Green experts said the OECD could play a crucial role in ensuring that future climate targets are met, as governments would listen to its advice.
Helen Mountford is a former OECD executive who is now vice-president of climate and economics at the World Resources Institute, a non-profit research organisation. She said: “Climate change must be central to any successful candidate’s agenda. Leadership from the top to integrate climate across the full OECD agenda is essential. But implementing a sustainable, inclusive agenda will require all countries to engage.”
The outgoing head tells us:
“And put a big fat price on carbon,”
Well, yes, obviously.
Let’s do that, let’s maintain 770 million people without access to electricity and keep over 700 million people in extreme poverty.
That will certainly solve world poverty. Impoverish everybody, MOAR TAX!
The only proper response to anyone talking “climate target” is to laugh uproariously at them and remove them from proximity to any decisions which affect the rest of us.
Helen Mountford is a former OECD executive who is now vice-president of climate and economics at the World Resources Institute
Gosh, no interests there then. Clear, unbiased analysis.
“And put a big fat price on carbon,”
Well, yes, obviously.
So carbon taxes, yes?
It’s an absolute mystery to me, the mechanism by which giving governments money reduces climate change.
But why on earth would you institute a carbon emissions tax when you could instead employ many monstrous and expensive bureaucracies to discuss what to ban and what freedoms to limit and further monstrous and expensive bureaucracies to enforce the new limits on freedom?
What self-respecting politician would ever take the first path?
You’ve given me an idea, BiG. A sure fire way to reduce carbon emissions. Decimate, literally decimate, the public sector. OK, you get a slight peak running the crematoria for a few weeks. Then it’s all plain sailing. Instant 5% reduction. What’s not to like?
– – “And put a big fat price on carbon,”
Well, yes, obviously.
Right now there are certain sections of Texas, Tim, in which I wouldn’t advise you to be inane.
But why on earth would you institute a carbon emissions tax when you could instead . . .
Like our host, BiG, you seem to have a blind spot to the fact that politicians are familiar with the concept of “and”.
Yes, PJF, good point.
I like the carbon tax because it will cost the square root of fuck all if correctly priced, and we can tell the greenies we’re done with it, fixed, and you can fuck off ‘n all with banning cars and meat and planes and so on.
But you are right. It won’t be enough of a sacrifice to placate the high priests of greendoom.
So “and” it is then.
Donors list – https://www.wri.org/about/donors
usual suspects.
Since it is becoming evident that the world is entering a cooling phase, those climate targets are going to be piss easy to achieve. Unless they are going to try lying that it is getting hotter as it becomes ever more obvious that it isn’t. Or are they going to try claiming that “carbon” causes cooling now?
World Resources Institute, a non-profit research organisation
I bet Mountford, a lifelong quango trough, makes a very tidy ‘profit’ from it.
I see the list of ‘donors’ includes the UK taxpayer. What a fucking surprise.
And the Aussie taxpayer, MC. This was one thing I really liked about Trump. He actually stopped payments to at least a few of these wankers.
Since it is becoming evident that the world is entering a cooling phase, those climate targets are going to be piss easy to achieve. Unless they are going to try lying that it is getting hotter as it becomes ever more obvious that it isn’t. Or are they going to try claiming that “carbon” causes cooling now?
There’s an argument that global warming is just a cooling period delayed and we’d be better off getting some more warming. Its the cold that kills, not the warmth.
But you are right. It won’t be enough of a sacrifice to placate the high priests of greendoom.
There is no sacrifice that will placate any bunch of single issue campaigners, whether it’s Greens or BLM or feminists or … They simply move on to their next demand, they can never be satisfied.