Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, who made the trip to Copenhagen to tell delegates the American public is rejecting a national energy tax, opined that the UN climate change conference was a failure in USA Today. The market agrees with him. As expectations for a legally binding treaty to reduce greenhouse gas emissions fell, so did the price of carbon:
“European and United Nations carbon prices fell the most since February after the Copenhagen climate accord didn’t set targets that would boost demand for permits.
European Union carbon-dioxide allowances for delivery in December 2010 declined 8.3 percent to close at 12.45 euros ($17.82) on the European Climate Exchange in London. Today was the first day of trading since the summit concluded Dec. 19.
The agreed targets in the Copenhagen deal amount to a “bunch of negotiation ranges” that investors had already factored in, Trevor Sikorski, an emissions analysts for Barclays Capital, said in a phone interview after returning to London from the Danish capital. “It seems to be below even our modest expectations.”
The fall in the carbon market is very symbolic of the two week climate summit. Drummed up to be the next big climate treaty to globally reduce carbon dioxide emissions, Copenhagen was a failure, both procedurally and in its attempts to create a treaty. Although it will inevitably be spun as a significant step forward, it produced no legally binding agreement but instead an additional 40,500 tons of carbon dioxide. One friend put it like this: “I’ll believe global warming is an imminent threat to our health and the environment when those telling us to reduce our emissions start video-conferencing these summits rather than traveling on their private jets.”
Not only has the market responded to the failure of the Copenhagen conference, but the public is responding with skepticism to global warming – or the lack thereof. The American Enterprise Institute’s Karlyn Bowman summarizes four polls taken throughout the year that shows the public’s waning support for serious action on global warming. She offers the economy, Republicans rallying against Obama and the public’s confusion over the term “cap and trade” as reasons for falling support, and also highlights the public’s contempt for global warming alarmists continuing to cry wolf:
“People may simply be tired of hearing about the coming climate apocalypse. Only 28% in the new Harris poll knew that the subject of a major international conference in Copenhagen was climate change, demonstrating that although they’ve been bombarded with information by a sympathetic press, people just aren’t paying attention. In addition, media credibility is very low these days, and many Americans may simply be discounting what they read about climate change, especially after the recent climategate scandal. All in all, bad news for the activists.”
But good news for the economy and the market. Except the carbon market.
For all of Heritage’s work on Copenhagen, visit our Copenhagen Consequences Web site.
Science Fiction from the Climate Research Unit.
The CRU is has not been practicing the scientific method for almost two decades. The scientific method requires that the researcher publish the original data, models and procedures needed for a skeptical analysis of any of their work. Since they are not using the scientific method then they simply are not doing science, they are writing fiction.
Ponds and Fleishman may have been wrong, but they were at least real scientists. They did their experiments, published the results and their data, procedures and description of the apparatus and the methods. They where shown to be in error, fine, but they were still scientific in their work. The outputs from the CRU are in comparison junk, so I ask, why are these fictional ‘research’ papers allowed to remain in the realm of scientific publications? Why do people continue to quote the CRU as if they were the work of Einstein rather then the work of Mark Twain?
Quote:
"Why do people continue to quote the CRU as if they were the work of Einstein rather then the work of Mark Twain?"
It’s not only players like Al Gore, the Rothschilds and George Soros who stand to make a killing.
President Obama was a founding investment partner in the Chicago Climate Exchange.
The Chicago Climate Exchange is also written into the architecture of many of the proposals for alternative energy credits, carbon derivatives and other green financial products and stands to provide a worthwhile return on investment.
It would be very hard for them to admit this was nothing more than a sham.
"Just a little honest graft". At least I think that is a pretty good paraphrase of a quote attributed to either Boss Tweed or some other notorious politician. Maybe it was Richard Daley.
All those geniuses in Copenhagan actually believed that if you led a horse to water, he could walk on it.
Pingback: PA Pundits - International
I cannot believe the great information on this site