Rich nations "give up" on climate deal as GHGs reach record levels

The ABC thinks particulates and toxins are GHGs…

Greenhouse gases are continuing their steady rise, and the climate is stubbornly refusing to play the game:

The amount of global warming-causing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere rose to a new high in 2010 and the rate of increase has accelerated, the UN weather agency said on Monday.

Levels of carbon dioxide – a greenhouse gas and major contributor to climate change – rose by 2.3 parts per million between 2009 and 2010, higher than the average for the past decade of 2.0 parts per million, a new report by the World Meteorological Organisation found.

“The atmospheric burden of greenhouse gases due to human activities has yet again reached record levels since pre-industrial time,” said WMO secretary-general Michel Jarraud. (source)

No emotive language there. Despite the fact that emissions have risen significantly over the last decade or so, the increase in global temperature has slowed significantly. This alone is sufficient to demonstrate that the hypothesis of “dangerous global warming” is false. As Bob Carter explained in a recent email exchange:

The greenhouse hypothesis, which is almost never formulated correctly in the public discussion, but is “That human carbon dioxide emissions are causing dangerous global warming”. 

Given that the mixing time of the atmosphere is ~1 yr, and that physical radiative effects are instantaneous, a 10 year period is plenty of time to test that hypothesis. And the data that I cited invalidate it.

Note that that DOESN’T mean that humans have no effect on global temperature, because we know they do. What is indicated is that that effect is small, and for the time being lost in the noise of natural variation of the climate system.

So it is fortunate, then, that there is no chance of any global agreement on reducing emissions in the near future, because it would be a complete and utter waste of time and money. Headline of the day, in The Guardian, is not exactly what their moonbattish environmental staff would like to be writing a few days before Durban:

“Rich nations give up on climate treaty until 2020”

Governments of the world’s richest countries have given up on forging a new treaty on climate change to take effect this decade, with potentially disastrous consequences for the environment through global warming.

Ahead of critical talks starting next week, most of the world’s leading economies now privately admit that no new global climate agreement will be reached before 2016 at the earliest, and that even if it were negotiated by then, they would stipulate it could not come into force until 2020.

The eight-year delay is the worst contemplated by world governments during 20 years of tortuous negotiations on greenhouse gas emissions, and comes despite intensifying warnings from scientists and economists about the rapidly increasing dangers of putting off prompt action.

After the Copenhagen climate talks in 2009 ended amid scenes of chaos, governments pledged to try to sign a new treaty in 2012. The date is critical, because next year marks the expiry of the current provisions of the Kyoto protocol, the only legally binding international agreement to limit emissions.

The UK, European Union, Japan, US and other rich nations are all now united in opting to put off an agreement and the United Nations also appears to accept this. (source)

Hang on a minute, didn’t Julia Gillard sell her carbon tax on the premise that Australia was lagging behind the rest of the world? Ah, that was a lie, wasn’t it? In fact, we are at the bleeding edge of climate madness, with our economy set to haemorrhage billions of dollars over the next forty years thanks to a pointless carbon tax which morphs into an ETS, neither of which will do anything for the climate. What it will do, however, is send thousands of jobs overseas, and funnel your hard-earned taxes to developing countries. Great move.

Barely a month after the carbon tax was passed into law, the chance of any global deal, on which all the highly favourable treasury modelling was based, has evaporated. What was that about the rest of the world following Australia’s lead? Greg? Hello?

The reality is that there is no chance of a “global deal” on anything. With 190-odd countries’ competing interests battling it out, the possibility of reaching an agreement about something as simple as what colour the sky is today is all but impossible.

At least this gives us all some breathing space. The Coalition will repeal the carbon tax in 2013, and a few cold winters in Europe and the US, combined with ever increasing fuel poverty, will finally force their governments to think twice about setting nonsensical renewable energy targets. Politicians will begin to realise that adaptation might be a better way of allocating valuable and scarce resources, rather than mitigation which simply won’t work.

By the way, if you would like to relive some of the dramas of Copenhagen, go here.


  1. It’s all those inefficient factories powered by coal power stations that china had to build to keep up with the world demand for solar panels.

  2. “The atmospheric burden of greenhouse gases due to human activities has yet again reached record levels since pre-industrial time..”

    “Yet again”? Did it dip below “record levels” at some stage?

    Interesting also that they don’t mention that CO2 levels have been much, much higher than that in the past, at times when temperatures were much colder. “Human generated” CO2 must have special properties.

  3. “Despite the fact that emissions have risen significantly over the last decade or so, the increase in global temperature has slowed significantly. ”

    No, global temps have actually DECREASED slightly over the pas 13 years or so.

    • Exactly. At the very least it has flatlined for the past 13 years. And nobody knows whether this halt to the warming is temporary, permanent or what. We may even be going into a cooling phase for the next 20-30 years. I’m sure the IPCC is covering itself for that possibility, judging by their last report.

  4. What ! Julia lied !!

  5. Julia has also broken international law with her making it a crime to state the effect of her carbon tax on prices. All in a day’s politics.

  6. Meanwhile, the Australian Labor/Green government becomes more delusional by the day.

    According to Treasury carbon price modelling some ’89 countries (are) making pledges to undertake mitigation action.’ and ‘world carbon prices are expected to range from A$29 to A$61 in 2015-16.’

    But the most delusional statement is this one … ‘The world continues to prosper while cutting emissions to reduce the risks of dangerous climate change.”

    I’m not sure if Wayne ‘the world’s best treasurer’ Swan has checked lately, but the world is well on track for GFC Mark II. The USA is $14 trillion in debt, Greece has all but defaulted, with Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland all not far behind.

    And with increasing uncertainty about the EU’s carbon market as buyers evaporate (pay wall protected), with the carbon market falling 13% alone in the last week to a price of between Au$12.22 and Au$8.63 for December 2011, Australia is also well on track to join the ‘basket case’ economies as we ponder the consequences of a Au$23 carbon dioxide tax.

  7. I think they’ve just changed the hypothesis from “That human carbon dioxide emissions are causing dangerous global warming”. to this “That human activity is causing dangerous global warming”. without telling anyone. A bit sneaky I’m thinking.

  8. Just give up on it!

    Its Over

  9. Now that the carbon tax has passed into legislation and with parliament about to finish sitting for the year the Commissar for the Russian Australian Competition and Consumer Commission Rod Sims has released a guide for businesses on carbon price claims.

    The latest censorship laws prohibit businesses from mentioning any price increases, that take effect after 1 July 2012, as a result of the carbon ‘dioxide’ tax (unless they can be fully substantiated). Fines of up to $1.1 million and 23 carbon cops roaming the streets doing snap audits will ensure business compliance.

    Tell me again how many of our 150 federal politicians went to the last election in 2010 advocating a tax on carbon dioxide … 1!

    Miranda Devine from the Daily Telegraph has more.

  10. “the only legally binding international agreement”

    “I think it’s next to impossible that Canada is going to be able to reach its Kyoto target, that’s a given.”

    So just wondering when we will be placing trade sanctions or are we going to invade Canada. In other words how on earth is the Kyoto Protocol binding?

  11. Vivienne Skeen via Facebook says:

    Australia in now being run by a pack of idiots!

  12. @vivienne since when did a pollie need a qualification? we need a license to drive a car, operate machinery, get married…but what qualification are required ru(i)n the country?

  13. @vivienne since when did a pollie need a qualification? we need a license to drive a car, operate machinery, get married…but what qualifications are required to ru(i)n a country?

%d bloggers like this: