Poland Challenges EU’s Carbon Market Reform

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)http://www.thegwpf.com

Poland is challenging draft carbon market reforms agreed by most European Union governments this week, saying the deal is not binding because it did not have the full backing of the bloc’s 28 nations, the country’s environment ministry said yesterday (2 March).

Poland does not rule out taking the issue to the European Court of Justice to unravel the legislation once it is adopted, Environment Ministry spokesman Pawel Mucha told Reuters.

Poland was among nine countries who opposed a deal backed by 19 EU environment ministers on long-awaited reforms of the Emission Trading System (ETS), which is the EU’s flagship policy to meet greenhouse gas emissions targets.

The EU has been trying to reform the system because it has suffered from an excess supply of carbon permits that depressed prices.

But Poland fears the reforms to the so-called cap-and-trade system will prove too heavy a burden for its energy-intensive industrial plants and coal-fired power stations.

The EU’s efforts to tackle global warming have increasingly put Poland at odds with the rest of the 28-nation bloc, which is keen to maintain leadership in global climate diplomacy.

Poland’s Environment Ministry said it felt “cheated” by the compromise deal, saying it violated the right of each member state to shape its own energy mix. The ministry said in a statement that the draft reform proposal adopted by the EU members was “not binding”.

Warsaw is arguing that EU treaties say rules on a country’s choice between different energy sources can only be adopted with the unanimous consent of the bloc’s 28 nations.

Polish diplomats contested Tuesday’s (28 February) compromise deal on the grounds that the draft text should have been brought to a vote, insisting the nine member states made up a “blocking minority”.

Full story

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF) http://www.thegwpf.com

March 2, 2017 at 08:15PM

TECHNOCRACY RISING

via climate sciencehttp://climatescience.blogspot.com/

via climate science http://ift.tt/2jXH2Ie

March 2, 2017 at 05:00PM

Reality Bites: ‘Green’ Dreamers Struggling to Spin Away South Australia’s Failed Wind Power Experiment

via STOP THESE THINGShttps://stopthesethings.com

*** It’s been barely 5 months since South Australia experienced a state wide blackout on 28 September, when a typically vigorous spring storm delivered wind speeds in excess of 90km/h, causing the majority of turbines operating at its 18 wind farms to automatically shutdown to avoid self-destruction. The ensuing collapse in wind power output overloaded […]

via STOP THESE THINGS http://ift.tt/2kE7k62

March 2, 2017 at 04:31PM

Why the Climate-industrial Complex Needs to Be Publicly Attacked and Deligitimized

via Carlin Economics and Sciencehttp://www.carlineconomics.com

The first indications of climate policy equivocation by the Trump Administration have appeared in the past week. It has also become clear that two members of the Trump family support the Climate-industrial Complex (CIC), as defined in my book, Environmentalism Gone Mad. I had hoped for better, but this is not exactly unexpected. The CIC is an exceedingly well funded special interest trying to persuade the US Government to waste huge sums on a useless and damaging effort to “control climate change” primarily at the expense of lower income members of the population and the environment. Eradicating the CIC and its ideology is not an easy task, and the more equivocation the Administration shows the harder it will be.

Recent history shows this. My discussions with some of the political appointees at EPA convinced me that the George W. Bush Administration internally strongly opposed the CIC. But everyone from Bush on down played a very careful game of publicly trying to camouflage their views. This avoided a public fight with the CIC but fooled no one, of course, and contributed to the climate disaster during the Obama Administration by failing to deligitimize the CIC ideology; as a result, the Obama Administration was able to rapidly breathe new life into the CIC and did not miss any opportunity to support it both rhetorically and financially.

The Importance of the Long Term Demise of the CIC and Its Ideology

Although the Democratic Party’s capture by the CIC may result in long term problems for the Party, the Trump Administration has at most 8 years in office, and possibly only 4. And the last 2 of these 4 years they may or may not have a friendly Congress. If the CIC is not to regain its influence after its defeat in the 2016 election, someone who can be heard through the mainstream media (MSM) filter has to speak out forcefully during the short period that the CIC opposition may have to avoid the catastrophe that a CIC climate victory would constitute for both the US economy and the environment. A brave band of climate skeptics have done great service, but they have been handicapped by strong MSM opposition in getting their views heard through the MSM and the Democratic Party. What is needed is forceful statements by the Trump Administration as to what is wrong with the CIC ideology and actions to at least implement all of Trump’s campaign promises concerning climate, such as withdrawing the US from the so-called Paris Treaty.

The alleged internal sabotage of Trump’s stated intention to end US participation in the so-called Paris treaty by Mr. and Mrs. Kushner may prove to be a major loss to the skeptic cause, but attempts to hide the anti-CIC viewpoint of the Trump Administration will do even more damage, just as it did during the G.W. Bush Administration.

The first indications of the Trump Administration on this issue are not what I had hoped. EPA Administrator Pruitt, for example, was very careful to hedge his real views on the CIC even at a recent friendly conservative meeting. This may reduce the current conflict slightly but will not win the war. Even the major defeat of the CIC in the 2016 election will by no means finish off the CIC. Public statements by Administration spokespersons who can get press coverage opposing the CIC’s ideology would help a great deal since many aspects of the skeptic case are unknown to readers of/listeners to the very biased MSM on this issue.

via Carlin Economics and Science http://ift.tt/1gVT2t3

March 2, 2017 at 02:02PM