Archives quotidiennes :

climate-debate

UN COP FLOP’: Most Countries Will Miss Climate Targets Ahead Of Major Summit

by A. Streb, Oct 28, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch 

Countries are twiddling their thumbs over climate goals.

ver 100 countries have missed the deadline to tighten their climate targets ahead of November’s United Nations conference as President Donald Trump has rolled back some U.S. climate policies. [emphasis, links added]

Though the Paris Climate Agreement requires countries to set more stringent climate targets, many have yet to submit updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) plans as COP30 inches closer.

The climate talks will be held in Belém, Brazil, from Nov. 6 to Nov. 21, 2025, but the Trump administration has yet to select a delegation to attend as it continues to enact majorderegulatory moves in the energy space.

“Most nations realize the cost of cutting carbon dioxide is painful and unnecessary. It is no surprise that nation after nation [is] trying to skirt their prior greenwashing pledges,” James Taylor, president of The Heartland Institute, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Most countries missed the Feb. 10 deadline, though the U.N. reportedly was accepting of this as long as it meant they were working on their climate goals, according to The Associated Press.

…

Morano previously told the DCNF that Democrats and Europeans seem to be retreating from aggressive climate policies as the American “public is not tolerating virtue signaling about saving the planet anymore.”

Several corporate media outlets and some Democrats have recently shifted away from climate policy and are instead focusing their message on rising electricity prices and reliability.

climate-debate

Hiding the Endangerment Finding’s Systemic Biases – Politico’s Failed Attack on DOE’s Climate Science Report

by M. Lewis, Oct 28, 2025 in WUWT

Politico recently published an article by Benjamin Storrow, Chelsea Harvey, Scott Waldman, and Paula Friedrich titled “How a major DOE report hides the whole truth on climate change.” The reporters’ objective is obvious and their strategy simple. They aim to discredit the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposal to repeal the December 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Findingby discrediting a Department of Energy (DOE) draft report which is cited in the repeal proposal’s climate science discussion.

From a statutory perspective, that strategy is not a winner. The EPA’s proposal to repeal the Endangerment Finding (plus motor vehicle emission standards adopted by the agency in April 2024) relies chiefly on legal arguments that do not presuppose specific climate change assessments.

However, the Politico article could sway the court of public opinion, which in turn could influence future litigation. Such influence would be undeserved. The article ignores foundational biases compromising the scientific basis of the 2009 Endangerment Finding. Further, its criticisms of the DOE report repeatedly misfire or backfire, and none comes close to refuting any of the report’s conclusions.

Background    

The 2009 Endangerment Finding purported to determine that carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from new motor vehicles “cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” The Finding was the impetus for the Obama administration EPA’s adoption, in 2010, of GHG emission standards for model year 2012-2016 motor vehicles. To one degree or another, the Finding undergirds all subsequent climate policy regulations proposed or promulgated by the Obama and Biden administrations.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

How Climate Dogma Is Keeping The World’s Poor In The Dark

by P. Keeney, Oct 27, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch 

Poverty in India
Among all the discussions about climate change, one aspect of the debate gets far too little attention: the moral and practical costs that climate alarmism places on the developing world. [emphasis, links added]

For those in the West, energy is so plentiful that it’s almost invisible. We flick a switch, start a car, or refrigerate food without considering the miracle of power that makes it all possible.

But for billions of people in Africa, South Asia, and Latin America, energy is not just a convenience in the background; it’s the difference between subsistence and progress, between darkness and light, between education and ignorance.

It is easy for comfortable Westerners to moralize about “ending fossil fuels.” For the world’s poor, that slogan means ending development itself.

Wind and solar can supplement power in modern economies, but they cannot satisfy the needs of industrialization. A solar panel may charge a phone or light a hut, but it cannot operate a factory, a hospital, or a modern water system.

The idea of “leapfrogging” fossil fuels and moving straight to renewables is delusional.

As Danish economist Bjorn Lomborg points out in his book “False Alarm,” a solar panel:

“can provide electricity for a light at night and a cell phone charge, but it cannot deliver enough power for cleaner cooking to reduce indoor air pollution, refrigeration to keep food fresh, or the machinery needed for agriculture and industry to lift people out of poverty.”

For the rural poor in Africa or South Asia, what they need is not less energy but more reliable, affordable, and plentiful energy similar to what the West has long enjoyed.

Yet Western governments and financial institutions have become increasingly obstructive. Under pressure from climate activists, the World Bank and other lenders have reduced fundingfor coal and natural gas projects—the very fuels that helped Western countries prosper.

Wealthy nations, which industrialized through the use of fossil fuels, now refuse the same opportunity to others. It’s a form of moral imperialism: a policy of “Do as we say, not as we did.”

The consequences are significant. In sub-Saharan Africa, around 600 million people still lack electricity. Women cook with wood or dung, inhaling toxic fumes that claim thousands of lives each year.

…

better to know...?, climate-debate

Bill Gates Retreats From Climate Doom, Tells Activists To Focus On Urgent ‘Social Issues’

by T. Catenacci, Oct 29, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch 

Gates, who spent a fortune warning about ‘climate disaster,’ now says it ‘will not be the end of civilization’.

Billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates, who spent tens of millions of dollars funding far-left climate initiatives and authored a book warning of “climate disaster,” is now changing his tune on global warming and urging activists to divert their attention to other progressive causes. [emphasis, links added]

In a lengthy blog post published Tuesday morning, Gates said climate change remains a serious issue, but that “it will not be the end of civilization.”

Gates then bluntly said the money that has been designated for climate is “not being spent on the right things.”

“Sometimes the world acts as if any effort to fight climate change is as worthwhile as any other,” Gates wrote. “As a result, less-effective projects are diverting money and attention from efforts that will have more impact on the human condition: namely, making it affordable to eliminate all greenhouse gas emissions and reducing extreme poverty with improvements in agriculture and health.”

In other words, leaders need to focus less on fighting long-term global warming and more on near-term economic issues.

That means Gates is prepared to divert millions of dollars in funding from climate issues to other social issues, a shift that could have significant reverberations across the American climate-advocacy ecosystem.

…

minerals and ores

Trump Moves To Break Communist China’s Grip On Rare Earth Minerals

by  S. Milloy, Oct 27, 2025 in ClimateChangeDispatch

Surface mining
It’s great news that the Trump administration agreed this week with Australia to take steps toward breaking Communist China’s chokehold on rare earth minerals. [emphasis, links added]

In addition to a July announcement of a project to extract rare earths from coal mined in Wyoming, President Donald Trump is moving us in a desperately needed direction. But our vulnerabilities to China go much deeper, and much more and faster action is needed.

Rare earth minerals are essential for modern technology. The good news is that they are available virtually everywhere. The bad news is that they generally require strip-mining to produce ore, and then the ore must be processed and refined.

Because environmentalists oppose both mining and processing, neither activity has been undertaken on a meaningful scale in the U.S. for decades.

And while a few Western nations allow rare earth strip-mining, about 90 percent of rare earth processing occurs in China, where there is no green activism or bureaucracy to obstruct operations.

This means that virtually all our technology is dependent on China, including military technology such as the advanced F-35 fighter jet. Imagine not being able to build warplanes without China’s cooperation. Even if China were neutral toward the U.S., this situation would be unacceptable.

China plans to become the lone global superpower by 2049, if not sooner. Toward that goal, China is quietly but certainly preparing itself for confrontation, if not war.

This is evidenced, in part, by China’s focus on electrifying its economy to reduce its dependency on the global oil and natural gas market, which is dominated by the U.S.

China has also cleverly worked to avoid war against a superior foe by simply checkmating the U.S. and Western nations through economic and energy dependence, and even sabotage.

After being mildly criticized by Australia during COVID, China announced that it would use trade as a weapon and then promptly stopped trading with Australia.

More recently, in response to U.S. and European efforts to build EV batteries domestically, China announced export limits on the rare earths and processed graphite needed to make batteries.

The Trump administration moved to stymie this part of the Chinese plan through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) enacted last July.

Our China-dependent technology includes all the wind turbines, solar panels, grid batteries, and EVs that greens have induced us to buy over the past two decades.

Worse than just the $250 billion in solar subsidies China expected to reap from U.S. taxpayers through the Green New Scam is the fact that electricity prices and equipment availability in the U.S. would be almost entirely dependent on the goodwill of China.

…

climate-debate

Recent Global Warming Mostly Due To Natural Factors, New Study Finds

by P. Gosselin, Oct 26, 2025 in NoTricksZone 

Recent warming is mostly due to natural climate factors…only 1/3 is attributable to the rising GHG concentrations. 

CO2’s impact on warming is likely wildly overstated. 

A recent paper by Ad Huijser, “Global Warming and the ‘impossible’ Radiation Imbalance,” published in Science of Climate Change, presents a detailed analysis that challenges the widely held assumption that rising greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations are the sole, or even the primary, drivers of recent global warming.

Hat-tip Report 24.

By comparing observed energy trends with theoretical forcings, the study concludes that natural factors play a significant and dominant role in the warming observed since the mid-1970s.

The Discrepancy: GHG Forcing vs. Observed Warming

The study scrutinizes the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) hypothesis, which attributes all observed warming solely to human-caused GHG emissions. Using satellite data from the CERES program and Ocean Heat Content (OHC) data from the ARGO float program, the author analyzed the Earth’s Top of Atmosphere (TOA) radiation imbalance—the net energy flux into the Earth’s thermal system.

Natural factors dominate

The central finding is that the assumed radiative forcing trend from GHGs is insufficient to account for the magnitude of the observed TOA radiation imbalance. The discrepancy suggests that another, significant factor must be involved in heating the planet.

…