Whither the Paris Climate Change Agreement?

The media battle lines are set on the Paris Climate Change Agreement with Politico hoping that Trump will continue to “study” the issue

Trump himself said he’ll make the decision this week  while Marc Morano says he has already indicated Clexit to many confidants.

Formal withdrawal is largely academic as regards the US itself since multiple steps have already been taken to abort its effect.  These include far reaching attempts to roll back the layers of permitting regulation stemming from the 1969 EPA Act.  In the near term, Trump is set to eliminate two Obama regulations covering generators’ greenhouse gas emissions and using the Clean Water Act to justify permitting refusals on spurious wetland and waterway protection grounds.

Just as heart-warming is the fanging of the economy-crippling “Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy” budget in the EPA which faces a quartering in Trump’s budget proposals for 2018.

Even so, formal US withdrawal is important for two reasons.

First, while the US is a party to the agreement, there will be pressures on its administration to continue the investment-stifling and cost-impositions inferred by its “Nationally Determined Contribution” to emission cutting.

Secondly, the swamp politicians are keen to see Trump remain in the tent since US continued membership gives them cover to continue the policies to which they have tied themselves.  That’s why the other G7 “leaders” maintained closed ranks in supporting 2015 the economy-crushing deal they had blindly been led into accepting in Paris and ganged up to get Trump’s support; they recognised his formal withdrawal will set the stage for their own humiliation at accepting economic suicide in the first place.  Stalling for time Angela Merkel, told reporters, “There are no indications whether the United States will stay in the Paris agreement or not.”

For the time being other traditional politicians are also putting on a brave face, as is Australia.  Josh Frydenberg quoted Turnbull from November of last year saying irrespective of the US position “Turnbull government takes its emissions targets seriously and we’re going on and trying to meet them”. Turnbull readily accepted the bureaucrats’ advice saying anyway it takes four years to withdraw.

Australia confronts the Finkel report into the “Future security of the national electricity market” in June.  It is unlikely that, as a Turnbull warmist appointee, Finkel will advocate anything less than a continued race to the create high cost, competitiveness-sapping economy he has long pursued.  One of the few submissions, a summary of which is here opposing this was that (in which I had a hand) of the Australian Environment Foundation.

Eventually, if Trump prevails and implements his deregulatory initiatives, the benefits will be apparent even to the blindest of politicians.  The question is will it be too late for the Australian economy to be resurrected or will we go down that long path to regulatory-induced economic mediocrity followed by Argentina last century.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Whither the Paris Climate Change Agreement?

  1. steve

    “whither”? Surely, you mean “wither”.

  2. Mark M

    A tripling of prices is commonplace & a mere doubling of bills is regarded as a perverse triumph.

    Australia’s 97% political elite continued destruction of Australia continues unchecked …

    Tesltra power costs up $100m as energy crisis bites industry(paywall)

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/tesltra-power-costs-up-100m-as-energy-crisis-bites-industry/news-story/ac04b1a9b475c0315d9fe035f8383910

    “But if the situation continues for even a year or two, we genuinely face the risk of a significant Australian de-industrialisation.”

    Skynews 28/5/17: Josh Frydenberg confirms the government is committed to the Paris climate change agreement of the decarbonisation of Australia.

    https://twitter.com/SkyNewsAust/status/868755793012695040

  3. RobK

    Climate agreement, environmental agreement, trade agreement are all the stock-in-trade of the technocrats to enable Agenda 21 / Agenda 2030. It is difficult to separate the issues when presented as telephone books of old.

  4. incoherent rambler

    From that oz link-

    Ai Group chief executive Innes Willox said members from a range of key economic sectors in southeast Australia reported electricity bills as much as quadrupling from one contract to the next. “A tripling of prices is commonplace and a mere doubling of bills is regarded as a perverse triumph,” he said.

    You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

    Does anybody have the figures on hand for the increase in GST and excise take as a result of increasing energy costs? Is the govt now a prisoner of high energy costs?

  5. john constantine

    The benefits of halting deindustrialisation only flow to the outer economy that does not matter.

    Their inner crony leech economy make massive unearned riches every week the rort staggers on.

    This is a struggle between the wreckers of the coast, and the class that drown on the rocks when their ships are lured in and wrecked [ and the class that have their goods looted].

    The economy as a whole suffered great misery from the actions of the old coastal wreckers, but the wreckers were farting through fine silk.

    http://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/Smugglers-Wreckers/

    Sadly, poor fella my country, the wreckers are running the political crony socialist class.

    Luring the economy onto the rocks of Ruinables Social Justice electricity is a disaster for H.M.S. Australia, but a treasure trove for the wrecking class.

  6. Bruce of Newcastle

    The US leaving the Paris agreement also demonstrates to all the world that half of the US electorate does not believe the chicken little message of the Left. They voted for Trump who during the campaign explicitly said he’d do this and also cut the climate money train.

    The catastropharians refuse to debate sceptical scientists and economists. That is one reason why they aren’t believed – because they haven’t been open and honest with the public. Perhaps they should try doing that instead of the current lawfare, activism and dirty politics that they use.

    Of course one reason they refuse to debate is they always lose, because the scientific data doesn’t support the CAGW hypothesis.

  7. C.L.

    If Trump folds on this, he’s finished.

  8. Shane

    C.L ,if Trump folds on this or is forced to leave this mortal coil in the very near future ,it will be all of us who will be finished.
    So far its literally been against all odds .
    Sorcha Faal continues to spell out starkly whats at stake here.
    http://www.whatdoesitmean.com ( it is rumoured to be a part of the media outreach of US Naval intelligence)

  9. Rob MW

    The question is will it be too late for the Australian economy to be resurrected or will we go down that long path to regulatory-induced economic mediocrity followed by Argentina last century.

    That’s no longer a question Alan. Government regulation, along with an enforcing SJW judiciary have long ago reduced the fundamental foundations of economic prosperity along with hard fought for freedoms and liberties to nothing more than ashes of a once aspirational fire.

    The first hint that AGW was going to be the ‘Gulag’ of modern times came in 1980; it is now 2017, so for nearly 40 fucking years the socialist engineers have worked their ideological transformational bent and they are not going to give up 40 years worth of this investment neither politically, socially or economically.

  10. Beachside

    Born Lucky: Stars Align Perfectly for PM’s Son with Mammoth Bet on Wind Power Outfit Infigen

    Life is a lottery. And lottery winners are a mixed bag.

    […] There is, of course, nothing insidious about parents seeking to smooth the path for their offspring. Indeed, that’s part of every parent’s obligation.

    Insofar as life is a gamble, so is investing in the great wind power fraud.

    Take Babcock & Brown, which having disintegrated in 2009, became Infigen. […]

    […]So what was it that attracted Alex Turnbull to Infigen?

    Certainly couldn’t have been their balance sheet or cash flow. Running a fleet of clapped-out Suzlon S88s, which are close to the end of their useful economic life, losing $304 million in single year, blaming its ‘performance’ on a lack of beneficial breezes, burdened with a staggering pile of debt and watching its senior management run to the hills would ordinarily spook any sensible investor.

    But not Alex Turnbull.

    As outfits like Infigen exist and only exist as a result of government mandates and subsidies, anyone backing them would need to be reading the political tea leaves with a particularly keen eye.

    Of course, politics moves fast and the creation and removal of policies that favour rorts like wind power subsidies are very hard to forecast in advance.

    On that score, Alex ‘Lucky’ Turnbull must’ve simply read it better than most.

    With Infigen’s shares tanking to around $0.20 in 2014 and trading at that level through most of 2015, in the latter part of that year – through his hedge fund, Keshik Capital – Alex began pouring money into an outfit that had been losing it faster than a drunk in a casino.

    And, wouldn’t you know it, the political tea leaves aligned, as if by magic.

    On 22 April 2016, Alex’s dad, Australia’s PM, Malcolm Turnbull sent his then Environment Minister, young Gregory Hunt off to Paris to sign the climate change agreement. This from daddy’s website: […]

    RTWT

  11. anonandon

    Classic Trump saying he will make a decision next week. Leave them hanging and hoping. He is pulling out, like my dear Dad should have.

  12. Oh say can you see!

    A friend told me the company he works for a Victorian company, electricity costs have or are forecast to go up $70million . Yes I queried the figure as it did not seem right. Anyway one of their senior managers is off to Europe to find new technology to reduce usage or offset these costs.

    Sounds like one big game of which we are on a the wrong side.

  13. jupes

    The question is will it be too late for the Australian economy to be resurrected or will we go down that long path to regulatory-induced economic mediocrity followed by Argentina last century.

    LOL. What do you reckon? The stupid is very strong here.

    Keep up the great work Alan.

Comments are closed.