Top Left Link Buttons
  • English
  • German

Green New Deal

Category Archives

Gabon Made To Mortgage Its Future for `Carbon Credits’

The otherwise nondescript nation of Gabon made history last week as the first African country to “get paid” to preserve its rainforest. At the end of an arduous, four-year process of “conforming,” on June 24, the Norwegian government distributed a $17 million payment, with the fantastic sum of $150 million still in the wind. The payment was allocated under the UN-initiated Central African Forest Initiative (CAFI). While not technically a part of UN Climate czar Mark Carney’s over-hyped “climate offset” scheme, this deal provides a window into the process, and will likely serve as a model.

In June of 2017, under the CAFI program, the nation of Gabon signed a Letter of Intent with the nation of Norway, and the Multi Partner Trust Fund of the United Nations Development Program, under which Gabon would agree to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 50% below the 2005 level, as well as agree to perform a series of “milestones”– which ultimately saw Gabon creating 13 “national parks”– effectively locking up the vast majority of its land area, prohibiting logging and other access to resources. Only at the end of the long process would Gabon get paid. That final “millstone” was passed in 2019, with an announcement at the Climate Action Summit in New York. For all its efforts and sacrifices, Gabon would receive $150 million over the next 10 years (assuming continued compliance). Last Thursday’s $17 million payment was the first evidence that its years of sacrifice would amount to anything at all.

First established in 2015, the CAFI brought together European governments, specifically Norway, France, Germany and the UK, along with six central African (rainforest) countries, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, the Central Africa republic, Cameroon, and both “Congos.” The “rationale” behind CAFI was the reduction of carbon emissions. The year before had seen Norway sign a deal promising $150 million to Liberia, a model which CAFI then extended across the mid-section of the entire continent. In 2019, timed with the signing of Gabon in New York, a similar deal worth $65 million — between France and the Republic of Congo — was announced in Paris. There are likely similar efforts afoot in South America and the Indo-Pacific, the other “rainforest regions” of the world, which need to be investigated.

However, the idea that Africa needs to {reduce} its carbon emissions is farcical on the face of it, something which is slowly dawning on African leaders, as more and more evidence of this type of exploitation emerges. Africa’s total greenhouse gas emissions are 4% of the global total, yet CAFI used that global mantra to convince these six LNI (Low National Income) countries to mortgage their future with the promise of mere pennies.

The other hidden force at play here is the elusive “carbon market.” Norway, which now “owns” the Gabonese forests for the next ten years, now has an amount of carbon offset equivalent to 3X the national output of the entire United Kingdom. (The Gabon deal is celebrated for “setting a floor price of carbon” at $10 per certified ton.) Could Norway, for example– at some date in the future– put this “asset” (or a derivative based on it) up for sale, to be bought by a carbon-belching airline or steel foundry? If they did, and got a higher price for it, would Gabon see any of the profits?

These are the questions currently weighing down the heads of Mark Carney and friends in Davos, Switzerland. The weight may yet draw them down to Hell.


Swiss Youth Among Big ‘No’ Vote against Switzerland’s CO2 Referendum

June 19 (EIRNS) — The big surprise with the No vote over the new Swiss CO2 law was the fact that the majority of young people voted against it. According to the website 20 Minuten website, 54% of those over 65 — that is to say the Boomers — voted in favor of the new law, while 58% of those under 34 voted against it, according to a 20 Minuten and Tamedia survey of 16,249 participants. See report here.

The leading Swiss weekly Weltwoche wrote that the result signaled a “turning point in international climate policy,” a “popular uprising” in which the Swiss electorate rebelled “against the dictates of the elites…. The Swiss are going on a climate strike, just differently than what those in power intended. They want less government action against climate change instead of more.”

The claim that was circulating, that many people voted against the new law because it was not “strong enough” also seems to have not been decisive, according to the survey, since only 2% of the no voters claimed they cast their ballot against it for that reason. According to the survey, fear of higher costs was the main argument against the CO2 law, including among young people.

Swiss Social Democratic Party parliament group leader Roger Nordmann claimed that the no vote was not a strike against climate policy, but had to concede that it showed that “the ‘green wave’ has ebbed — that’s clear. The rejected proposal has shown that the policy of big tones, of constant outbidding with even more ambitious climate targets has had its day.” He called for a climate policy of small steps, and not expensive and extravagant “wallet-regulated” ones.

The Swiss national broadcaster SRF had a similar take on the young no vote, quoting a 19-year-old saying: “You certainly have the money in the back of your mind, that you will have to pay more afterwards. In fact, that was the most important point when I think about it. “

Official statistics on the voting are expected to be released sometime in July.
Interestingly, another poll showed that 51% of Swiss would have voted against the framework agreement with the EU, which the government walked away from last month. Only 35% would have backed it, according to a survey. There was overwhelming support for suspending the talks. 

The climate is heating up for those tyrants!


Green Deal Failure

Southwest Power Blackout Disaster: What Can Save the U.S. Economy?

Feb. 15: By Monday night Americans in parts of numerous Southwest and western states were enduring rolling blackouts, some lasting hours in the deep sub-freezing cold of a polar vortex. Many lives were in danger for lack of power and/or electric heat. This shocking event must be a wake-up call to all those, from trade union members to high school and college students, who have been either accepting, celebrating or applying for work to the so-called “Green New Deal”.

“Green” technology – throwback technology – can kill you.

As in the electric grid emergency in Japan’s snowstorms in December, windmills are freezing up in Texas. That state’s 23% of rated electric power capacity which is wind, has largely stopped working, and more than 3 million Texans were without power Monday afternoon in near-zero temperatures. The {Austin Statesman} had reported Feb. 14 (“Frozen wind turbines hamper Texas’ power output”) that wind power, usually rated at 25,100 MW in the state, was rated at just 12,000 MW on Sunday, and actually generating considerably less than that. The state’s regulator, ERCOT (Electric Reliability Council of Texas), was conducting load-shedding operations and warning of potential blackouts, which became actual with 10,500 MW of customer lode cut off on Monday. Late Monday, rolling blackouts were beginning to affect the Southwest Power Pool, involving parts of 15 other states.

The states of the Midwest, gripped by the same polar vortex cold, were saved from blackouts by {coal}. An energy attorney on the board of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and the Missouri Public Service Commission, Terry Jarrett, wrote a Sunday column on the Upper Midwest situation on mainlinemedianews.com, called “Coal Rescues U.S. Power Grid During Polar Vortex”. The Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), which distributes power in 15 states, said coal was on Sunday generating more than half of all power there in the polar vortex, some 41,000 out of 78,000 MW. Natural gas was generating 22,000 and nuclear 10,000 MW. Wind turbine output, predictably, fluctuated wildly, reaching 2,300 MW at most. Solar? 231 MW. “That means these much-vaunted renewable systems produced only about 4 percent of the electricity needed across 15 states,” Jarrett concluded.

In Texas, some natural gas wellheads also froze, along with refining facilities in some locations. The great demand came both from the extraordinary cold, and from the freeze-up and failure of wind and solar power, the ready back-up power for which is almost always natural gas turbine electric plants.

The Green New Deal has been coming at us for 20 years and more from an instigating center – where? In the British royal family, particularly Prince Charles, who is known along with his father Prince Philip for wishing, {very publicly}, that there were far fewer human beings on this planet than there are. Wind power is just one of the dangerous technological leaps backward it promotes. Just two weeks ago, a big five-day conference of the World Economic Forum, Europe’s center for the Green Deal, targeted “the cement, steel, aluminum and chemical industries, as well as the ships, planes, and trucks that move them.” It claimed these sectors “exceeded the total amount of carbon the world can emit”. And don’t get them started about food – the Royal Institute of International Affairs reported to that conference that you should eat no meat, only plant food, and less of that than you do now.

Do you need any of these to live? Food? Electric power? Do you farm with animals? Work with chemicals or steel or cement? Stop kidding yourself that the Green New Deal is “infrastructure” and “jobs”. Put yourself in a car in Austin or Houston looking for heat in zero weather and to charge your phone. The Green New Deal is physical economic collapse, and deadly.

What will save us? Cooperating with the other major countries that don’t accept this green nonsense – especially China and Russia. Build real infrastructure, especially nuclear and fusion power and space travel technology. Listen to the late Lyndon LaRouche, in a speech eight years ago, “No to the Green Policy; Build the Credit System”:

“So mankind has to change his policy: Dump the Green policy, which is presently the greatest single threat to humanity, that’s a killer! And we have to understand that it is the increase of man’s intelligence, which means also scientific intelligence, the ability to create, the ability to generate higher energy-flux densities per capita and per square kilometer of territory—these are the standards on which credit is generated. It’s to increase the population of the planet: increase it! Stop this killing people: increase it! Because we need more work done. We need, also, increases of the energy-flux density of the work being done. These are absolute necessities for us…. So the point is, we need every human being. We need them to live longer and better. We need them to become more creative. We need to have their children better educated, and developed. We need an increase of the potential productivity of the human force, per capita and per square kilometer, and those are the missions that we must fulfill.”


Green Dealers Have To Digest Swiss Vote against Them

The fact that with 51.6 and 61% respectively, the Swiss population defeated plans backed by special legislation for a CO2 tax and for a total ban of pesticides in referenda yesterday, implies, as Germany’s leading news weekly {Der Spiegel} notes, that for the time being, the Swiss government’s ambitions to make its country the first in the world that bans pesticides, have been crushed. It remains a totally open question how Switzerland will now meet its promises signed at the 2015 Paris Climate Accords, the weekly says.


Germany’s state-run Deutsche Welle tries to still push the illusion that things might be corrected sooner or later in Switzerland, quoting Swiss Environment Minister Simonetta Sommaruga as claiming that the referenda were “not a vote against climate protection,” that “the debates of the past weeks have shown that many people want to strengthen climate protection—just not with this legislation.” How new legislation would come about, however, as other media note, is yet rather uncertain, because government and parliament have worked on the defeated laws for several years.


Freakouts in Germany seem to be moderate still, which may change once the full impact of the Sunday referenda has been digested. There is so far more of a freakout on the anti-terrorism law which the Swiss backed in a parallel referendum: Radical pro-climate actions like occupation or blockades of bank building, road blockades and the like which have repeatedly occurred in the past can now be termed “threat to public security” and punished much more harshly. And: police can now pre-emptively detain people suspected of planning a disruption or terrorist act even under “climate-protection” pretexts.

The science of climate change is not settled, and much of what is presented is not based on science at all.  Leading scientists with the integrity and courage to buck dangerous “popular” dogma will discuss so-called manmade climate change, and the most-advanced science including the galactic science of astronomical-scale oscillations during the upcoming Schiller Institute conference. The suicidal trend in some European countries to stick with anti-nuclear attitudes will also be discussed.

For the Common Good of all People, not the Rules Benefiting the Few!

International Schiller Institute/ICLC online conference, June 26/ 27, 2021

RSVP today →


Second “Dialogue on Climate” Webinar in Italy

The second “Dialogue on Climate” webinar took place in Italy yesterday, with professors Franco Battaglia and Franco Prodi as speakers. Prof. Battaglia is a teacher of physics and chemistry at the Modena University, while prof. Prodi, brother of Italy’s former Prime minister Romano, is teacher of Physics of the Atmosphere at the University of Bologna. 

Prof. Battaglia demonstrated in a conclusive way that all forecasts of the IPCC have been wrong. “Nobody can deny that human activity has produced CO2, but this is not the cause of climate change”, he said. We are in the end phase of a mini-glacial era, and global warming has already occurred in the past, when there was no anthropogenic CO2 production. 

Solar and wind energy will never be able to replace other energy sources, which today represent 80% of the energy mix. The insanity of renewables can be shown in Italy, where ca. 100 billion euro have been invested for photovoltaic parks that produce 2.6 GW of power, whereas one nuclear power plant would produce 3 Gw and would cost one tenth of it! Battaglia revealed that when he was advisor to Environment minister Altero Matteoli, the latter asked him whether he should sign the Kyoto protocol. Don’t sign it, Battaglia told him. Nobel prize winner Carlo Rubbia also told me so, Matteoli confessed – but eventually signed the Protocol. 

Prof. Prodi went into a long and detailed explanation on how the formation of clouds affects the climate. This is a complex and articulated system, but the IPCC focuses only on some aspects, neglecting some very influential factors. 

During the Q&A period, former minister Carlo Giovanardi asked why scientists who argue against the IPCC are excluded from the public debate. 

Prof. Alberto Prestininzi, who moderated the event, answered that “there is a direction. When economic leaders get together…. if the EU decides that one trillion Euro should go to decarbonization”. Prof. Renato Ricci, honorary chairman of the Italian Physics Society, commented that it is “big finance” behind the so-called climate emergency. 

Claudio Celani from EIR intervened in support of prof. Ricci explaining that the climate emergency is a pretext to create a new financial bubble in the attempt to save the bankrupt financial system. The origin of climate activism and environmentalism is neo malthusianism, and answering Sen. Giovanardi, Celani said that politicians have a responsibility for having accepted a decades-long slide into the current regime. 

Celani’s remarks were backed by prof. Mario Giaccio, an economist, who said that he agrees about neo malthusianism and went into a description on how liquidity has moved into energy assets, creating the bubble. However, he concluded with the pessimistic remark that you cannot do anything against it because they are too strong! 

Prof. Prodi intervened saying that he has been ostracized by media because of his “negationist” views, and the situation in the scientific community is “more rotten than you think”, almost as rotten as in the financial system. 

There will be a “Climate Dialogues” Webinar every other week between now and October.

The science of climate change is not settled, and much of what is presented is not based on science at all. Leading scientists with the integrity and courage to buck dangerous “popular” dogma will discuss so-called manmade climate change, and the most-advanced science including the galactic science of astronomical-scale oscillations at the upcoming Schiller Institute/ICLC conference. The suicidal trend in some European countries to stick with anti-nuclear attitudes will also be discussed.

For the Common Good of all People, not the Rules Benefiting the Few!

International Schiller Institute/ICLC online conference, June 26/ 27, 2021

RSVP today →


Page 5 of 5First...345