Toronto 1988. The first step on the road to the national guarantee of higher prices and less reliable power.

The Toronto conference on climate change in 1988 was actually called the International Conference of the Changing Atmosphere: Implications for Global Security. The Geneva-based World Meteorological Organization held a series of meetings that led up to the conference with the backing of the United Nations, the World Meteorological Organization, the Canadian government and other international organizations. With 300 scientists among politicians and bureaucrats it is billed as the first such international conference to combine science and policy.

The attendance was clearly selected with some care and the conference chairman was astonished by the degree of consensus. The impending damage to the planet from warming was compared with nuclear war and that was included in the strongly worded Conference Statement.

The meeting recommended a global pact to protect the atmosphere and a world atmosphere fund to facilitate global solutions, which recognized differential issues in usage and effects. For instance, the different historical consumption of and contribution to the atmosphere of already industrialized nations and those in the process of industrializing would be balanced by having the fund financed in part by taxes on fossil fuels consumed in industrialized nations. The proposed atmosphere fund would then be used partly to provide economic assistance to developing countries pursuing environmentally friendly strategies such as reducing deforestation.

Specifically on the issue of global warming from greenhouse gases and climate change, the conference reached a consensus on the likelihood of a rise in the global mean temperature of between 2.7-8 degrees F (1.5-4.5 degrees C) by about 2050, but not on whether such warming has begun. The conference statement called for a 20 percent cut in present (1988) levels of global carbon dioxide emissions by the year 2005, about half of which could be achieved through conservation, leading to an eventual cut of 50 percent.

In the real world at 9.20 Wind and Other are delivering 9.9% of demand, up from 7.8% at 7am. Demand is down a bit from 25.6 to 24.2. Nothing in Tasmania, what has happened to the mighty wind farm at Cape Grim? Too much wind or none at all?
12.20 update. W&O down to 7.5% despite demand down from 24 to 20! Weird. The sun is shining.
6.30pm Wind doing about 7% of demand which is high 27+. Price around 250 everywhere but Tasmania.
11.11 Wind and Other 13%.

This entry was posted in Global warming and climate change policy, Rafe. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Toronto 1988. The first step on the road to the national guarantee of higher prices and less reliable power.

  1. Roger

    Can anything good come out of Canada?

  2. I think historians, economists, scientists, politicians etc will look back on this and wonder how did such a global-wide scam ever gain such traction. It will go down as the biggest and most costly boondoggle ever perpetrated on humanity.

  3. RobK

    The Montreal Protocol was a warm-up.
    From Wikipedia:

    The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (a protocol to the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer) is an international treaty designed to protect the ozone layer by phasing out the production of numerous substances that are responsible for ozone depletion. It was agreed on 26 August 1987, and entered into force on 26 January 1989, followed by a first meeting in Helsinki, May 1989. Since then, it has undergone eight revisions, in 1990 (London), 1991 (Nairobi), 1992 (Copenhagen), 1993 (Bangkok), 1995 (Vienna), 1997 (Montreal), 1998 (Australia), 1999 (Beijing) and 2016 (Kigali, adopted, but not in force).[1][2] As a result of the international agreement, the ozone hole in Antarctica is slowly recovering.[3]Climate projections indicate that the ozone layer will return to 1980 levels between 2050 and 2070.[4][5] Due to its widespread adoption and implementation it has been hailed as an example of exceptional international co-operation, with Kofi Annan quoted as saying that “perhaps the single most successful international agreement to date has been the Montreal Protocol”.[6][7] In comparison, effective burden sharing and solution proposals mitigating regional conflicts of interest have been among the success factors for the ozone depletion challenge, where global regulation based on the Kyoto Protocol has failed to do so.[8] In this case of the ozone depletion challenge, there was global regulation already being installed before a scientific consensus was established. Also, overall public opinion was convinced of possible imminent risks.[9][10]

  4. Tel

    The Montreal Protocol has resulted in people running lighter fluid in air conditioners which is dangerous and has not done diddly for the environment.

  5. DaveR

    Cant help noticing the internationalists riddled throughout this gathering, including the main offender, the United Nations. Most of the attendees would have been public service employees, employees of internationalist bodies or NGOs; a significant number being paid by taxpayers. The role of internationalist organisations remains a major element in global warming activism today.

  6. Bruce of Newcastle

    The attendance was clearly selected with some care and the conference chairman was astonished by the degree of consensus. The impending damage to the planet from warming was compared with nuclear war and that was included in the strongly worded Conference Statement.

    Curiously global warming still isn’t actually occurring. The latest UAH data shows a slight kick up in global temperature from last month mainly because Australia is melting or something. Or, since we’re in winter, not freezing quite as much. The first half of this year (av. +0.22 C) was below the same period of 2002 (av. +0.26 C) sixteen years ago.

    UAH Global Temperature Update for July, 2018: +0.32 deg. C

  7. RobK

    Tel,
    I agree. I bit that I found curious of that Montreal Wiki quote was:

     In this case of the ozone depletion challenge, there was global regulation already being installed before a scientific consensus was established. Also, overall public opinion was convinced of possible imminent risks.[9][10]

    The buggers got a taste of it.

  8. RobK

    I liken the CAGW to something like the Mayan sacrifices to appease the gods.

  9. Dr Faustus

    the conference reached a consensus on the likelihood of a rise in the global mean temperature of between 2.7-8 degrees F (1.5-4.5 degrees C) by about 2050, but not on whether such warming has begun.

    That right there tells you all you need to know about the physical science basis of the Great Scare.

  10. BoyfromTottenham

    So the UN and the WMO (and probably a gaggle of self-interested, agenda-pushing NGOs) met in 1988 and agreed ‘by consensus’ that the world needed to tax various entities and give the money raised to the UN to pursue this agenda. Since when did the UN have the right to do this? Why did sovereign countries hand over their climate, energy and taxation policies to the UN? Who voted for the UN to be able to do this? And why the hell haven’t our governments woken up to this giant con at any time in the past decades?

  11. Kneel

    “The Montreal Protocol has resulted in people running lighter fluid in air conditioners which is dangerous…”

    You can fill your car A/C with propane (or LPG) and the “danger” is the equivalent of a couple of disposable cigarette lighters – most of which is, at any time, under the bonnet and very close to a feed of hydrocarbons from a tank holding considerably more of a much more dangerous fluid.

    Some perspective here, please.

    The only more efficient gases to use in A/C are the various CFCs – R12, eg.

    Oh – the ozone layer was not “protected” by the banning of CFCs. It was to protect DuPont’s income stream when the patent on R12 was about to run out. Since the ban, ozone levels have varied by similar amounts to when CFCs were freely available. Yes, “they” said it had worked after a couple of years, but further data shows bigger holes when CFC concentrations were on the way down.

    Clearly, there is more to ozone depletion than CFCs, just like there is more climate than CO2 and temperature. But don’t let any of those pesky facts get in the way of your outrage…

  12. David Brewer

    From the first link:

    The concern for the potential damage to the planet was compared with the consequences of nuclear war, and the scientific consensus at the conference astonished its chair, Stephen Lewis, who was then Canada’s ambassador to the United Nations. Lewis also brokered the strongly worded final declaration. Identifying the existing situation as “an unintended, uncontrolled, globally pervasive experiment,” the Conference Statement claimed that the consequences of this experiment would be second only those of a global nuclear war.

    Lewis himself, of course, was not a scientist, but a socialist politician whose first job was with the Socialist International. His father was also a socialist politician and his son, Avi Lewis, the husband of Naomi Klein, once conducted this interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

  13. I think historians, economists, scientists, politicians etc will look back on this and wonder how did such a global-wide scam ever gain such traction. It will go down as the biggest and most costly boondoggle ever perpetrated on humanity.

    More likely, the destruction of the credibility of science coupled with the rewards for mendacity the truth will be kept from the public as we enter a new age of darkness.

  14. Spring is coming

    Are damaging winds in SA damaging the planet? Pls keep the wind power gen figures coming through. Strong winds forecast next 48 hours. I might turn extra lights on just in case I pick up some cheap power.

  15. min

    If renewables supply around about 14% of energy , that figure I have read in relation to Germany perhaps little Denmark is doing better but at what cost, how many more windmills etc will we need to get to 36%?

Comments are closed.