More Climate Change Slush Funds
06/15/2012 1 Comment
I have been writing about CARB’s Cap and Trade climate change slush fund. The ability to tax citizens for their carbon emissions to save the planet from global warming. The problem is that all those taxes will not change the climate, according to Richard Muller, Berkeley Physics Professor, “California is far too small a part of the global warming problem that anything we do here cannot really help.” (More details on Muller views HERE.)
Now the UN wants start their own climate change slush funded by taxing American Citizens for their energy use and resulting CO2 emissions. The Green Climate Fund will collect $100 billion a year for distribution to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change (More details HERE.)
Diplomats at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Conference in Rio de Janeiro next week will consider proposals that would levy taxes on American families and energy industries in order to support international efforts to combat global warming, according to a draft agenda for the conference.
“We recognize that subsidies for non-renewable energy development should be eliminated and replaced with a global tax on the production of energy from non-renewable energy sources,” the UN draft agenda, amended by non-governmental organizations at the invitation of the UN, says. “The income of this tax should be allocated to renewable energy development.”
Now, here is the problem as explained by this post at the No Tricks Zone, by P Gosselin:
At their Die kalte Sonne website, Professor Fritz Vahrenholt and Dr. Sebastian Lüning present a guest post by Prof. Jan-Erik Solheim, who comments on the huge divergence between Hansen’s 1988 forecast and actual observations. I’ve translated his guest post in English:
What ever became of James Hansen’s 1988 temperature forecast? Time for an evaluation
by Prof. Jan-Erik Solheim
One of the most important publications on “dangerous man-made climate change” is one by James Hansen and his colleagues in the year 1988 which appeared in the Journal of Geophysical Research. The title of the publication: Global Climate Changes as Forecast by Goddard Institute for Space Studies Three-Dimensional Model.
Figure 1: Temperature prognosis by the Hansen Group from 1988. The different scenarios assume 1.5% CO2 increase (blue), fixed CO2 emissions (green) and stopped CO2 emissions (red). In reality CO2 emissions have increased about 2.5% per year, which would be more than depicted the the blue curve scenario. The black curve is the actual temperature (smoothed 5-year mean). The Hansen-Model overestimated the temperature by 1,9°C and is thus a full 150% off. Graph supplemented as to Hansen et al. (1988).
It is clear that CARB and the UN are ignoring the facts. Increases in CO2 are not driving climate change, yet CARB and UN Bureaucrats insist on correcting a problem that does not exist. It is clear the real issue is politics and not science. Science is telling us there is no global warming problem, but politicians are insisting there is a problem and that we need to put our hard earned dollars in their climate change slush funds.
There is not much we can do in California, but we can tell the UN no way! Let our political leaders know that we are not contributing our tax dollars to a UN Green Climate (Slush) Fund.