IT is generally recognized that the west is in decline and that China will emerge as a superpower some time later this century.
It is also generally recognised that it is the west that has spear-headed the campaign against the so-called climate crisis. And the west is desperate to get the rest of the world to a United Nations meeting in Copenhagen in December to discuss solutions to this issue.
The UN’s top climate negotiator, a Dutchman Yvo De Boer, has already said the west will have to put $10 billion on the table to get the developing world – read China and India – to agree to anything at Copenhagen.
He doesn’t sound like much of a negotiator to me: More likely a bleeding-heart who can’t see that those in power in so-called developing countries like China and India are probably laughing behind closed doors. Indeed their GDP is already very large and growing relative to countries like Holland.
All the west really has on its side for this upcoming meeting in Copenhagen is its own smug, misguided sense of morality based on environmentalism.
Indians appears to better understand the science and the politics – at least better than Holland and Australia.
Rajendra Pachauri, an Indian and chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has explained, “You cannot, in a democracy, ignore some of these realities and as it happens with the resources of coal that India has we really don’t have any choice but to use coal in the immediate short term.
Jairam Ramesh, the Indian environment minister, recent accused the developed world of needlessly raising alarm over melting Himalayan glaciers.
The west will of course continue to obsess over environmentalism and its tax payers continue to finance planned investments in renewable energy in countries like India and China that will continue to build coal power fire stations.
Tax payers in the west have already been paying through their nose for all the moralizing on climate change. According to a recent study by Australian Joanne Nova the US Government has spent more than $79 billion of taxpayers’ money since 1989 on policies related to climate change, including science and technology research, administration, propaganda campaigns, foreign aid, and tax breaks. And she concludes: Most of this spending was unnecessary.
Notes and Links
Read Joanne Nova’s Climate Money: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/climate_money.html
Despite the billions wasted, audits of the science are left to unpaid volunteers. A dedicated but largely uncoordinated grassroots movement of scientists has sprung up around the globe to test the integrity of “global warming” theory and to compete with a lavishly-funded, highly-organized climate monopsony. Major errors have been exposed again and again.
Carbon trading worldwide reached $126 billion in 2008. Banks, which profit most, are calling for more. Experts are predicting the carbon market will reach $2 – $10 trillion in the near future. Hot air will soon be the largest single commodity traded on global exchanges.
Meanwhile, in a distracting sideshow, Exxon-Mobil Corp is repeatedly attacked for paying just $23 million to skeptics—less than a thousandth of what the US government spends on alarmists, and less than one five-thousandth of the value of carbon trading in 2008 alone.
The large expenditure designed to prove the non-existent connection between carbon and climate has created a powerful alliance of self-serving vested interests.
By pouring so much money into pushing a single, scientifically-baseless agenda, the Government has created not an unbiased investigation but a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Sound science cannot easily survive the vice-like grip of politics and finance.
To get a perspective on what some Chinese political theorists are thinking, consider this. While Westerners “anguish” about how to manage China’s rise, Chinese think-tankers debate about “how to manage the West’s decline”! Wang Yiwei, from Fudan University, shares this worry, and asks, “How can we prevent the USA from declining too quickly?” (pp. 115-116)
“(It) will allow developing countries to begin preparing national plans to limit their own emissions, and to adapt to climate change,” he told the BBC. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8163456.stm
Image of the Shanghai skyline from http://www.ghmadsen.com/Bilder/Kina/shanghai_skyline_g.jpg