Only weeks after the peculiar, entirely symbolical and possibly dangerous Earth Hour gimmick, it’s now the 42′nd Earth Day. Hard to be against the Earth, but I’ve never understood the tendency to use these events to suggest an ongoing conflict between the earth and humanity.  

CFACT International President David Rothbard comments:

“Celebrate them all, we should. But as faithful followers of CFACT know, today’s environmentalism (at least the kind that gets all the attention) isn’t so much about reveling in the beauty of nature and its amazements as it is in using this lofty matter to hammer away at human productivity, prosperity, and plenty. Saddest and ironic of all, of course, is that people prospering is the very thing that helps us steward the environment the best.”

 You might add that without humans, there wouldn’t be an Earth Day, or that without human action, in the form of development and exploitation, there would be no humans. Ecological nostalgia is sometimes tempting to some, but I believe we all realize that if time travel was possible, none of us would survive even minutes in a prehistoric era.

 So, let’s take the opportunity to celebrate the innovations that increasingly is making it possible to lead a life even in areas still ridden by hardship. Not of prehistoric proportions, but at least with meagre possibilities to adjust housing and clothing to the weather, choose what we eat, or even have access to fresh drinking water.

Today’s sunny news is that Brittish scientists now have shown that hidden groundwater resources wating to be exploited in Africa, may amount to a hundred times the more shallow wells being used today.

  ”We estimate total groundwater storage in Africa to be 0.66 million km³ (0.36–1.75 million km³). Not all of this groundwater storage is available for abstraction, but the estimated volume is more than 100 times estimates of annual renewable freshwater resources on Africa. Groundwater resources are unevenly distributed: the largest groundwater volumes are found in the large sedimentary aquifers in the North African countries Libya, Algeria, Egypt and Sudan. Nevertheless, for many African countries appropriately sited and constructed boreholes can support handpump abstraction (yields of 0.1–0.3 l s⁻¹), and contain sufficient storage to sustain abstraction through inter-annual variations in recharge.” (Environmental Research Letters)

Getting access to this life saving resource will require skill and technology. Luckily, both have been let to flourish in parts of the world, less hurt by dictatorships, wars, socialism and misguided green activism and legislation.

A bit confused. As every year. Rather used to working and traveling across time zones, but the daylight saving time switch somehow doesn’t really get along with my head. At least no heart attack, though they are reported to be more frequent in connection to the switch. And all the farmers, and their cattle, sigh once again.

Sincerely hope too, that niehter I, nor anyone else, will be injured during the upcoming, annual Earth Day, but that might be too much to hope for. The stupidity is on again. I write about it every year, apparently to no avail, as it’s still on.

No one, at least no one serious about it, even among the enthusiasts claim that cutting all lights for one hour, would do anything to save energy, or the climate. At best it could disrupt the electricity flow and cause more severe power failures. If that is the goal.

It’s symbolic, it’s claimed. I certainly agree. If anything, it serves as a reminder of how important electricity and energy is. Not just to the hospitals, that hopefully wont participate this year either, or the traffic lights, also, hopefully not out, but for most of our daily lives. Returning to candles, or to the era before the tamed fire, is not really a desirable option.

We’ll see how many accidents there will be this year. Luckily the counter movement Life Hour, (available on Facebook), seems to be gaining some momentum. Lighten up!

Wiser from the Copenhagen hysteria, all sides – except President Zuma, who is forced to show some enthusiasm, and in a way The Holy Father, who wants a “credible” outcome (nothing wrong with credibility) - seem to agree that COP17 in Durban wont accomplish anything. As for me, I’m content with that, but it’s still fun to watch the show, including side appaerances from all places. Guess we can look forward to a lot of that.

In the UK, PM Cameron’s “Green Guru”, Steve Hilton suddenly comes out as a realist, saying he doubts the entire Global Warming idea.

Reports the Daily Mail:

‘I’m not sure I believe in it,’ he announced at a meeting of the Energy Department, prompting one aide to blurt out: ‘Did I just hear that correctly?’

Meanwhile, Canada seems to abandon ship as far as Kyoto goes.

“[Environment Minister, Peter] Kent said in the House of Commons on Nov. 22 he won’t sign a document at the Durban conference that extends the Kyoto targets.

‘Canada goes to Durban with a number of countries sharing the same objective, and that is to put Kyoto behind us,’ Kent said.” according to CTV News.

And this is just the beginning. Roughly, on the table is: Kyoto, expiring next year. The EU, not having any problems with the obligations, are for an extension, and the big players never joined. A global binding treaty that was hoped for in Copenhagen and now, if ever, might appear at least as a draft resolution in three years.

Remains the 100 billions, pledged, but still unclear how, to be spread over the earth. This is COP17. Guess the by now professional summit globerotters find that a fair sum for others to pay, in order to continue the circus.

A screwdriver often comes in handy. But not as a soup ingredient. Black pepper is essential in any cooking. But don’t try repairing your bike with it.

Calculation of GDP is, not only among laymen like myself, but also among skilled economists, regarded as a tricky tool indeed. Still, it’ very useful, also for the general public, in trying to grasp all sorts of economic facts and development.

Since the mid 90′s, scientists, but predominantly politicians, have been playing with the concept of a Green GDP, expanding the data to include environmental costs. This process is now gaining speed, e.g., in the World Bank.

This is a questionable path. Even as, naturally, growth and hardship can be linked to environmental factors, it’s not the same thing as to say that environmental factors should be regarded as exclusive data in their own right. Further, changing the calculation methods is difficult for several reasons. You need an international consensus, otherwise comparisons will be meaningless. GDP figures are used to calculate changes over time. If you mess with it, you will have to – somehow – compensate against historical figures.

And including “climate change”, as is being more and more talked about? Careful here. This is an ongoing debate and predictions are all but clear. And how do you intend to translate the virtual lack of global warming over the past decade into economic figures?

GDP, with all it’s shortcomings, is at least useful for showing the development of the GDP/Tax pressure ratio, over time, and in comparison with other countries. Adding new, rather shaky variables seems like little more than inventing another tool for the politicians to polish their statistics.

Just think again, before you pour those extra spices in the soup, try to fix the brakes on your bike. Or try to fix international, economic statistics.

I Don't Want No Climate War

Apparently the UN climate meetings are not enough. Now, the Security Council will get involved.

From our beloved Guardian, we learn that: “A special meeting of the United Nations security council is due to consider whether to expand its mission to keep the peace in an era of climate change.”

We know that everyone was stressed up at the latest Bonn conference, but isn’t this going a bit to far?

The Security Council, like it not, is a product of the Cold War. In essence in order to avoid a destruction of the planet by a nuclear war. Hence the peculiar rules for who’s in or out. Again, like it or not, but this is a serious thing.

Here’s my modest recommendation: Just leave people alone. We don’t need no Green Helmets. There has basically been no Global Warming for over ten years, and even if it should come, infrastructure, economy, market economy you name it, is the only way out.

There might not be an imminent threat of nuclear war, but that’s no excuse for making up another Armageddon.

DAVID ROTHBARD & CRAIG RUCKER - The Washington Times

As the United Nations wrapped up its recent climate conference in Bonn, talks organizer Christiana Figueres proclaimed that climate change is the “the most important negotiation the world has ever faced.” Faced with real problems – financial meltdowns, unemployment, war and genuine human suffering – the world no longer agrees.

It’s a good thing human productivity doesn’t threaten the global thermostat the way the U.N. would have us believe. If it did, we’d be cooked. Countries rich and poor are backing away from commitments they made years ago during rosier economic times, before the public became aware of Climategate, renewable energy costs and genuine debate.

The Kyoto Protocol, the only binding international agreement signed since the global warming scare began, expires after 2012. Canada, Russia and Japan have declared they will not renew; China and the United States never signed it, and the U.S. has made it plain it is not about to. And poor countries are becoming less enamored about signing on, as they realize hard economic times mean there will be little climate “mitigation” and “restitution” money coming their way from (formerly) rich countries.

Even die-hard warmists increasingly recognize that bureaucratic solutions hatched at these conferences are rife with waste, fraud and abuse. They may enrich a few, but they are powerless to control Earth’s climate.

In March, German investigators reported that 850 million euros disappeared when shady companies swarmed into carbon trading, emissions and energy businesses.Criminal enterprises raked in tens of millions, fended off regulators with delaying tactics and then announced bankruptcy or vanished. An Italian sting operation resulted in arrests of wind-farm developers who billed the country for subsidies but never produced a kilowatt of electricity.

London’s liberal Guardian newspaper was aghast to learn that the World Bank’s Biocarbon Fund had arranged to pay European “entrepreneurs” $1 million to establish a system under which 60,000 Kenyans would restrict themselves to farming under rigidly controlled, inefficient, “sustainable” techniques. For that they will receive $1.4 million over 20 years.

That’s right, the beneficent World Bank will enrich more Europeans so 60,000 Kenyans can receive $23.83 apiece for 20 years of drudgery, poverty and misery – a princely $1.19 a year.

Even the European Union finally understands how little bureaucracy and energy deprivation dictates the climate. “It is not enough for the EU to simply sign up for another commitment period,” EU climate representative Jurgen Lefevere admitted. “We only represent 11 percent of global emissions.”

Burning fossil fuels contributes only a fraction of total annual atmospheric carbon dioxide buildup, and the EU contributes just 11 percent of that. The EU’s commitment to slashing CO2 emissions by 20 percent invites corruption, has no control over Chinese or Indian emissions and has no effect on the climate.

The biggest divide evident in Bonn was between the United States and large emerging economies. Even Obama administration officials who are thoroughly committed to man-made global warming catastrophe claims finally recognize the fraud problem. In Bonn, the U.S. insisted that all countries subject their emission reduction claims to verification.

However, China will accept only an agreement that lacks verification – and guarantees the right to cheat. Meanwhile, the Chinese are happy to be “the world’s leader” in manufacturing wind turbines – 95 percent – which they gladly sell to guilt-ridden Western countries.

China and other nations support the notion that prosperous countries owe the world restitution for the “sin” of engaging in the Industrial Revolution and becoming prosperous. We can only hope some nation’s representative will have the courage to remind China and its fellow climate travelers that the West never forced them to spend 50 years mired in communism, bureaucracy and stagnation.

While it is encouraging that the global warming camp no longer has things entirely its own way, celebration would be premature. For all the gnashing of teeth and complaining about corporate influence we hear from global warming bureaucrats and campaigners, the truth is that, today, the warmists are the establishment.

Billions are being redistributed to researchers, developing nations, carbon speculators, alternative energy investors and other carbon profiteers – who would like to turn billions into trillions. Pity the poor carbon traders whose markets expire with Kyoto. Not all have their villa in the sun yet.

But rest assured, they will do whatever is necessary to get theirs. Big Warming will not surrender its hold on Western taxpayers without a fight.

The warmist camp plans to retake the initiative at the December U.N. conference in Durban, South Africa. It intends to turn back the clock to the time when the media would attribute any weather or nature event to global warming, without question or critical examination. Al Gore’s recent RollingStone diatribe essentially calls on the media to censure climate disaster skeptics and adopt a one-sided man-made warming narrative.

The NewYorkTimes may go along, but the huge and growing alternative media will not. This week’s Heartland Institute international conference of climate-alarm skeptics in Washington will only reinforce the lack of evidence for man-made Armageddon, and the disastrous consequences of staying the current U.N. course.

Many believe the last-minute appearance by dozens of world leaders crippled the Copenhagen climate conference. But with the big names absent from Cancun, Mexico, and now Bonn, the U.N. wants them back.

Ms. Figueres capped the Bonn conference with a call for “high-level political attention.” If she succeeds, just imagine the mischief a gathering of heads of state, foreign ministers, bureaucrats, researchers, green campaigners and carbon profiteers can do at an African beach resort.

Then imagine how nearly impossible it will be to repair the harm they inflict. Action must be taken to avert such a result.

David Rothbard is president of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow. Craig Rucker is CFACT’s executive director.

CLICK TO VIEW NOW

This morning CFACT & EIKE presented a scientific briefing at the UN conference on climate change in Bonn, Germany.  The briefing was introduced by Wolfgang Müller of EIKE and Berlin’s Manhattan Institut and featured Professor em. Friedrich Karl Ewert a geologist from Paderborn University and Dr. Horst Borchert of the Johannes-Gutenberg Universität in Mainz.  The presentations build upon the analysis of Professor S. Fred Singer and provide information on the geological record, solar activity and the big question — is our climate governed by man or nature?

Holger Thuss, Executive Director, CFACT Europe

The UN climate conference in Bonn opens today and CFACT has partnered with EIKE to send a delegation led by Dr. Holger Thuss.  The UNFCCC is banking on these subsidiary conferences to set the stage for major agreements in Durban South Africa in December.  The global warming scare and the inept and corrupt nature of proposed solutions have fallen far out of favor with the public and policy makers are taking notice and defecting.  CFACT has scheduled a  UNFCCC hosted press conference for Wednesday, 14:00 CET in the Hotel Maritim’s room Haydn.  The press conference may be webcast live by the UN.  Stay in touch with CFACT Europe for further updates from Bonn.

French wire service AFP reports that Russia, Japan and Canada have all indicated that they will cease following carbon limits agreed to under the Kyoto protocol.  In addition, President Obama stated at a dinner Thursday night that he does not intend to bring the U.S. into Kyoto.

The global warming folks are desperate to obtain a renewal of Kyoto at the UN conference on climate change in Durban, South Africa in December.  The expiration of Kyoto places the hopes and dreams of carbon profiteers in peril as their carbon trading markets are set to expire along with the protocol.  The expiration of Kyoto also places the fortunes of those seeking to cash in on offset, subsidy and other raids upon the treasuries of developed nations in jeopardy.  We suggest the UNFCCC create a fund to support career counseling and the transition of global warming campaigners and profiteers into constructive endeavours.

Which nation will be next to abandon the global warming scare?

READ MORE at French Expatica

The EU Comission has a long standing cooperation with  UNEP. Recently, this resulted in joint statement, outlining priorities and strategies for environmental work within a number of areas.

At a first reading, suspicious that I was, I was, at least partly, surprised. Apart from the by now apparently compulsory sections on biodiversity and global warming, the part about efficiency included expressions like “economic instruments”, “the economy delivers what citizens want” and vague references to market mechanisms.

And then I read it again.

The economic instruments turned out to be “procurement” (for some reason, they left out the word public). The economy should not only deliver according to the above, but being led to do so via increased political cooperation. Above all, some otherwise sound observations, invariably leads to the conclusion that what is called for is more government, local, state, and – possibly – global.

That was a short romance. OK, I understand that the people behind this want to maximise their own influence, and yes, I know both institutions have their agendas, but for a moment I thought that some realistic authors had been involved in the process. For example people who recognize the quite obvious fact that efficiency is market driven. I’m well aware of the political efforts made to help the market, in reality disrupting it, but the constant improvement in both production methods and technology for energy consuming products, is entirely dependent on competition, profit interest and entrepreneurs who are left alone by government to do their job.