They simply panicked - or else were too morally cowardly to stand in the way of the panicked masses rushing for their tripled masked confinement. The narrative was stronger than the analytical skills of even the best experts.
It's the same for climate gobbledygook. When I sit down with friends of mine who espouse the alarmist agenda and go through it point by point, they invariably agree that none of this stuff makes much sense. But the next day, they will sit in a meeting or in a group of their peers and praise the High Gods of Climate like the Pharisees of old.
And actually, if you work with, and socialise with, and depend for your network on, Alarmists, then that strategy is the rational one to employ.
Climate policies are not being put in place to solve any "problem". They are being put in place to divert money from the working masses to rich political cronies to make them richer. That is all this is about. And of course the politicians are "repaid" after they leave office. That is how the system works these days. Nobody in their right minds can think that cutting down millions trees and putting up solar fields and windmill fields in their place can be good for the environment. These guys aren't stupid, but they are evil and greedy. Very greedy.
I have spent a considerable amount of time pondering this over the last years, and only a few months ago I 'snapped' at the ridiculousness of the discourse and the contorted attempts to defend the 'CO2 creates global boiling' nonsense. There followed several articles on the matter:
The whole grift is based around a single - flawed - assumption (namely that 'excessive' CO2 released by man is somehow causing 'global warming', no, climate change, no, global boiling!) and this assumption has been taken on blind faith. to the faithful, this assumption is akin to a sacrament of a cult. "Precisely how climate alarmists have managed to get away with the canonisation of their beliefs – such that they were excused from scientific cross-examination and are now consensus – is a debate for another day. One thing is for sure, the planet’s future shouldn’t be left to the catastrophist prophets of doom".
To which one just needs to be reminded that "By their fruits you shall know them".
So in answer to your question as to why this is happening, a sickly Occident has been tricked by an unholy alliance of grifters & vested interests who are selfishly working - possibly unwittingly - in cahoots with nefarious factions (not Blofeld masterminds, just standard espionage / dirty tricks campaigns) from non-Western nations. See also: woke idealogy, trans agenda, the Zero Covid crowd.
fanatical magic cures for the never-ending challenges of life are a basic byproduct of the slightly-too-smart to be useful type.
i lived for 18 months two decades ago in the dreadful house without fireplaces my idiot then-father-in-law built in a place that saw hours of power outages, summer and winter. we had propane canisters for cooking but for the rest everything was electric.
sometimes, in winter, when i couldn't stand freezing any longer, i'd walk down the street to the home of a relative by marriage and enjoy the heat from a bucket of coal sitting on her bedroom hearth.
fyi my then-father-in-law was a very highly educated university professor and civil servant but may best be described as a wretched idiot in all things.
Look what awaits Blighty-pylon pollution- assuming ,of course, that Blighty will still be in a viable condition after tomorrow's events, when the fourth ptotest march will coincide with Remembrance Day.
Public anger is growing, as we face resurgent Islamism, plus its noisy army of Useful Idiots, while the lords and masters at the National Grid are all set to spend 19 billion and more on Meeting Net Zero targets.
By then, we'll be confined in an overcrowded impoverished caliphate, if present trends continue.
The 1.5 degree number is pulled out of thin air just like the covid “mitigation” decree of standing 6 feet apart. Who came up with that? And why wasn’t it 5, 10 or 15 feet? These control freaks simply pull numbers out of their asses while telling us all to “trust the science”. No thanks…
What I really like about this CO2 paranoia-hysteria, is that China has dropped out of the infamous 2017 Paris Climate agreement. In so many words the CCP said, "We will provide electricity and energy for our population, as we see fit" "We will no longer be bound by Paris" __________ (Same as C19 paranoia-hysteria) (Both WEF endorsed)
China Abandons Paris Agreement, Making U.S. Efforts Painful and pointless
WebJul 25, 2023 · This contradicts Xi’s 2015 Paris Agreement pledges to reduce its carbon emissions at the latest after 2030. Xi’s remarks came while climate envoy and former …
We continue in the west to shoot ourselves in both feet while the East (especially China, India and Indonesia) sprint ahead because they have common sense.
The Green Paradox: Why unilateral emissions restrictions may actually increase fossil fuel production and will always fail to do anything about atmospheric CO2 levels
How about the whole thing is based on one damned great lie? There is no climate crisis, CO2 levels do not control the temperature of the atmosphere. CO2 is a trace gas which is highly beneficial to life. No CO2, no life; less CO2 means less life.
Climate changes, it always has and always will and it is entirely natural. Mankind can do nothing about it except adapt if necessary. There are a host of scientists who broadly agree but their opinions are suppressed.
Therefore why argue about policy details when the whole damned political project needs to be brought down.
My theory is a combination of your 5 great points. A sociopathic, greedy, power-hungry elite is weaponizing fear to convince useful idiots to support policies that enrich them but impoverish all of us.
ESG is antithetical to democracy and capitalism. It must be stopped: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/how-to-raise-your-esg-score
The 1.5 deg warming target is reminiscent in obvious ways of the 6 foot social distancing mandate. No connection whatsoever with empirical reality, but a nice easily remembered metric around which the bureaucracy can organize as it pretends to be doing something.
I think a lot of this comes down to European political leaders assuming that they have some sort of globally recognized moral leadership. Sure, destroying their economies won't do anything to stop climate change on its own ... but the whole world is watching! Europe's self-immolation will inspire China and India to follow along! Conversations with Swedes when I was living there suggest that the Swedes, at least, have a powerfully warped sense of their own moral importance on the world stage. The sad reality is that most of the human population is only vaguely aware that Sweden exists. Likewise, Europe's suicide is of no interest to the teeming masses of the global south, save insofar as it offers an opportunity to them.
All paradoxes are resolved on the understanding that we are merely dealing with a grift the scale of which has never been seen before in all human history. Nations which have no intention of complying (whether speaking of their populaces or their ruling classes), such as India and China, happily go along with all the BS because it (a) reduces competition for fossil fuels and the relative price they pay for energy; (b) in the case of China, weakens the ability of states they view as enemies, such as the US, to wage war; (c) they benefit from "developed world" deindustrialization because much of that production may relocate inside their borders (d) in the case of China, they control most of the current production/logistics in respect of minerals and other inputs required for "green" solutions (other than nuclear); and (e) in the case of China, creates new opportunities for alliances whilst simultaneously weakening American/NATO alliances which were a threat to China's ambitions.
Basic economics is not necessarily accepted, even by today's economists. That is not because they are unable to grasp the concept, but because they are caught in a narrative.
Even in my own field of economics, I was shocked when, in April 2020, cascades of high-ranking economists all threw their unmitigated support behind lockdowns. Virtually none argued for a careful balancing of benefits and risks. They simply panicked - or else were too morally cowardly to stand in the way of the panicked masses rushing for their tripled masked confinement. The narrative was stronger than the analytical skills of even the best experts.
It's the same for climate gobbledygook. When I sit down with friends of mine who espouse the alarmist agenda and go through it point by point, they invariably agree that none of this stuff makes much sense. But the next day, they will sit in a meeting or in a group of their peers and praise the High Gods of Climate like the Pharisees of old.
And actually, if you work with, and socialise with, and depend for your network on, Alarmists, then that strategy is the rational one to employ.
Climate policies are not being put in place to solve any "problem". They are being put in place to divert money from the working masses to rich political cronies to make them richer. That is all this is about. And of course the politicians are "repaid" after they leave office. That is how the system works these days. Nobody in their right minds can think that cutting down millions trees and putting up solar fields and windmill fields in their place can be good for the environment. These guys aren't stupid, but they are evil and greedy. Very greedy.
Dear Eugyppius,
I have spent a considerable amount of time pondering this over the last years, and only a few months ago I 'snapped' at the ridiculousness of the discourse and the contorted attempts to defend the 'CO2 creates global boiling' nonsense. There followed several articles on the matter:
https://reaction.life/author/alex-starling/
The whole grift is based around a single - flawed - assumption (namely that 'excessive' CO2 released by man is somehow causing 'global warming', no, climate change, no, global boiling!) and this assumption has been taken on blind faith. to the faithful, this assumption is akin to a sacrament of a cult. "Precisely how climate alarmists have managed to get away with the canonisation of their beliefs – such that they were excused from scientific cross-examination and are now consensus – is a debate for another day. One thing is for sure, the planet’s future shouldn’t be left to the catastrophist prophets of doom".
But associating CO2 reduction to cool the planet is a McNamaran fallacy of the highest order. It creates the most ridiculous contradictions, such as environmentalists promoting the clubbing of koalas (https://x.com/ElanderNews/status/1722714137782788354) and the extermination of whales (https://twitter.com/AlexStarling77/status/1693670005349437574).
To which one just needs to be reminded that "By their fruits you shall know them".
So in answer to your question as to why this is happening, a sickly Occident has been tricked by an unholy alliance of grifters & vested interests who are selfishly working - possibly unwittingly - in cahoots with nefarious factions (not Blofeld masterminds, just standard espionage / dirty tricks campaigns) from non-Western nations. See also: woke idealogy, trans agenda, the Zero Covid crowd.
The narrative of man-made climate change simply is a trojan horse for socialism. It really is as simple as that.
Excellent essay!
This has nothing to do with GCC.
It is for the elites to control all of the world's energy, thereby giving them the power to dictate whether you can bring life into this world.
Seems straightforward and...potentially EVIL.
The zealots are just stooges
fanatical magic cures for the never-ending challenges of life are a basic byproduct of the slightly-too-smart to be useful type.
i lived for 18 months two decades ago in the dreadful house without fireplaces my idiot then-father-in-law built in a place that saw hours of power outages, summer and winter. we had propane canisters for cooking but for the rest everything was electric.
sometimes, in winter, when i couldn't stand freezing any longer, i'd walk down the street to the home of a relative by marriage and enjoy the heat from a bucket of coal sitting on her bedroom hearth.
fyi my then-father-in-law was a very highly educated university professor and civil servant but may best be described as a wretched idiot in all things.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/11/09/national-grid-spend-up-19bn-rewire-britain-net-zero-era/
Look what awaits Blighty-pylon pollution- assuming ,of course, that Blighty will still be in a viable condition after tomorrow's events, when the fourth ptotest march will coincide with Remembrance Day.
Public anger is growing, as we face resurgent Islamism, plus its noisy army of Useful Idiots, while the lords and masters at the National Grid are all set to spend 19 billion and more on Meeting Net Zero targets.
By then, we'll be confined in an overcrowded impoverished caliphate, if present trends continue.
The 1.5 degree number is pulled out of thin air just like the covid “mitigation” decree of standing 6 feet apart. Who came up with that? And why wasn’t it 5, 10 or 15 feet? These control freaks simply pull numbers out of their asses while telling us all to “trust the science”. No thanks…
What I really like about this CO2 paranoia-hysteria, is that China has dropped out of the infamous 2017 Paris Climate agreement. In so many words the CCP said, "We will provide electricity and energy for our population, as we see fit" "We will no longer be bound by Paris" __________ (Same as C19 paranoia-hysteria) (Both WEF endorsed)
_____________
https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/07/china-abandons-paris-agreement-making-u-s-efforts-painful-and-pointless/
China Abandons Paris Agreement, Making U.S. Efforts Painful and pointless
WebJul 25, 2023 · This contradicts Xi’s 2015 Paris Agreement pledges to reduce its carbon emissions at the latest after 2030. Xi’s remarks came while climate envoy and former …
When will we ever educate ourselves about CO2.
It’s not cause and it’s not the enemy.
We continue in the west to shoot ourselves in both feet while the East (especially China, India and Indonesia) sprint ahead because they have common sense.
In short, we destroy our economies so the Chinese can burn more fossil fuels. Brilliant.
> While the climateers persist in their mad drive to restrict consumer behaviour, they address fossil fuel production not at all.
I don't know that's accurate. Certainly, Puddin' Joe has done what he can to screw US oil and gas production.