Jennifer Marohasy

For an interview with Fred Singer in Copenhagen please see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmNQoQ2Tr18&feature=rec-LGOUT-exp_fresh+div-1r-5-HM

According to the New York Times the real success of Copenhagen was Western nations pledging to fund developing countries through international mechanisms. “Copenhagen’s One Real Accomplishment: Getting Some Money Flowing” by James Kanter, New York Times, Dec 20 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/21/business/energy-environment/21iht-green21.html?_r=1&hpw.

However journalists for Der Spiegel consider Copenhagen a failure. “Copenhagen Was an All-Out Failure” by Sobhan Dowling and Daryl Lindsey, Spiegel Online, Dec 21, 2009 http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,668352,00.html#ref=rss

For the Journal “Nature” the major issue is the failure of scientists (advocates) to communicate. “After Copenhagen: The agreement reached last week lends fresh urgency to challenges in science and communication,” Editorial, Nature, international weekly journal of science, 12/24/09 http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v462/n7276/full/462957b.html [SEPP Note: in this lengthy editorial the editors ignore the lack of physical evidence that carbon dioxide was the cause of the recent warming.]

Few have asked who will be handling the payments from developed nations to developing ones amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars. Christopher Booker and Richard North have a few suggestions in “Questions over business deals of UN climate change guru Dr. Rajendra Pachauri.” UK Telegraph, Dec 20 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/6847227/Questions-over-business-deals-of-UN-climate-change-guru-Dr-Rajendra-Pachauri.html

The Asian Development Bank is likely to be one entity that expects to profit from carbon trading and allocation of funds: “Eminent Persons to Advise ADB on Climate Change” Asian Development Bank Press Release, May 4, 2009, http://www.adb.org/Media/Articles/2009/12885-adb-annual-meetings/

On her web site, Jo Nova has posted a 30 year time line of Climategate created by Mohib Ebrahim.  It is long, but demonstrates that the Climategate scandal is not isolated or insignificant. http://joannenova.com.au/global-warming/climategate-30-year-timeline/

Many advocating that human emissions of CO2 cause global warming claim that the electricity produced by coal fired utilities can easily be replaced by wind or solar power both of which require huge amounts of land. Of course, in the US California is leading the way as illustrated in this New York Times article: “Desert Vistas vs. Solar Power” by Todd Woody, NYT, Dec 22, 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/22/business/energy-environment/22solar.html?_r=1&th&emc=th

Big Green is heavily involved in the well financed lobbying group, US-CAP, which advocates cap and trade. According to one US Representative, US-CAP provided the “blueprint” for the House passed cap and trade bill. No doubt some supporters of cap and trade assume that Big Green will not oppose sources for energy to replace coal. Will Big Green deliver? This article in the Wall Street Journal may provide a partial answer. “Sierra Club’s Pro-Gas Dilemma” by Ben Casselman, WSJ, Dec 21 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126135534799299475.html?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_news#

The Investors Business Daily has its own views on why development of US sources of natural gas is becoming difficult. “Get The Frackin’ Gas,” IBD, 12/22/09, http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=516041

Not everyone is bowing the EPA’s finding that science supports the claim that greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare, thus must be regulated. “Cattlemen challenge EPA greenhouse gas ruling in court,” Dec 24, 2009, [H/t Brad Veek] http://www.farmanddairy.com/news/cattlemen-challenge-epa-greenhouse-gas-ruling-in-court/13835.htmlprint/

from Kenneth Haapala at  www.SEPP.org