James Hansen on the Coming Paris Fail (Kyoto II)

By Robert Bradley Jr. -- November 30, 2015

“Big Green consists of several ‘environmental’ organizations, including Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), each with $100+M budgets, each springing from high-minded useful beginnings, each with more high-priced lawyers than you can shake a stick at. EDF … was chief architect of the disastrous Kyoto lemon. NRDC proudly claims credit for Obama’s EPA strategy and foolishly allows it to migrate to Paris.”

“The danger is that Paris will lay a Kyoto.”

– James Hansen, “Isolation of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue: Part I,” November 27, 2015.

James Hansen speaks truth to power when it comes to the politics of climate change. (On the science, he has staked out an alarmist position that he cannot seem to shake, even at this late date.) In previous posts, I have noted Hansen’s recalcitrance toward cap-and-trade, whether federal, state (California), or in another country (Australia or Quebec/Ontario). He lambasted Copenhagen (COP20) for its interest in cap-and-trade too.

And who can forget his immortal words about the feasibility of large-scale renewable energy: “Suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.”

As COP 21 gets underway, Hansen is hopping mad about what is developing in Paris. He wants a global fee-and-dividend approach, which would require border tariffs for all of the sovereign nations of the world. (Forget that too, Sir.)

Short of that, Hansen correctly sees imaging and alligator-shoe posturing, not real results about forced decarbonization, coming out of COP21, as indicated in these quotations:

“[We] cannot let developed countries use payments [to developing countries] to buy business-as-usual. The future of people in all countries requires rapid phasedown of fossil fuel emissions. An across-the-board carbon fee is needed to achieve rapid emissions reduction, avoiding the Kyoto debacle.”

“Merkel is suggesting that others adopt the German approach: close nuclear power plants, subsidize renewables, reduce emissions via resulting high electricity prices and a cap & trade scheme, and export production of many products for domestic consumption to other countries (where fossil fuels may be used). Result: global emissions decline little, if at all.”

“[It] is disquieting that Germany is building coal-fired power plants and other nations are building gas-fired power plants. If this continues, the “technology lock-in” from long-lived power plants could guarantee expanded fracking and high CO2 emissions through most of this century.”

“The danger that Paris may mimic Kyoto is heightened by the ‘guard rail’ concept, which allows governments to promise future emission reductions rather than set up a framework that fosters rapid emissions reductions. Climate science does not define a safe guard rail; instead science indicates that atmospheric CO2 is already into the dangerous range, as shown by a group including world experts in the carbon cycle, paleoclimate and other relevant areas.”

“The valid scientific message is that emissions must be reduced as rapidly as practical. And in turn, that implies the price of fossil fuels must be made honest by adding a rising carbon fee.”

“However, instead, in pre-Paris negotiations each nation is being asked how much it will reduce emissions. These pledges are then used to estimate whether global temperature will be within the ‘guardrail’. Meanwhile low fossil fuel prices continue, guaranteeing that more fossil fuel infrastructure will be built and high emissions will continue. Valuable time is wasted.”

“Big Green consists of several ‘environmental’ organizations, including Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), each with $100+M budgets, each springing from high-minded useful beginnings, each with more high-priced lawyers than you can shake a stick at. EDF, with purblind equation of the sulfur and carbon pollution problems, was chief architect of the disastrous Kyoto lemon. NRDC proudly claims credit for Obama’s EPA strategy and foolishly allows it to migrate to Paris.”

“Obama still has a chance at a positive climate legacy, if he ditches Big Green. Better to sit down with the Chinese leaders, who are technically trained, rational, and understand we are together in the same boat. We had better figure out how to plug the leaks together or we sink together.”

“Watch what happens in Paris carefully to see if all that the leaders do is sign off on the pap that UN bureaucrats are putting together, indulgences and promises to reduce future emissions, and then clap each other on the back and declare success.”

—————

Appendix: Posts on James Hansen at MasterResource

Halloween Hangover: Hansen, Holdren, and McKibben (spooky science on display)

James Hansen’s Tax-Tariff-Reparations Climate Policy

James Hansen: “I Struggle to Sleep” (with current energy trends, energy policy)

Hansen Warns Against ‘Cap-and-Tax’ (Steyer and California, are you listening?)

Hansen to Obama/EPA: State Renewable Credits, Cap-and-Trade Are Special-Interest, Ineffectual GHG Mitigation Policies

James Hansen: Still More Good Energy Realism (just ignore his climate alarmism, world fee-and-dividend fix)

Game, Set, Match Fossil Fuels? James Hansen Sleepless in Ningbo

Energy Realism Amid Climate Alarmism: James Hansen Rides Again