• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Morning Bell: They Can't Even Run A Conference, Let Alone the Global Economy

    The climate treaty negotiations inside Copenhagen’s Bella Center at the United Nations Climate Change Conference ground to a halt yesterday when the G-77, the largest group of developing nations, walked out. These poorer nations demanded that richer nations sign a treaty that includes a large transfer of wealth to the developing world to compensate for the developed world’s historical contribution to global warming. The G-77 countries ended their walkout after less than two hours, perhaps because global warming has had no apparent impact on December Copenhagen temperatures.

    Stuck out in the cold trying to get into the convention center that the developing countries had left were thousands of registered participants including delegations from universities, trade unions, and the press. It took more than 8 hours for non-governmental delegates, like Heritage’s Steven Groves and Ben Lieberman, to check in on December 14th. The New York Times described the registration system as chaotic, and notes that the overflow of freezing unregistered delegates forced the Copenhagen police to shut down the subway stop nearest the conference. The problem: despite some two years of planning, the United Nations organizers failed to come up with a way to fit the 45,000 people they registered for the conference into the 15,000 person capacity Bella Center. Oops.

    This entire circus would be funnier if not for what is at stake: trillions of dollars in regulatory actions and billions of dollars in aid to developing nations. And, if there were to be some miracle and nations in attendance did sign an agreement, who would be in charge of monitoring all these agreed to carbon reductions and oversight of all that development aid? The same entity that can’t even figure out that 45,000 people won’t into a 15,000 person building; the United Nations. Heritage fellow Ben Lieberman explains:

    Compliance with such a treaty would require massive changes to the U.S. economy, and U.N. bodies would decide many of the details of those changes. For example, one way to comply with Kyoto or subsequent treaties is to purchase so-called offsets to carbon dioxide emissions. Offsets allow regulated entities to pay others to undertake projects that presumably reduce emissions globally, such as paying landowners to plant trees or bankrolling the installation of solar panels in poor countries. In many cases, companies find offsets cheaper than actually reducing their own emissions. However, these projects have been subject to fraud. For example, some offset projects have not actually reduced emissions, while others involved industrial facilities with unnecessarily high initial emissions for the purpose of profiting by lowering them later. Currently, the Clean Development Mechanism under the U.N. decides which offset projects are acceptable. Thus, unelected international bureaucracies would control this critical aspect of a climate treaty, which would have significant implications for the U.S. economy.

    The costs of all this regulatory compliance would be huge. A Heritage Foundation analysis of the Waxman-Markey energy legislation found that for a household of four, energy costs (electric, natural gas, gasoline expenses) would rise by $436 in 2012 and by $1,241 by 2035, averaging $829 over that period. Higher energy costs would increase the cost of many other products and services. Overall, Waxman-Markey would reduce gross domestic product by $393 billion annually and by a total of $9.4 trillion by 2035.

    A new poll by Gallup/USA Today finds that when given no specifics, Americans generally support a climate treaty 55%-38%. But once you start informing Americans about the trade offs involved with such a deal, support plummets. 46% of Americans sat they worry more that the United States will take actions against global warming that cripple the U.S. economy. Furthermore, by a 7 to 1 margin Americans say the Obama administration should put a higher priority on improving the economy than reducing on global warming.

    Quick Hits:

    Progressive activists angered by Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (I-CT) opposition to the public option are now targeting his wife‘s work with the Susan G. Komen for the Cure breast cancer foundation.

    The founder of one of the largest liberal blogs on the web, Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos, is calling on fellow progressives to “kill this monstrosity coming out of the Senate.”

    Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) called on President Barack Obama Monday to veto the $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill that just passed through Congress.

    Al Gore’s office admitted yesterday that a percentage he quoted on polar ice melting in a speech was not actually supported by science.

    Energy consumers in California, Connecticut, and Texas are all in open revolt over “smart grid” power meters their utilities forced them to install.

    Posted in Ongoing Priorities [slideshow_deploy]

    27 Responses to Morning Bell: They Can't Even Run A Conference, Let Alone the Global Economy

    1. Tater Salad says:

      This so-called conference should have been called "The Extortion by Lies" Conference.

    2. Richard Cancemi, Arl says:

      Carbon DIoxide(CO2) is not a poison, Carbon MONoxide(CO) is. All living creatures exhale CO2 and plants need CO2 as much as humans need Oxygen(O2) and it is the plants that take in CO2 and give out O2. It is a wonderful symbiosis.

      Climate control is beyond Man's ability to control. We can and have been improving the Environment which we can control.

      This whole farce perpetrated by Al Gore and the rest of the evil idiots should be scrapped. Their only aim is to use this nonsense, that many people have bought into, to wreck Capitalism and Individual decisions.

      Their wish is to install World Socialism.

      The Socialist Elite will profit handsomely but the common folk will suffer severely.

      They must not be allowed to succeed in destroying what freedoms we have left.

      "Beware of Greeks bearing gifts".

      I will put my trust in God but not in Government!

    3. Blair Franconia, NH says:

      Let Al Gore subsidize the developing countries if they want to

      pollute. They DON'T want to take responsibility for their own

      pollution. They want US to do it. Why? Because we're Mr. and Mrs. Moneybags, we're the rich parent, aunt, uncle, whatever

      relative you choose, to bail them out. The recent Cimategate

      scandal proves that there's really no consensus on climate change. Contrary to what Al Gore, the Pope of Church of Our

      Lady of Climate Change, (j/k/s/o), says. If global warming is real, then why have the past 11 years since 1998, been the COOLEST on record?

    4. Ozzy6900, CT says:

      The entire issue is shear stupidity! If things are so bad, how can "buying credits" make it better? This is not rocket science here, anyone with a 3rd grade education can figure out that if you turn on the spigot, the water will flow even if you pay someone to look the other way.

      Of course CO2 is still a joke to me. We exhale it, trees use it to make oxygen and I love it in water (club soda). I really cannot believe how gullible the world is to let a useless Politician go ranting on as he does (Al Gore) and think that he is the savior of Earth!

      Let's say that we all buy into this entire theory and pour money into the "World Coffer". Do you really think Africa will recover come into the 21st Century? Do you really think that there will be no more hunger in 3rd World Countries? Do you really think that the World will equalize itself and live together in Peace? Do you want to buy a bridge that I am selling?

    5. Publius Huldah, Cook says:

      If Obama signs the "climate change" treaty and if the Senate ratifies it, it will not become part of the "supreme law of the land". It will be a mere usurpation and will deserve to be treated as such. All Americans who have taken an Oath to support The Constitution will be bound by their Oaths to disregard that "treaty" and all implementing legislation. The paper at the link explains why the treaty would be unconstitutional.

      http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2009/10/27/cli

    6. Tom Lusk says:

      Al Gore has a lot of nerve telling me how to live my life while the carbon footprint from his mansion is over 400 times the average Tennessee residence. Tell you what Al. Sell your house, stop flying private jets, and go ride a damn bike from now on. You have to walk the walk before you can talk the talk. Not the other way around. I'm tired of these liberal elitist trying to save the world with my money when they don't even support their own causes with the way they live their own lives. Lead by example before you tell me how to live.

    7. Dennis A. Social Cir says:

      I think the shareing of wealth was one of obama's campaign promises. That promise demanded by the G-77 is just trying to get the world to see what obama is doing to this country.If the other countries will not share the wealth then I am sure obama will be glad to borrow more money to sink us and give it to them. WE MUST VOTE IN 2010.

    8. Ron Derry NH says:

      They should have had it at Disney, where a true Mickey Mouse operation is run like a greased pig.

      Not only could Disney have handled the logistics, but they would have also catered to the inner child that is so prevalent in these shenanigans we call Global Threatening, where a small group of characters mesmerize millions at the cost of reality.

      Yes Disney should have hosted it and ran it as a theme park extravaganza where being Mickey Mouse is considered an act of sophistication and being swept away by your imagination is considered a harmless plus.

    9. Mike Butler, Jackson says:

      H'mmm! 45,000 registrants for 15,000 seats. Sounds like a money grab to me.

    10. Wallyblu, Zion, IL says:

      The climate changes from day to day and year to year and has been doing so for millions of years, even before man was around.

      The fact is that the climate is cooler now than it was a thousand years ago, so I ask how far under water was Venice in the year 1000?

    11. paul collins.the vil says:

      This climate control is just another method of controling the average citizen.If they really believed what they are saying, they wouldn't be causing so much of it.Those liars used as much polution fly to that conference as the average city produces in a decade,and they want us to conserve.GET REAL! THIS IS JUST ANOTHER WAY FOR INCREASE THEIR OWN RICHES!

    12. Freedom of Speech, T says:

      Here we go again. Historical reparations?

      Not now. Not ever. No matter what we do, the rest of the world is going to despise and hate us any way, especially when our leaders keep telling the world how screwed up we are.

      I guess that political strategy calls for an "A+"?

    13. Andrew, Canada says:

      Missing text: "…figure out that 45,000 people won’t [fit] into a 15,000 person building; the United Nations."

      And an excellent point.

    14. Stan says:

      Wanna shut up a Copenhagen disciple?

      Ask them how shutting down the clean industry here and moving production to the much dirtier industry in China will reduce pollution.

      Chinese industry already pollutes more than ours and Chinese industry will not be bound to reduce pollution under the new treaty.

      So even more production will move to the dirtier industry in China.

    15. Babs Lee,Ph. D. CA says:

      Climate Change is a Hoax. The UN should be abolished. Having lived in NYC for over 30 years and been invited to UN Affairs, I know their bumbling deceit while partaking of amenities beyond belief.

    16. Steven Douglas says:

      "…a large transfer of wealth to the developing world to compensate for the developed world’s historical contribution to global warming."

      Yes, that's who we owe. Let's pay them all back…to compensate them…for…what they…didn't get…um..

      …for what we…used (consumed?)…without them…before them (before they could?)…

      OK, I'm stuck. I'm sure it's obvious, just point me in the right direction. How do you say it? The reasons for "compensating" them, I mean.

      …in a way that actually makes sense.

    17. Whicket Williams Kin says:

      We must stop being Sheeple. I am afraid that 50 years of deliberately dumbing down of the american people, and their addiction to movies has made us to stupid to tell the difference between truth and lies. We are so much followers that we cannot produce leaders and when a leader like Sara Palin does appear, the sheeple listen to the lies told about her, instead of listening to her. they swallow lies instread of going to the source and making up their own minds. WE MUST FIGHT!!! Stop listening to professional politicians and elect our own leaders from amoung ourselves!!

    18. Rockncoal, West Virg says:

      This conference is a joke and waste of time. We need to stop focusing on "global warming" in the context that it is something that never existed before man started burning fossil fuels and will ultimately end the world as we know it. "Climate change" is a more suitable name for this topic, and it has been occurring since the earth was first formed.

      Polar ice caps have been absent through much of earths history. Many areas of the interior of the North American continent were covered with shallow inland seas and swamps millions of years ago. The Sahara Desert was a lush green region 6000-10000 years ago before becoming a desert, and many scientists believe it will be green again. There have been tropical fossils observed in cores taken in the Arctic and Antarctic.

      The point is that the earth's climate has always gone through cycles of change before there were any human contributions and always will. We can hysterically implement radical policies that subject the world to economic misery and it will have as much affect on climate change as dumping a teaspoon of salt in the ocean! Humans need to get over themselves – this is not a force that we can control and manipulate as we see fit.

      That does not mean we cannot be stewards of the environment and minimize pollution where feasible. Great progress has been made under the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts from the times when the Cuyahoga River caught on fire in Cleveland, or when drivers needed to use their headlights at noon in Pittsburgh due to smoke. I think in recent years we have been on the right track in the US as far as environmental policy and regulation are concerned. It should be stopped short, however, of turing the country into a park where no one can do anything and our economy falls into greater shambles than it is already. If we want to control "change", we need to focus our energy and resources on problems that we actually have the power to control like hunger, poverty, and the spread of contagious diseases.

    19. Linda,Naples,FL says:

      Add this to the list of changes that Obama promised on his campaign for presidency. When are we going to make this madness stop. Is there any way to stop his changes in their tracks before our country is changed for our future generations to suffer for OUR "indescretions".

    20. Pingback: Let’s Personalize Obama’s Repeal of the Mexico City Policy

    21. Pingback: Global warming reporters left out in the cold | NewsReal Blog

    22. Ella QUINN N.C. says:

      I agree with richard camcemi.

    23. Ella QUINN N.C. says:

      I agree with richard cancemi.

    24. Pingback: Journal: ClimateGate 16 December 2009 Afternoon « Public Intelligence Blog

    25. Pingback: U.N.-Intelligent « The Simple Facts

    26. Pingback: They Can’t Even Run A Conference, Let Alone the Global Economy | Tampa912 Project

    27. Pingback: U.N.Intelligent | ARC Blogs: Austin Rhetoric Club

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×