Climate Madness: EU signs its own economic death warrant

26 May, 2010 by

Dangerous pollution? No, steam.

The … world … has … gone … mad. I am sure many of you, like me, will simply not believe the content of this article. The EU is going through a time of almost unprecedented financial turmoil. The global economy is struggling to recover from the GFC, but in Europe things are still very precarious: Greece is sinking fast, and Spain isn’t far behind, trillions in debt, the Euro will soon be worthless, and the entire economy of the European Union may literally grind to a halt. So what do the morons at the European Commission decide to do? Set ridiculous unilateral targets for curbing CO2 emissions which will cripple Europe’s economy even faster. From the UK Times Online (via The Australian):

Europe will introduce a surprise new plan today to combat global warming, committing Britain and the rest of the EU to the most ambitious targets in the world. The plan proposes a massive increase in the target for cutting greenhouse gas emissions in this decade.

The European Commission is determined to press ahead with the cuts despite the financial turmoil gripping the bloc, even though it would require Britain and other EU member states to impose far tougher financial penalties on their industries than are being considered by other large economies.

The plan, to cut emissions by 30 per cent on 1990 levels by 2020, would cost the EU an extra £33 billion a year by 2020 [roughly AU$60 billion as of today], according to a draft of the Commission’s communication leaked to The Times.

The existing target of a 20 per cent cut is already due to cost £48 billion. The Commission will argue that the lower target has become much easier to meet because of the recession, which resulted in the EU’s emissions falling more than 10 per cent last year as thousands of factories closed or cut production. Emissions last year were already 14 per cent below 1990 levels. [What a great argument! Let’s cripple our economy, then we won’t have any emissions anyway! Brilliant!]

Business leaders fear that thousands of jobs could be lost and energy bills could soar. Carbon taxes on road fuel, heating and other sources of emissions could be introduced, with proceeds reinvested in renewable energy products. [Wind and solar, and we know how reliable they are]

The EU’s present policy is to wait for other countries to commit themselves to equivalent action on their emissions before raising its target to 30 per cent “as part of a genuine global effort”. But after the failure of the Copenhagen climate summit, a global deal on cutting emissions is now unlikely to be agreed until the end of next year.

Connie Hedegaard, the Climate Commissioner, will make the case for the EU to commit itself unilaterally to a 30 per cent cut, to inspire other countries to follow suit and accelerate the development of low-carbon industries.

This is Climate Madness on a simply staggering scale. My heartfelt sympathy goes out to those readers in the EU. It’s been nice knowing you, but sadly, by next year, you won’t be able to afford the electricity to switch on your computers…

Read it here.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: ,

EU proposal to bind itself to 30% cuts by 2020

16 March, 2010 by

What the EU has been doing?

And the precondition for an international agreement is gone. What are the EU smoking? Whatever it is, it has so addled their collective brains that they are prepared to sacrifice the economies of dozens of countries, force energy bills through the roof, and send millions of jobs offshore just to pander to the enviro-extremists. But hang on, it’s all OK, because that kick in the guts to the EU economy will create thousands of “green jobs” – yeah, like I was born yesterday:

The [UK] Government will today support a proposal tabled in Brussels for a new, much more onerous EU target for cutting carbon dioxide even though other nations with higher emissions have failed to commit to reciprocal action.

Ministers have abandoned their previous condition that the world must agree a legally binding treaty on emissions before the EU commits to a tougher target.

The EU has already gone farther than the rest of the world by making a legally binding commitment to cut emissions by 20 per cent on 1990 levels by 2020. It is now preparing to raise the target to 30 per cent despite the failure of December’s climate change summit in Copenhagen.

By contrast, the US is debating whether to cut emissions by 4 per cent on 1990 levels by 2020 but is unlikely to make a decision this year.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) has calculated the cost to Britain of its contribution to the 30 per cent target but is refusing to publish the research.

A European Commission policy document, being debated today by EU environment ministers, says the EU should adopt the 30 per cent target “if the conditions are right”.

The EU had previously said it would only adopt the higher target “if an international agreement on emissions reductions is secured”.

I can’t believe what my home country has come to: Fool Britannia.

Read it here. (h/t EU Referendum)

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: , ,

China to "cut emissions 40% by 2020"

27 November, 2009 by

ABC-style carbon dioxide

ABC-style carbon dioxide

This has to be some kind of joke, right? China, which depends on coal for something like 70% of it’s entire energy requirements, and which is building a new coal fired power station every two weeks, has apparently  stated that it will cut its emissions by 40% on 2005 levels by 2020:

“This is a voluntary action taken by the Chinese government based on its own national conditions and is a major contribution to the global effort in tackling climate change,” the statement said.

It added that China faced “enormous pressure and special difficulty in controlling greenhouse gas emissions”.

The announcement marks the first time China has put specific numbers on a September pledge by President Hu Jintao to cut carbon intensity by a “notable margin”.

So what is “carbon intensity”? And here is the get out clause:

Carbon intensity refers to emissions per unit of economic activity. Emissions would continue to grow under China’s plan as economic growth is expected to continue. Beijing is not offering an absolute cut in carbon dioxide production.

So it’s nothing like a 40% cut in emissions. It’s a 40% cut in emissions tied into economic growth, which isn’t a cut at all. The ABC fails to mention that in it’s headline, of course.

Read it here.

Filed Under: Climate Tagged With: , ,