Plans for the government to donate (sic) hundreds of millions of pounds to a new Green Climate Fund could lead voters away from the Tories in an upcoming by-election. Senior Tories fear that the contribution has jeopardised the party’s chances of obtaining votes from potential UKIP supporters – skeptical of climate change claims and opposed to foreign aid. David Cameron has done little to address these fears, by refusing to disclose the precise amount that Britain plans to donate to the fund, although he stressed that the money would come from existing funds. --Nick Reilly, Metro News, 17 November 2014
Peter Hartcher, the Sydney Morning Herald political editor, is losing touch with reality.
Yesterday he claimed a former Fairfax colleague from Melbourne who’d vilified Australia in the Leftist Los Angeles Times was proof of a ”towering international indignation” over Tony Abbott.
...it’s not only possible for Abbott and Xi to put together a deal on climate change, it’s also desirable in the national interest and in the Abbott government’s political interest…
But didn’t China already announce its plan last week in Xi’s joint announcement with Barack Obama? Not at all. China merely said its emissions would peak by 2030, earlier if possible. Another way of saying it is this: We reserve the right to keep increasing emissions for another 15 years.
Between the recent “deal” with China, reports of Obama taking climate action via executive fiat, and the debate over keystone, global warming has been over the mainstream media recently. But instead of debating whether or not the global warming hypotheses is a valid threat to the Earth, the media starts with the premise that the theory is real and anybody who contests global warming is the equivalent of people who don’t believe the holocaust actually happened, they are called deniers.
The “LA Times” refuses to print letters that disagree with global warming, CNN openly mocks them on air, the NY Times ran a cartoon suggesting climate change skeptics should be stabbed to death, and MSNBC and CBS only interview climate change believers on their programs.
But their green smiles are quickly turning into frowns as more and more enviros recognize the same lower oil prices that hurt fracking are killing their most treasured darlings: Solar and wind power.
Today fracking -- pumping sand and water at high pressure to release copious quantities of oil and natural gas from hard to reach places -- is on the verge of turning the United States from an energy importer to energy exporter.
With 59 Senators publicly voicing support, the hunt was on for the 60th vote before a critical vote Tuesday to advance the measure. Maine independent Sen. Angus King left the possibility open, telling reporters he was a “probable no.”
All 45 Republicans support it, and 11 Democrats have signed onto the bill, along with three others who have publicly said they will vote “yes.”
With just two years left in power, President Barack Obama is elevating his efforts to combat global warming above almost all else as he seeks to leave an imprint on the world that will endure after he's gone. It's a strategy rooted not only in Obama's long-stated support for such efforts, but also in political reality.
Two weeks ago, Obama watched his prospects for realizing his goals on education, wages and immigration all but evaporate as voters handed his party a stinging rebuke in the midterms, putting Republicans in full control of Congress for the remainder of his presidency. But on a trip last week to Asia and Australia, Obama sought — and found — fruitful opportunities to make a lasting difference on global warming.
In China, traditionally a U.S. adversary on environmental issues, Obama set an ambitious new target for cutting future U.S. emissions as part of a landmark deal in which China will also rein in pollution. In Australia, he pledged $3 billion to help poorer nations address changing temperatures while prodding Australia's prime minister to stop questioning the science of climate change.
A bit more good news about polar bear populations, this time from an abundance study in the Southern Beaufort Sea. A paper released yesterday showed a 25-50% decline in population size took place between 2004 and 2006 (larger than previously calculated). However, by 2010 the population had rebounded substantially (although not to previous levels).
All the media headlines (e.g. The Guardian) have followed the press release lead and focused on the extent of the decline. However, it’s the recovery portion of the study that’s the real news, as it’s based on new data. Such a recovery is similar to one documented in the late 1970s after a significant decline occurred in 1974-1976 that was caused by thick spring ice conditions.
The German coalition government is planning to withdraw from its 2020 climate change goals. Notwithstanding public protest, Federal Economics Minister Sigmar Gabriel (SPD) has abandoned the requirement of cutting 40 percent of CO2 emissions compared to 1990 levels by 2020. “It’s clear that the [2020 CO2] target is no longer viable,” said the vice-chancellor according to information obtained by SPIEGEL, adding: “We cannot exit from coal power overnight.” --Der Spiegel, 16 November 2014
Germany’s Vice Chancellor, Sigmar Gabriel, has indicated that the country will abandon its commitment to reducing CO2 emissions by 40 percent by 2020, from a 1990 base level. In doing so he has won the ongoing clash with his own environmental minister Barbara Hendricks over energy policy, telling her that he will tolerate no further resistance to the change of direction, according to Der Spiegel. --Donna Rachel Edmunds, Breitbart, 17 November 2014
There is not a day passes that statesmen on the world stage don’t talk about emissions of Carbon Dioxide. David Cameron has been at it in Canberra alongside Tony Abbott, prior to the G8 meeting in Brisbane.
So let me ask you a question: What is wrong with emissions of Carbon Dioxide? Answer: Nothing at all. In fact we are impoverished for CO2. Great Nature – according to the IPCC - produces 97.1% of atmospheric Carbon Dioxide - for the great Carbon Cycle! Without the power of the Sun there would be no Photosynthesis, and without Carbon Dioxide green plants and phytoplankton would be lacking the material to synthesise into Oxygen.
Many people cite the latest National Climate Assessment report as an authority that proves human carbon dioxide emissions are the main cause of recent warming. But reading the report shows a different story.
The 2014 National Climate Assessment (NCA) claims on page 7: “Multiple lines of independent evidence confirm that human activities are the primary cause of the global warming of the past 50 years.”
What physical evidence does the NCA give as proof that human carbon dioxide emissions play a significant role in global temperature? In my opinion they present no unequivocal evidence.
NCA cites three main lines of “evidence” in the report (pages 23 & 24):
Looming Environmental Protection Agency ozone regulations personify the Obama administration’s secrecy, collusion, fraud, and disdain for concerns about the effects that its tsunami of regulations is having on the livelihoods, living standards, health and welfare of millions of American families.
Virtually every EPA announcement of new regulations asserts that they will improve human health. Draconian carbon dioxide standards, for example, won’t just prevent climate change, even if rapidly developing countries continue emitting vast volumes of this plant-fertilizing gas. The rules will somehow reduce the spread of ticks and Lyme disease, and protect “our most vulnerable citizens.” It’s hogwash.
Professor Henrik Svensmark is a physicist at the Danish National Space Institute and director of the Center for Sun-Climate Research at the Danish Space Research Institute.
Since the early 1990s there has been strong evidence that changes in the Earth's climate follow changes in the Sun's electromagnetic activity. In principle this correlation might explain much of the warming in the 20th Century, but no mechanism was known by which the Sun could affect terrestrial climate so much.