Or claims even:
US plan to exploit Venezuela’s oil could eat up 13% of carbon budget to keep 1.5C limit
Exclusive: ClimatePartner analysis shows how move would risk plunging Earth further into climate catastrophe
From which we can derive two claims.
1) US intervention in Venezuela is bad, see, because broiling Flipper.
2) Socialism in Venezuela crippled the oil industry so was good, see?
Only 3 pieces of nonsense in that article:
1.Carbon budget.
2.1.5C Budget.
3, Climate Catastrophe.
“…risk plunging Earth further into climate catastrophe”
Pre-supposing that ‘climate catastrophe is a proven state we are in. I remain unconvinced. Though it is unseasonably mild in London right mow, fort the time of year.
It wasn’t last week though. And it might not be next week. Like every winter I’ve spent in the UK. Can anyone actually point out a change in climate that we can see, as opposed to dodgy stats?
JuliaM, yes, nice and mild and obviously a sign of climate collapse.
As of course would be ‘unseasonably’ cold, warm, wet, dry, etc. (cont p94.), and exactly why the whole boondoggle of ‘climate change’ is inherently unscientific.
p.s. Re: US oil companies going back into Venezuela – US oil company CEO’s appear reluctant to get involved at the moment due to what happened the last time they invested in the place, when that nice Mr. Chavez came along and stole all the businesses and infrastructure they had paid for.
There was quite a balanced discission on Radio 4 this morning (yes! what on earth happened?) where it was pointed out the lack of property rights and the cost of converting Venesuelan Sludge into saleable product make it impossible for any free market operation to invest any resources there. I think it was a former CEO of Orinoco Oil they had on.
Catastropheer? Catastropheist?
Catastrocrap
Climate Careerist.