Tag Archives: Rajendra Pachauri

Research first?

Well, here’s an interesting item from down under. It strikes me as funny but you can read it and judge for yourself. From “The Australian” we get an item from Bjorn Lomborg,  director of the Copenhagen Consensus Centre and adjunct professor at Copenhagen Business School, titled “Research first, then make deep carbon cuts,” that claims “CLIMATE committees across the world are mistakenly putting the cart before the horse.”

Well, to that statement I’d have to say “duh?” but lets see what he has to say. My commentary is in red.

ADVOCATES of drastic cuts in carbon dioxide emissions now speak a lot less than they once did about climate change. (Really? This is a good thing!) Climate campaigners changed their approach after the collapse of the Copenhagen climate change summit last December, and the revelation of mistakes in the UN climate panel’s work, (AKA: Total screwup) as well as in response to growing public scepticism and declining interest. (Yes, the public tends to lose interest in total BS).

Although some activists still rely on scare tactics – witness the launch of an advertisement depicting the bombing of anybody who is hesitant to embrace carbon cuts – many activists now spend more time highlighting the “benefits” of their policy prescription. (What benefits? Emptying everyone’s wallets?) They no longer dwell on impending climate doom but on the economic windfall that will result from embracing the “green” economy. (Really? I’d like to know who’s going to get this economic windfall? It certainly won’t be your average Joe. Al Gore perhaps?)

Sounds to me like Bjorn realizes the warmers are having some sort of dissociation with reality, but let’s see what else he has to say before we decide if he’s figured the big global warming scam out or not.

You can find examples all over the world, (Really? Where?) but one of the best is in my home country, Denmark, where a government-appointed committee of academics recently presented their suggestions for how the country could go it alone and become “fossil fuel-free” in 40 years. The goal is breathtaking: (more like totally stupid and impossible) more than 80 per cent of Denmark’s energy supply comes from fossil fuels, which are dramatically cheaper and more reliable than any green energy source. (Well, you said a mouthfull there Bjorn, “dramatically cheaper and more reliable”)

I attended the committee’s launch and was startled that Denmark’s Climate Commission barely mentioned climate change. (Perhaps they’ve figured out it’s bullshit?) This omission is understandable since one country acting alone cannot do much to stop global warming. (Tell that to the idiots in California who think a state can stave it off all by themselves with AB32!) If Denmark were indeed to become 100 per cent fossil-free by 2050, and remain so for the rest of the century, the effect, by 2100, would be to delay the rise in average global temperature by just two weeks.

Wow 2 weeks? So I can have a 2 week vacation before doomsday thanks to Denmark. So how many hundreds of billions or trillions will this 2 weeks cost Denmark? Talk about an asinine goal!

Instead of focusing on climate change, the Climate Commission hyped the benefits that Denmark would experience if it led the shift to green energy. Unfortunately, on inspection these benefits turn out to be illusory. (Can I get another “duh?”)

Being a pioneer is hardly a guarantee of riches. Germany led the world in putting up solar panels, funded by E47 billion ($66bn) in subsidies. The lasting legacy is a massive bill and lots of inefficient solar technology sitting on rooftops throughout a cloudy country, delivering a trivial 0.1 per cent of its total energy supply.

Well, no wonder Germany lost World War II with “terrific” ideas like that. 0.1%?  $66 billion dollars? What a difference that made towards staving off global warming!  Again, tell this to the idiots in California who think we’re the “special” state who can stop global warming all by ourselves! They’ll spend billions, cost jobs and probably delay global warming by 10 minutes.

OK, back to Denmark and their “stellar” ideas……

Denmark itself has also already tried being a green-energy innovator; it led the world in embracing wind power. The results are hardly inspiring. Denmark’s wind industry is almost completely dependent on taxpayer subsidies, and Danes pay the highest electricity rates of any industrialised nation. Several studies suggest that claims that one-fifth of Denmark’s electricity demand is met by wind are an exaggeration, in part because much of the power is produced when there is no demand and must be sold to other countries.

Hmmmm…..yes I bet those taxpayers love paying for that wind power with subsidies and then getting screwed again with “the highest electricity rates of any industrialized nation.” What a bargain! They get to bend over twice! It’s so bad the Denmark is about to tell the wind power companies they’re on their own! Then watch either the rates really skyrocket or all those wind power companies file bankruptcy! Then they can enjoy all those large eyesores sitting idle for years, rotting away, doing nothing.

Bjorn then proceeds to note hat an enormous task it will be to get off oil, then explains why we probably should stay on oil and coal, is Bjorn bi-polar or something? Which is it?

Despite the fact changing from fossil fuels to green energy requires a total economic transformation, Denmark’s Climate Commission claimed that the price tag would be next to nothing. The commission reached this conclusion by assuming that the cost of not embracing its recommended policy would be massive. (Huh? Talk about justifying stuff with fantasies! Typical warmer economics!)

The commission believes that, during the next four decades, fossil-fuel costs will climb sharply because sources will dry up and governments will place massive taxes on fossil fuels. But this flies in the face of most evidence. (Oops! There goes reality again!)There is clearly plenty of cheap coal for hundreds of years, and with new cracking technology, gas is becoming more abundant. Even oil supplies are likely to be significantly boosted by non-conventional sources such as tar sands. (So he’s saying his government and the warmers are a bunch of bald-faced liars…my how refreshing! You can bet the warmers will try and stop coal, gas and oil so they can claim there’s a problem and we need to be green.)

By the same token, the prediction that governments will impose massive carbon taxes has little basis in reality. Such assumptions seem like a poor framework on which to build significant public policy and seem to ignore the substantial cost of eliminating fossil fuels, which is likely to amount to at least 5 per cent of gross domestic product a year. (This one he’s got right. The global warming-carbon-CO2 crap has little or even no basis in reality. But, what do you expect from government employees and nefarious assholes like Al Gore and his buddies who want to make a killing trading carbon? You can bet they’ll keep harping about it and keep trying to restrict things to create a crisis so they can “prove” we need all this greentard crap.)

The shift away from fossil fuels will not be easy. (No shit!) Policy-makers must prioritise investment in green-energy research and development. Trying to force carbon cuts instead of investing first in research puts the cart before the horse. (Double no shit!) Breakthroughs do not result automatically from a combination of taxes on fossil fuels and subsidies for present-day green energy: (Triple no shit!) despite the massive outlays associated with the Kyoto Protocol, participating countries’ investment in R&D as a percentage of GDP did not increase. (No, but you can bet they’re doing “R & D ” trying to figure out how to stick the taxpayers for it! I’d love to know who made all the “green” on Kyoto.)

The change in message after the disaster of the Copenhagen summit was probably inevitable. (Not to mention well-deserved) But the real change that is needed is the realisation that drastic, early carbon cuts are a poor response to global warming no matter how they are packaged. (Gigantic no shit!)

Wow, I think Bjorn has it almost all right! The whole global warming fantasy is a total crock of shit! What the idiot’s are trying to do won’t work! Their science isn’t only not settled it’s totally whacked! They’re liars!

You know, I think I’d vote for Bjorn to replace Pachauri at the IPCC because he actually has a clue! He still doesn’t get that we don’t really need carbon cuts but at least he’s aware that what’s happening is what the US Military refers to  as FUBAR.

Source: The Australian

2 Comments

Filed under AB32 California, Carbon Trading, Climate Alarmism, Climate Change, Co2 Insanity, Financial, Global Warming, Government, IPCC, United Nations

Good News! Pachauri wants to stay at IPCC

Reuters brings us good news this morning! Rajendra Pachauri wants to stay on at the IPCC to ensure the next report will be a mess like the last one was!

The head of the U.N. panel of climate scientists said on Monday he aimed to stay on and lead “overdue” reforms after errors in a 2007 report, including an exaggeration of the thaw of the Himalayan glaciers.

India’s Rajendra Pachauri, opening an October 11-14 meeting of 300 delegates from 130 nations in Busan, South Korea, admitted “shortfalls and mistakes” in the 2007 overview of climate science but has resisted suggestions that he should quit.

“I am committed to carry reform forward,” he told the first talks of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) since an August 30 report by the InterAcademy Council, grouping science academies, urged fundamental reform of IPCC management.

“Change and improvement in an organization as important and complex as the IPCC is inevitable and overdue, but it must build on the demonstrated strengths of the system,” he told delegates.

Well, Obama has given us “hope and change” so I guess it’s Pachauri’s turn to give us “change and improvement.” I wonder if those changes and improvements will consist of new and better ways to “hide the decline?”

Source: Reuters

Comments Off on Good News! Pachauri wants to stay at IPCC

Filed under Climate Change, Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, IPCC, United Nations