The failure of Carbonhagen

Despite the rhetoric of Obama and other lying Pinkos Carbonhagen is nothing but a failure. Like modern day King Canutes they think they are going to halt the rise in temperatures just by saying it will be so. The fact that temperatures aren’t rising has escaped them all, though what’s the bet they claim the coming little Ice age on their efforts at combating “Climate Change”.

About the only good thing to come out of Carbonhagen was the superb negotiating skills of Tim Groser, who much to the envy and jealousy of Nick Smith got to sit on the international stage with a proposal that will actually put some cash in our pockets rather than Nick Smith’s daft ETS which will wreck the economy. It was beautiful just to watch Smith’s pus-face look (at about 1:28) as Groser took the stage.

Nick Smith is looking forlorn (prob because he opposed this and Groser has succeeded in doing something ? agriculture emissions account for 14% of the global total, so if the alliance can halve them, that would be a 7% cut in global emissions ? the biggest single practical thing ever to come out of climate change talks (and of benefit to NZ even when climate change is found to be a hoax, because it will have wider environmental benefits such as reducing pollution in rivers).

Nick Smith opposes this, because if Groser?s initiative leads to a 7% cut in global emissions there would be little need for NZ to have an ETS (given our total domestic emissions are only 0.2% of the global total).? While Smith fucks around trying to get a 0.002% reduction in global emissions through the NZ ETS, Groser?s alliance may cut them by 7%, or 3,500 times as much as Smith?s ETS!

Meanwhile the traitor Sustainability Council’s Simon Terry believes that when a tree is harvested, all the carbon in it immediately turns into a gas and goes into the atmosphere.? He has never heard of houses, tables, bookcases, paper ….? or anything made of wood. The traitor man is an idiot

“What climate tracker has yet to report is that there are essentially no gains for the environment from New Zealand’s pledge on current plans, just the temporary storage of emissions in trees that are to be chopped down in the 2020s,” he said.
“Those trees time-shift the emissions reduction burden to another generation (but) they do not reduce emissions long term.”

Matthew Hooton noted as much in his NBR column on Friday, which NBR strangely still doesn’t put online or even behind the paywall, while Farrar’s drivel is now pay-per-view.

The alliance is based on three common-sense observations, accepted by everyone but warmist extremists and UN and New Zealand climate bureaucrats.

The first is that, ultimately, only research, development and application of new technology can reduce net greenhouse emissions ? unless, of course, the world accepts the environmental movement?s real agenda of a collapse in global population and living standards to pre-industrial times.

All other initiatives are mere money shuffling and nonsense, including our environmentally pointless yet economically vandalous ETS, and the communiqu? set to emerge from Copenhagen this weekend ? once it?s bashed out overnight without anyone understanding it, as happened at Kyoto.

Second is, if New Zealand genuinely wants to do something about climate change, it should act in areas where it is already a world leader and has something meaningful to offer.

Paying medieval indulgences to Russia and Ukraine under the Kyoto system fails this test.? So does deliberately harming our economy with the ETS, especially with New Zealand producing just 0.2% of global emissions.

The phrase ?punching above our weight? has rightly been banned by Mr Groser, Murray McCully and new MFAT chief executive John Allen.? They understand that New Zealand gains nothing from pretending to be something it is not, like the annoying third former trying to get entry to the seventh-form common room.? The alliance is not about ?punching above our weight? but focussing on an area, agricultural science, where New Zealand is already the global heavyweight and getting entry on our merits.

With 50% of domestic and 14% of global greenhouse gases coming from agriculture, it is the one area where New Zealand has an opportunity to contribute meaningfully to cutting emissions ? and, if you believe the hype, saving the planet from imminent destruction.

Ultimately though, Carbonhagen has proven to be a massive disappointment to the most hardened Green apostles and for that we should be grateful.

The fight goes on however amongst our small band of Climate realists who reject the proven lies and falsehoods of the scientists.

Lord Monckton is demanding answers from Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – and not just over his use of dodgy data in his presentation where he told no less than 18 lies about the climate and the science.

The fraud must be exposed and the rationale behind ceding our sovereignty to a global bunch of bureaucrats must be fought with every breathe.

It is heartening that without fail every left wing blog is aghast at the failure of Carbonhagen.