×
See Comments down arrow

Call off the COPs

20 Nov 2024 | News Roundup

The main focus of this newsletter is, of course, COP29, which is still staggering on in Baku, Azerbaijan though we have staggered home. We had a good deal to say in real time and posted it in short videos, and we’ll have more to say in coming weeks. But the big thing on our minds currently is that the conference was a bust going in. It was a bust because despite covering the walls with dogmatic slogans about 1.5C they had actually given up on stopping greenhouse gas emissions several COPs ago, though the participants pretended otherwise. Instead they’re now focused on making rich countries promise to give poor countries oodles of cash to help them deal with non-existent surges in man-made bad weather through ineffective bureaucracies. Though focused isn’t exactly the right word. The whole process has decayed into endless meetings about creating mechanisms for coordinating standards on initiatives to work together to send strong signals about their intention to discuss mechanisms. And then, Climate Home News complained by email on Thursday, “Azerbaijan puts climate fund on ice”. Apparently they didn’t see it coming.

We did. But before we could manage to predict it boldly, it landed with a thud while we were here so we just get to say “Would have told you so.” And did, because at CDN we have long stressed the remarkable, even brazen impracticality of climate alarmists. They will be back for COP30 in Brazil and so on and so forth, bureaucratic organizations having a way of gathering something resembling momentum though it’s really inertia, partly because all those involved are so weighted down with money. But in a very real way it is all over, in that their rhetoric soars but their ambitions are nose-down in the dust with both wings off and the engine block cracked.

A major purpose for CDN in going to this COP conference, the first we have ever attended, was to get a flavour of what people were really doing here. It hasn’t been easy because a surprising amount of the key activity, using that term loosely, is in closed sessions. But having gone to Baku we now quote from the Climate Home News article to which that email pointed, accessed via the Internet in the conference centre which sits as an alien object in Baku rather like a spaceship from the home planet of homo conferensis (including this article being “supported by ICLIMATE, PEACE & TRANSBOUNDARY RESILIENCE PAVILION | COP29”) which sure sounds like it came from outer space:

“On COP29’s ‘finance day’, the Azerbaijan presidency was expected to unveil one of its flagship – and most controversial – initiatives: a new climate fund with money voluntarily put in by fossil fuel-producing countries and companies. But the Climate Finance Action Fund (CFAF) all but disappeared from the agenda. When Climate Home asked Azerbaijan’s lead negotiator Yalchin Rafiyev about it, he said cryptically that the COP hosts have established a working group to ‘work out a concept that would be workable and acceptable’ for donor countries. He added that it is ‘a very complex process to establish a new fund’ but that they have seen ‘a great interest’ by the potential contributors.”

And it is extraordinary the extent to which the participants, numbed by nearly three decades of this sort of thing, have come to think such verbiage accurately describes real things that matter.

Or consider this gem, which we assure you is quoted verbatim from the transcript we got from the Internet because the actual press conference was closed to such proles as we:

“We have worked intensively over the last days and hours to ensure that we can adopt the agenda on the first day. We have many significant priorities that the world is counting on us to deliver and we could not afford delay. We are delighted to say that we passed this first test and we got to work. Colleagues, yesterday we already secured critical progress on one of our key priorities – Article 6. Last month we hosted a meeting of the supervisory body for Article 6.4 in Baku. At that meeting, standards were proposed for how international carbon crediting projects will work. We built support for these standards at Pre-COP and worked intensively to lay the foundations for early endorsement. Yesterday, Parties reached consensus on the standards for Article 6.4 and a dynamic mechanism to update them. This is a critical step towards concluding Article 6 negotiations.”

You get the idea… and you can have it. First, they hadn’t even locked down the agenda before the conference started. Second, they all think everyone knows what “Article 6” is because everyone they know does. Third, the massive achievement of a pre-meeting meeting of the “supervisory body for Article 6.4” enabled them to reach no agreement, but to pave the way for agreement in the meeting on the standards and the “dynamic” mechanism so that the post-meeting might conclude the negotiations. And then they can have more meetings on implementation.

The people involved have lavish salaries and expense accounts and flit from venue to venue air-kissing. (And “A high-resolution photo of the press conference panel is available for download here. Please credit the image accordingly with “UN Climate Change / Kamran Enceladus”.) But it comes at the cost of mistaking what they are doing for achievement.

9 comments on “Call off the COPs”

  1. Some of the litany of irony in the green revolution is this:
    1) without this man-made climate boondoggle all these poorer countries would have invested in the necessary level of fossil-energy sources
    2) the purveyors of the "climate crisis" tell us that the new green energy sources are now cheaper than fossil-energy sources
    3) so why do they need oodles of EXTRA COP-inspired cash if we have found a way for them to save money!

  2. After a bureaucracy is established, its primary focus is maintaining the existence of the bureaucracy, solving any problems that the bureaucracy was formed to solve could be fatal to the bureaucracy!

  3. Right you are, just like a politician elected to office, a politician's main objective is the perpetuation of their incumbency.

  4. I can add very little to what Len,Thomas,and John M have said above.But there's not much complicated about "establishing a new fund".Just who pays how much,when,where,etc to who?I'd like to see how much Russia,China,OPEC,and the BRICS nations are going to chip in?lol

  5. BLAH, BLAH, BLAH AND MORE BLAH. Geopolitical Oliver Twists: Please sir I want more. Or, Green Grifters that have turned Bernie Madoff GREEN with envy.

  6. Right from the earliest COPs some bright bureaucrats in non-First World countries have probably realized that the whole concept of climate change could be used as a tool to extract guilt money out of the aforementioned First World. And of course that money can be made to flow through the hands of those bureaucrats. What's not to like?

  7. At least COP is returning to its roots. The first time the IPCC started beating the 'climate change' horse, it was because the head of it wanted to find an excuse for the developed countries to give money to the poor ones. He later admitted in an interview (or at least so summary of the interview I read claimed) that he wasn't that interested in the environment - it was all about wealth transfer.

    And, as everyone else has observed, these guys seem to have sort of realized their initial reason for existing is a fool's errand, so now they're trying to come up with something to do, so they can keep flying around the world using someone else's money. Perhaps a century from now, they will still be meeting, and talking about imminent threats.

  8. If the US pays anything towards COPs, I am hopeful that the new Elon Musk department of government efficiency will cancel it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

searchtwitterfacebookyoutube-play