Globalists, Climate Alarmists Move Forward with Deindustrialization Agenda

Reuters
April 8, 2011

Rich and poor nations overcame deep divisions on Friday to cut a deal that maps out U.N. climate negotiations for 2011, building on last December’s agreement in Mexico and hardening the focus on tougher issues.

The deal in Bangkok came after nearly four days of talks that some developing nations said were needed to “recalibrate” U.N. climate negotiations after last year’s Cancun agreements.

They wanted an agenda that tackled the fate of the Kyoto Protocol on fighting global warming and rich countries’ pledges to cut emissions, and clarified sources of cash for poorer nations rather than just building on what was agreed at Cancun.

But many rich nations said some developing nations were simply trying to row back on what was agreed in Cancun and this undermined negotiations this year that culminate in the South African city of Durban from late November.

Many nations were unhappy that much of the April 3-8 meeting was taken up arguing over the agenda, with the United States saying the delay dampened the mood, while some developing nations had misgivings about the end result. All expressed an urgency to press ahead with negotiations.

“It’s less rosy today than when we came in (at the start of the meeting),” senior U.S. negotiator Jonathan Pershing told reporters. In particular, he said some countries wanted to renegotiate the Cancun decisions.

“I don’t think that’s going to be constructive. What became evident is that we can expect more of that going forward,” he said.

Tosi Mpanu Mpanu, chair of the Africa Group, said he had mixed feelings. “Thank god we came up with an agenda. It’s a pity it took so long. What does it say for the rest of the year?”

FRAUGHT

Cancun is widely regarded as saving the often fraught negotiations from collapse.

Nations agreed curbs on the loss of tropical forests, schemes to transfer clean technology to poorer nations and help them adapt to climate change impacts, and a goal for rich countries to provide $100 billion a year in aid from 2020.

But it side-stepped tougher issues, such as whether to extend or replace the Kyoto Protocol, with concerns growing that a new pact or extension to Kyoto will not be agreed before the pact’s first phase ends next year.

Kyoto binds almost 40 industrialized nations to cut greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 5.2 percent below 1990 levels during the five-year period 2008-2012. A second phase is meant to increase those cuts for rich nations.

It is the only pact imposing legal obligations on emissions cuts and the U.N. talks have been hobbled by disagreement over how to extend that obligation to all major economies, such as China, the world’s top greenhouse gas emitter.

The United States is No. 2. It never ratified Kyoto.

In Bangkok, there was a fresh focus on trying to find a compromise, with the agreed agenda stating there should be a continued discussion of the legal options of a new agreement that captures emissions curbs by all major economies.

“This evening in Bangkok, parties agreed an agenda to work toward a comprehensive and balanced outcome at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Durban,” said U.N. climate chief Christiana Figueres.

But disputes still loom over the size of rich nations’ pledges to cut emissions, with the United Nations saying they are not enough to avoid average global warming of less than 2 degrees Celsius.

Nations agreed in Cancun to work to keep the rise below this level to stave off ever greater extremes of droughts and floods, crop failures and rising sea levels.

Environmental groups were worried by the outcome of Bangkok.

“Once again, delegates could not reach agreement over key issues, including the future of the Kyoto Protocol, bringing the talks to a screeching halt almost from the beginning,” said Tasneem Essop of WWF.

Others pointed to the urgency to act to fight the impacts of climate change.

“There’s uncertainty about where the Cancun agreements take us, and can countries meet their commitments, and is it enough? And I think that was really at the heart of the agenda debate,” said Angela Anderson of the U.S. Climate Action Network.

The Road to Serfdom: Globalists push to shut off Western World

Puppet presidents and top mega corporations sell out the people to bring about neo-feudalism and de-industrialization to the Western World

Infowars.com

Fury is building over rolling nationwide blackouts triggered by the Obama administration’s deliberate agenda to block the construction of new coal-fired plants, as local energy companies struggle to meet Americans’ power demands amidst some of the coldest weather seen in decades.

– As we reported yesterday, four hospitals in Texas reacted furiously after they were hit with planned outages despite being promised they would be spared even as power to Super Bowl venues remains uninterrupted.

– Thousands in New Mexico have been left without natural gas as Gov. Susana Martinez on Thursday declared a state of emergency. “Due to statewide natural gas shortages, I have ordered all government agencies that do not provide essential services to shut down and all nonessential employees to stay home” on Friday, Martinez said after meeting with public safety personnel in Albuquerque,” reports the Associated Press.

– Borderland residents have been asked to limit their use of natural gas as the Texas Gas Service asks that larger commercial facilities voluntarily close their doors to save supplies.

– People in Tucson have been asked to limit their use of hot water and moderate their thermostat levels to save on energy.

– Shortages of natural gas in San Diego County has forced utility companies to “cut or reduce the gas supplied to some of their largest commercial and industrial customers,” reports North County Times.

– In El Paso, “Hundreds of thousands of electricity customers continue to face periodic blackouts, and nearly 900 gas customers still have no heat,” reports the El Paso Times, with El Paso Electric resorting to using generators in a struggle to meet demand while still having to implement forced outages.

Coal-fired power plants are used to convert coal to synthetic natural gas. The Obama administration’s efforts to block the construction of new clean-burning coal plants has massively exacerbated this week’s outages.

Mexico has now announced that it will suspend supplying power to southern US states, underscoring how America has been left completely dependent and desperate as a result of the Obama administration’s war on the coal industry.

Cold weather is not the primary culprit behind the power outages that have hit many areas of the country this week. The real blame lies with the Obama administration’s deliberate war against the efforts of local power companies to meet America’s energy needs by building new plants, the vast majority of which have been blocked by judges, governors and the EPA over the last four years at the behest of the Obama administration in the name of preventing global warming.

State authorities in Texas have been engaged in a long-running battle with the EPA as the feds attempt to block the construction of new plants by enforcing adherence to new clean air permit regulations that cripple smaller companies’ ability to afford desperately needed new energy centers and plants. Twelve states are mounting a legal challenge against EPA restrictions that threaten to bankrupt the entire industry.

But it’s not just in Texas where the federal government has embarked on an all out siege against energy independence.

– Back in July 2008, a Superior Court judge in Fulton County blocked the construction of a coal plant in Georgia, citing global warming concerns and the need to limit CO2 emissions.

– In January 2009, the Obama EPA blocked approval for a coal-fired power plant in South Dakota, claiming the state, “didn’t meet requirements under the Clean Air Act in part of its proposed permit for the plant.”

– As Governor of Kansas, Obama’s current Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius slapped a de facto ban on the construction of all new coal-fired plants across the state.

– Last month, Senators in Obama’s home state of Illinois blocked the construction of a clean-burning coal gasification and power generating plant.

– As a result of the EPA’s recent remand of air permits, Shell Oil announced yesterday that it has “dropped plans to drill in the Arctic waters of the Beaufort Sea this year,” ensuring more shortages and higher energy prices for Americans already laboring under soaring food costs.

The federal government’s siege against independent power companies’ efforts to build coal-fired plants is part of the unfolding agenda to de-industrialize the United States even as China and Mexico build new power plants at ever accelerating speeds.

Global warming alarmists have consistently gone on record to openly voice their agenda to de-industrialize the United States in the name of saving the planet.

In his new book, author and environmentalist Keith Farnish called for acts of sabotage and environmental terrorism in blowing up dams and demolishing cities in order to return the planet to pre-industrial society. Prominent NASA global warming alarmist and Al Gore ally Dr. James Hansen endorsed Farnish’s book.

The global elite resolved to exploit contrived fears about climate change to de-industrialize the United States back in 1991 when the Club of Rome, a powerful globalist NGO committed to limiting growth and ushering in a post-industrial society, said in their report, The First Global Revolution, “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…. All these dangers are caused by human intervention… The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”

In 1969, Dr. Richard Day, the National Medical Director of the Rockefeller-sponsored “Planned Parenthood,” asserted that a move towards a “unified global system” would necessitate the sabotage of American industry.

“Each part of the world will have a specialty and thus become inter-dependent, he said. The US will remain a center for agriculture, high tech, communications, and education but heavy industry would be “transported out,” Day stated.

In 2008 Obama openly stated his plan to bankrupt the coal industry.

Fraudulent Climate Accord Passed in Cancun

Even third world nation Bolivia objected the agreement and labeled it a blank check for developed nationsdue to back room deals not published in the approved document.

Xinhua

The U.N. climate change conference finally came up with a way forward in the fight against global warming early Saturday after an all-night session, overruling objections from Bolivia.

The agreement covers establishment of a new Green Climate Fund to help poor nations, measures to protect tropical forests and a mechanism for clean energy technology transfer to poorer nations. It also reaffirmed a commitment reached at last year’s Copenhagen conference to provide 100 billion U.S. dollars a year to help developing countries fight global warming.

Xie Zhenhua, head of the Chinese delegation, said the conference was a success and the Kyoto Protocol had been reaffirmed.

Xie said the parties advanced with the guidance of the “Bali Road Map” and reached success at Cancun.

“The achievements of the conference are the result of the parties’ efforts and the advantages of the multilateral mechanism, which can promote the negotiation progress. We have full confidence in the multilateral mechanism after the conference,” he said.

The next climate conference will be held in Durban, South Africa, in 2011. According to Xie, the parties are confident about the South Africa conference. “We can step forward in South Africa, if we can continue to consolidate and carry on the spirit of unity and coordination formed at the Cancun conference,” he said.

Although the results were positive, it could not be described as “perfect.” Some details were left to solve in South Africa, Xie said.

Mexican Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa, chair of the conference, said, “The texts on the table represent the work of many delegations that carry the hope of delivering what our societies expect.”

“I take note of your opinion, but if there are no other objections, this text is approved,” Espinosa told Pablo Solon, the Bolivian representative.

Bolivia rejected the two documents of the deal, saying they amounted to a blank check for developed nations because the commitments set were in documents which had not yet been published.

Solon also challenged the validity of the agreement, saying the rules stipulated it could not be passed when one state strongly objected. “We will get every international body necessary to make sure that the consensus is respected,” he said.

“Consensus does not mean that one nation can choose to apply a veto on a process that other nations have been working on for years. I cannot ignore the opinion of another 193 states that are parties,” Espinosa replied. Her response received a huge applause from the floor.

Another Bolivian official also complained that his nation had been denied basic rights by the conference.

Read more…

European Commission opens the Coffin of Global Warming

Financial Times

The European Commission reopened an acrimonious argument on climate change policy on Wednesday, with the presentation of adiscussion document on toughening its targets on greenhouse gas emissions.

Some member states, including the UK, are calling for the European Union to cut its emissions by 30 per cent compared with 1990 levels by 2020, a substantial strengthening of the 20 per cent already pledged.

But nations such as Poland and Italy are adamant that the higher level of cuts represents too heavy a burden on their industries.

In the document, the Commission noted that the effects of the recession, which pushed down emissions across the bloc, had made it much easier and cheaper to cut emissions.

The cost of meeting the 20 per cent target has dropped from €70bn to €48bn per year since 2008, according to the report. Moving to a 30 per cent target would cost an extra €33bn per year by 2020.

Weighed against this would also be benefits, such as lower health costs from air pollution.

Some member states say moving to 30 per cent would stimulate the growth of low-carbon technologies, and would make it easier for Europe to meet the 2050 target of cutting emissions by 80 per cent.

Chris Huhne, the UK’s secretary of state for energy and climate change, said: “Global climate change is the biggest challenge the world faces and securing an ambitious deal is a priority for this government. That’s why we will push for the EU to demonstrate leadership by supporting an increase in the EU emissions reduction target to 30 per cent by 2020.”

But the last time the possibility of 30 per cent cuts was discussed, there was such opposition to it that a compromise was established of cutting emissions by 20 per cent by 2020 but offering to move to higher cuts if other nations also agreed to substantial reductions. This was intended to encourage other countries to up their offers of taking action on greenhouse gases.

That did not happen at the Copenhagen climate summit last December, when the Commission was forced to admit that no other country was calling on the EU to move to the higher target. Critics of the higher target say agreeing unilaterally to the increase in cuts only leaves Europe without leverage in the international negotiations.

Wednesday’s announcement was timed to come just before the restart on May 31 of the stalled United Nations talks on a new treaty to replace the Kyoto protocol.

However, the document does not represent a firm plan by the Commission to push for member states to adopt the 30 per cent target. Instead, it has been carefully positioned as a way of providing information on the costs and benefits of toughening the target.

Connie Hedegaard, commissioner for climate change, is well aware that any proposal to increase the target will face vocal opposition from some member states, and from many sections of business.