The US, UK, Canada and Australia have fallen billions of dollars short of their “fair share” of climate funding for developing countries, analysis shows.
The assessment, by Carbon Brief, compares the share of international climate finance provided by rich countries with their share of carbon emissions to date, a measure of their responsibility for the climate crisis.
Rich countries pledged to provide US$100bn a year by 2020, although this target has been missed. The US share of this, based on its past emissions, would be $40bn yet it provided only $7.6bn in 2020, the latest year for which data is available. Australia and Canada gave only about a third of the funding indicated by the analysis, while the UK supplied three-quarters but still fell $1.4bn short.
Because cash isn’t what is actually needed. Assume that everything said is in fact true. So, what needs to happen? The development of technologies that allow economic growth – there’s no other way the poor are going to get rich – without boiling the oceans. Those technologies are being developed. At great cost. The subsidies to solar for example. The feed in tariffs, the green subsidies on electricity bills, all that malarkey. We shouldn’t have done it that way, true, but we did. And solar is now much cheaper than it was. So, those costs of that subsidy, leading to that price reduction, are part of the gift of the rich countries to the poor. The same is true of the work done on batteries, on synthetic aviation fuel and on and on. Billoions upon billions are being spent to make the non-emitting techs cheaper. That’s a benefit to those poor countries. We need to count it. We don’t – therefore these figures are wrong.
There is nothing to believe.
We give money to the Maldives and they build airports.
It is all just grift and graft.
As I have said elsewhere, the only agreements that will come from this COP27 party in the sun for the great and good will be: which millionaire playground resort will host COP28 next year, and the UK and US must pay even more to 3rd world despots to finance their lifestyles.
From AEP in the Torygraph, via V_P:
ING says the Fed has incurred a paper loss of $1 trillion (£880bn) this year on its $8.7 trillion balance sheet of US Treasuries and mortgage debt. Its holdings are trading at an average 7pc discount to par value. This is going to be hard to explain to Congress.
Ever seen Cinderella Man, starring Russell Crowe?
It’s a good boxing / Depression-era family drama from a few years back. Ritchie Cunningham from Happy Days directs. At the beginning our protagonist is wearing fancy spats and counting his big piles of cash, but he’s soon broke, the leccy gets shut off, and he’s reduced to begging former associates to drop some pocket change in his hat.
That’s the West, that is.
China has emitted more *net* CO2 this century than the UK has since the dawn of time (net was pretty much zero – except during the Roman occupation – until the industrial revolution).
So how much has China contributed to this fund?
$100 billion a year will need a team of administrators with degrees. Where do I sign up?
The single most effective way of reducing carbon emissions would be to ban green politics
Trade not aid. Giving them money to “solve” their climate problems is just aid. Trade with them and they will build up infrastructure and get more efficient and eventually will be like already developed countries. Difference between the two methods? Time. But time is not a limiting factor since the aid solution won’t change the climate in one year, more like 30-50. But that will be the time in which developing countries will catch up with the rest of the world.
Forget the lab bound theory – has anyone ever seen definitive, empirical, proof that the climate responds to an increase in CO2 by increasing the temperature?
I believe the Pre-Cambrian Ice Age began when CO2 was around 7000ppm…….
‘There is nothing to believe.
We give money to the Maldives and they build airports.
It is all just grift and graft.’
Thank you Otto. I couldn’t have put it better.
Adolff: “has anyone ever seen definitive, empirical, proof that the climate responds to an increase in CO2 by increasing the temperature?”
Yes, plenty of geological record. The way Mars heats up in summer is also a Big Hint. Same for methane. And water vapour, and…
The thing is that CO2 is only one factor in deciding how cozy a planet gets.
Definitely too complicated for Liberal Arts grads, but they don’t like being told so, and tend to be loud in their complaining.
And Precambrian… that’s Cheating.. And quite frankly silly.
That CO2 level was mostly from some rather enhousiastic volcanism, which also pumped out untold tons of dust into the atmosphere.. During most of that particular age sunlight tended not to get to the surface to begin with.. With the added insult upon injury that the Sun was going through Puberty and was generally sulking and not putting in the work it does now…
But we’ll see this winter, innit? With Tonga going off this summer, the southern hemisphere should be in for a bit of a treat….
Why did my brother kill himself at 49 despite having a well-paid managerial job at a multinational company?
Was the pain of seeing others capriciously worse off than himself too much?
Forget it. The billions squandered on these places since, and including the colonial period, put most of them in a debit situation and they owe the developed countries, principally the Anglosphere, more than they’ll generate in the next 50 years.
@?
Too many Stoopid questions from you on his Twitter feed?
I can just feel that goddamn Trudeau reaching for his (meaning MY) chequebook…
“Let’s just assume for the moment that everything they say about climate change is true” is a morally indefensible argument. It’s on a par with saying “Let’s just assume for the moment that everything they say about Jews eating babies and swindling us honest Christians is true,” then going on to discuss the optimal ways of solving the imagined problem such as Zyklon-B and mass shootings. Tim if you are a climate catastrophist at least be honest and say so. At least then your opinions on climate, no matter how flawed, would earn some respect.