Poland’s President Andrzej Duda Throws Wrench Into Kyoto Treaty Ratification Process, Puts Paris Treaty At Risk!

German site EurActiv.de here reports that Poland’s new president Andrzej Duda refuses to extend the UN Kyoto Treaty until 2020. EurActiv writes this “blocks the ratification process” just a month before the historic UN climate summit in Paris (COP21)”. Duda’s move comes just two days after the victory of his conservative Law and Justice Party in Poland’s parliamentary election.

Duda_portret

“Andrzej Duda portret” by Michał Józefaciuk. This file has been extracted from another file: Anna Komorowska Bronisław Komorowski Andrzej Duda Agata Kornhauser-Duda Sejm 2015.JPG.. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 pl via Commons – https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Andrzej_Duda_portret.JPG#/media/File:Andrzej_Duda_portret.JPG

According to the EurActiv report, Duda is requesting a more detailed analysis of the matter on climate, writing in a statement:

Binding Poland to an international agreement that will affect Poland’s economy and the therein connected social costs should require a detailed analysis of the legal and economic impacts. These impacts have not been sufficiently explained.”

EurActiv.de explains that the 1992 Kyoto Treaty expired back in 2012 and that a number of countries have yet to ratify an extension. Duda’s party won Poland’s national parliamentary elections just two days earlier in a landmark victory, promising voters that the country’s coal industry would be protected. 90% of Poland’s electrical power is generated by coal. Analysts expect a bumpy ride ahead regarding relations with the EU. The European Union agreed last year to cut greenhouse gases by 40 percent by 2030.

Experts see little chance of preventing Duda’s move. Kamila Pacquel of the Brussels-based Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) AFP wrote the AFP that the new signals coming from Poland “does not help things”.

Greenpeace Poland called Duda’s announcemtn a “bad sign” the could stall Europe’s movement on emissions limitation by the 28 member states.

Also read more at Reuters.

 

53 responses to “Poland’s President Andrzej Duda Throws Wrench Into Kyoto Treaty Ratification Process, Puts Paris Treaty At Risk!”

  1. Don B

    Imagine that – a European political leader who wants to keep the lights on. Elsewhere,

    “Britain’s Insanely Expensive & Utterly Pointless Wind Power Fiasco Exposed”

    https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/10/22/britains-insanely-expensive-utterly-pointless-wind-power-fiasco-exposed/

  2. emission

    http://www.gizmag.com/nasa-timed-satellite-carbon-dioxide-trends/40111/

    NASA’s TIMED satellite identifies unexpected carbon dioxide trends

    “The gas is responsible for raising temperatures close to Earth’s surface, but it has a very different effect in the upper atmosphere, reducing air density and actually having a cooling effect.”

    1. Graeme No.3

      I thought it was NASA raising the temperatures nearer the ground.

      Quite how CO2 reduces upper atmospheric air density leading to a cooling effect would make interesting reading. Perhaps the NASA “scientists” will discover the atmospheric lapse rate.

    2. DirkH

      Oh noes! The climate models guessed wrong again!

      “Making sure that we have a complete understanding of how carbon dioxide moves through the planet’s atmosphere is important, as it informs the most cutting edge climate models and helps us plan spacecraft flight plans.”

      That should surely read “the least crappy climate models”.

      “”It seems clear that we don’t quite understand the relationship between the lower atmosphere and the upper atmosphere,” says TIMED project scientists Diego Janches. “We tend to separate them into different fields – lower atmosphere is Earth science, upper atmosphere is heliophysics – but we need to understand the atmosphere as a complete system.””

      The upper atmosphere BTW is where the QBE takes place… which isn’t simulated by climate models (surprise). (We also don’t know what causes it. Oh natch.)

  3. Fred Colbourne

    Three cheers for sanity! Vive Pologne!

  4. Robert Folkerts

    Great to see a politician with the courage to stand up like this. It will be interesting to see how long it takes for him to be made to tow the line.

  5. Mikky

    Europe could easily meet its emissions obsessions by sticking with and further developing Nuclear and Hydro, allowing coal-rich countries like Poland to continue burning, pretty much the energy policy of China.

    The Climate Mob will soon be coming after natural gas and oil for heating/cooking/transport, nuclear is the only way to satisfy the resulting surge in demand for electricity.

    1. sod

      “allowing coal-rich countries like Poland to continue burning, pretty much the energy policy of China.”

      Sorry, but that is not, what China is doing. Instead they currently think about banning new coal plants altogether.

      http://www.smh.com.au/business/china/china-mulls-new-coal-curbs-that-would-limit-emissions-but-dent-commodity-demand-20151005-gk1jmu.html

      China is dong a clever move, towards more renewables and future markets. Poland is doing the opposite, under a right wind populist government.we will see…

      1. sod

        If you search the web for the term “coal power” you will stumble over tons of articles like his:

        new coal plants are no longer feasible.

        http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/appalachian-power-exec-on-the-inevitability-of-coals-demise-the-debate-has

        Big power companies in India are switching from coal to renewable power:

        http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2015/10/30/energy-markets/indian-giant-reliance-powers-shift-coal-clean-energy

        Or renewables surpass coal in the UK from july to september:

        https://cleantechnica.com/2015/10/29/renewable-electricity-surpasses-coal-uk/

        This results rarely make it into mainstream papers, because of their obvious bias towards coal.

  6. sod

    Poland is defending its dirty coal. Do you people really support that?

    Meanwhile in Chile renewables are winning all auctions and solar is providing electricity at night CHEAPER than other sources.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/latest/chile-goes-100-renewables-in-power-procurement-auction/story-e6frg90f-1227588194039

    But stick to coal if you like it.

    1. DirkH

      “solar is providing electricity at night CHEAPER than other sources.”

      You’re so funny.

    2. GP Alexander

      “Poland is defending its dirty coal. Do you people really support that?”

      sod, your use of “dirty coal” tells me in spades that you are unable to separate dialectic from rhetoric.

      This is not helpful if you want to sincerely engage with an obviously intelligent and erudite community. You are using a form of snark.

      If I employed the same tactics, I could never make a single sale here at the trading desk as my investment clients do not suffer fools easily and I would be out of a job very quickly.

      In regards to your question. The government of Poland is democratically elected and is exercising the will of the people. I have no say in the matter but am willing to invest in their coal if given the opportunity to enrich my investors and provide economic benefits to the citizens of Poland.

    3. GP Alexander

      It dawned on me that I should provide a suitable example of use of dialectic vs rhetoric.

      Lesson start—

      It seems that David Suzuki has gone from being an anti-Dirty Coal campaigner to what some would call a Dirty Old Man.

      https://johnosullivan.wordpress.com/2013/02/11/exposed-david-suzuki-uses-cult-of-celebrity-to-procure-young-girls/

      sod, are you and your fellow Global Warming cultists unable to express disapproval of this behaviour? The absence of disapproval can only telegraph that it is condoned and is a feature, not a bug.

      —–End Lesson

      This is posted as a satire.

    4. Mikky

      I warned you about percentages, 100% of a tiny amount of electricity (100 MW) is still a tiny amount of electricity. Not surprising that tiny renewable generators win auctions for tiny amounts of electricity against the cost of building or upgrading proper power stations, I just hope the proper power stations have enough spare capacity to step in when the wind fails to blow, which must be in doubt given the result of the auction.

      Poland is defending its economy, not “dirty” coal.

    5. Mikky

      Chile power sector, from wikipedia:

      Total installed nominal capacity in April 2010 was 15.94 GW. Of the installed capacity, 64.9% is thermal, 34% hydroelectric, and nearly 1% wind power.

      Maybe this latest auction will push wind above the magic 1% figure.

    6. DirkH

      sod said: “But stick to coal if you like it.”

      Of course he means the exact opposite of that. He wants to force us to pay a multiple of the market price for all non-solar/wind energy and redirect the surplus we paid to the owners of solar/wind contraptions – because otherwise his solar/wind contraptions would not be bought by anyone; also, he wants coal to be gone today as he believes CO2 kills the planet – or at least pretends to.

      Finally he also wants subsidies for batteries and electric cars – again, as nobody would buy them without.

      So, sod’s “Do what you want” statement is very bizarre coming from a person like that – an ultimate statist and control freak.

      1. sod

        “He wants to force us to pay a multiple of the market price for all non-solar/wind energy ”

        coal does not even pay a fraction of the damage it does. And i am not even talking about climate change.

        “Finally he also wants subsidies for batteries and electric cars – again, as nobody would buy them without.”

        That is true. Because people dislike upfront costs and the majority of people does worry more about the colour of a car or other product, than about lifetime costs.

        In Geramny, many cities exceed fine particle limits and action (and basically this means electric cars) will have to be taken rather sooner than later.

        In the end, the electric car will be like the LED light: People will SAVE money,not use more!

        1. William Hyde

          SoD
          “coal does not even pay a fraction of the damage it does. And i am not even talking about climate change.”

          Coal does not do damage, it simply exists as it has for untold eons. And the same goes for ‘climate change’ which has always existed, slowly changing the various climates found throughout the world. Trying to associate ‘danger’ with such a slow natural process is nothing but an obvious propaganda point. You won’t alarm anyone who has done any thinking about it, so why bother?

        2. DirkH

          Surprising honesty now by sod!
          ““He wants to force us to pay a multiple of the market price for all non-solar/wind energy ”

          coal does not even pay a fraction of the damage it does. And i am not even talking about climate change.”

          He did not refute my insinuation that he wants us to pay multiples of free market prices.

          ““Finally he also wants subsidies for batteries and electric cars – again, as nobody would buy them without.”

          That is true. Because people dislike upfront costs and the majority of people does worry more about the colour of a car or other product, than about lifetime costs. ”

          He confirms that he wants subsidies.

          sod, you justify me calling warmists warmunists for years now, as warmunism is just communism under pseudoscientific disguise.

          Basically, all cooked up by the Fabians:
          The Fabian Elite and Their Not So Secret Agenda
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZDhy0n3wWE

  7. sod

    And if you need more inforamtion about what those who invest money think:

    “irst up on the first panel was a managing director of Bank of America Merrill Lynch, describing how it has committed to invest a cool $125 billion in low-carbon initiatives by 2025, while “significantly reducing” its exposure to coal. The bank had, said Abyd Karmali, its MD for Climate Capital (itself an unthinkable title only a few years ago), “a non-exchangeable, non-refundable one-way ticket to a low-carbon economy.”

    Mark Lewis, managing Director of research at Barclays, gave out much the same message on the next panel. He said: “The impact of renewables has been much more disruptive than anyone foresaw.” He went on: “There is a huge tide flowing. We can decide in which direction we choose to swim, but we can’t control the tide.” And so it went on.

    Speakers attributed the change to an increasing realisation that two-thirds of the world’s known reserves of fossil fuels cannot be burned if dangerous climate change is to be averted, combined with a rapid increase in renewable sources as prices fell. There is now, for example, about ten times as much solar power installed worldwide as the authoritative International Energy Agency forecast just eight years ago, while the cost of panels has plummeted fourfold in just five years. ”

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/climatechange/11965218/In-the-fight-against-global-warming-the-real-eco-warriors-wear-suits-and-ties.html

    (source here is the telegraph!!!)

    1. Stephen Richards

      You truly are an idiot or deceitful green.

      Investment cos invest for reasons of money and nothing else. Soros invested in brazilian oilfield while paying into obama’s solar fund. Crushing coal in the usa would mean he makes a killing in brazil. see how it works.
      Shell have been ‘investing’ in green by way of green conferences, solar panel reserch etc but are now finding it very hard to continue because, oh bugger, the oil price has collapse because there is too much cheap oil.

  8. Oswald Thake

    Annual hours of sunshine: Santiago, Chile 2462 hours.
    Annual hours of sunshine: Berlin, Germany 1625 hours.
    Think I’ll stick to coal, but thanks for your permission!

    1. sod

      “Annual hours of sunshine: Santiago, Chile 2462 hours.”

      Yes, places with good solar and wind resources can get an eassier benefit. But it was the mass market in Germany, that drove prices down. In the future, we will harvest the benefits, that we get from other countries, joining the mass market.

      The calculation is not a simple one.

      1. Walter H. Schneider

        But sod, you don’t listen (and you never even blink). Energy generation using photo-voltaic panels (or by any other currently-known method using renewable sources) can never be cheaper than using energy generation by conventional methods.

        Regardless how low the costs of manufacturing a square foot of PV panel, the cost of installing the panels will inexorably climb, because installing the panels requires manual labour, manual work, that is (let’s hope you know what that is), plus support structures and their installation or erecting, plus inverters (DC to AC), plus transformers, plus voltage regulators, plus connections to the grid.

        Of course and aside from that, the biggest problem with PV panels is that they don’t produce much or any energy when the sun doesn’t shine. In case you have not caught on to that either, even though you have been told so time and again, the sun doesn’t shine at night, when it is cloudy or when PV panels are covered with snow or dirt.

        PV panels are simply not practical or economical as long as access to conventional sources of energy is available.

        Other than that, you bring a lot of life and smirking into an otherwise cut-and-dried discussion. However, don’t get stuck so badly on pie-in-the-sky scams. Use common sense and economics. That will be better for you.

        1. sod

          “Energy generation using photo-voltaic panels (or by any other currently-known method using renewable sources) can never be cheaper than using energy generation by conventional methods. ”

          That is false. Even rather conservative sources will tell you that onshore wind is cheaper tan all new sources of electricity in basically every country.

          rooftop PV does not compete with the electricity price from a coal plant but with electricity delivered to your house.

          But it is cheaper than the electricity of new coal plants even by production!

          http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/latest/chile-goes-100-renewables-in-power-procurement-auction/story-e6frg90f-1227588194039

          “the biggest problem with PV panels is that they don’t produce much or any energy when the sun doesn’t shine.” again solar power won the auction for electricity at night

  9. David Johnson

    Feel sorry for SOD, after all he is rapidly losing all his ethically invested money http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/28/green-investment-funds-are-tanking-losing-shareholders-millions/

    1. DirkH

      Imagine. In that timeframe it was nearly impossible to lose money as the central banks pumped up the stock markets like crazy.

    2. DirkH

      But, it’s logical. You can optimize for one function, ROI, or for another, Ethicalness. If you try to optimize for a (possibly linear) combination of both you end up with less than optimal results for any of the two.

      Maybe with PURE ethicalness they would have lost ALL their money.

      1. DirkH

        ONLY IFF both functions – here, ROI and ethicalness – have their global maximum at exactly the same coordinate can you optimize for both at the same time and hit the maximum for both.

        So claims that ethical investments are at the same time the most profitable assume that for some magical, unnamed reason “Ethicalism” is the best economic system.

        The magical unnamed reason is in fact the assumption that governments continue subsidizing that which is invested in. Or in other words: That you can TRUST government.

        Yeah, trust government, that’ll work!

        1. DirkH

          which brings me to
          The Laws Of Stupidity
          http://www.ecotopia.com/webpress/Stupidity/
          1st Law: Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation.
          2nd Law: The probability that a certain person be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.
          3rd Law: A stupid person is a person who caused losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.
          4th Law: Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals. In particular non-stupid people constantly forget that (at all times and places and under any circumstances) to deal and/or associate with stupid people always turns out to be a costly mistake.
          5th Law: A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.

          1. Loodt Pretorius

            DirkH, may I suggest a 6th law?

            The total number of stupid persons increase with time as the scary thing is, they breed while we speak.

          2. Jeff

            Could I maybe add a seventh law:
            As soon as you make something idiot-proof,
            someone comes up with a “better” idiot.

    3. sod

      “Feel sorry for SOD, after all he is rapidly losing all his ethically invested money”

      Did you read your article?

      “he Energy Select Sector SPDR exchange-traded fund, which tracks the alternative energy sector, is down 15 percent over the past eight years.”

      Down 15% in 8 years sounds horrible! But keep reading:

      “Overall, the entire energy sector has struggled, with the S&P 500 energy index down almost a quarter in 2015.”

      Down 25% in one year? that is a totally different beast! And we are talking about entrenched old companies with lots of money and paid off huge power plants (free money production).

      15% loss over 8 years in the gambling new technology branch will mean, that many gamblers actually made money.

      25% loss in the old power companies in one year will mean, plenty of people have had a serious cut to their pension money.

      1. DirkH

        So you’re losing money slower than someone else? Way to go sod!
        Well as wind turbines are your favorite, and as they’re money losers, when we ignore the rich subsidies, that only makes sense.

        1. sod

          “So you’re losing money slower than someone else? Way to go sod!”

          I am not losing any money. And the comparison is not with “someone else”.

          The comparison is with old fossile fuel companies. And those lose more than the new green companies.

          Believe it or not. But you can not change the facts.

          1. DirkH

            “I am not losing any money.”

            So you’re a hypocrite – you are not even invested in the renewables industry that you constantly advertise.

          2. sod

            “So you’re a hypocrite – you are not even invested in the renewables industry that you constantly advertise.”

            hypocrite does not mean what you think it does:

            “Hypocrisy is the claim or pretense of holding beliefs, standards, behaviors, or virtues that one does not truly hold. Hypocrisy is often mistook as one’s failure to do that which they ask of others”

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy

            So i am a hypocrite, if i try to convince people of investing in solar, when i actually think it will fail. That is not what i am doing.

            What you do, is a showbook case of hypocrisy. You either attack me for having investments or for not having them.

          3. DirkH

            “What you do, is a showbook case of hypocrisy. You either attack me for having investments or for not having them.”

            That is not hipocrisy. That is called shooting fish in a barrell. And yes it’s a guilty pleasure of mine.

      2. Stephen Richards

        I’m invested in Total, SOD, got a 4.7% divi this year and last against 0.7% at the bank. Capital gain has been the best ever but I’m breaking even.

        1. sod

          “I’m invested in Total, SOD,”

          Thanks for your help towards green energy:

          “thanks to our affiliate SunPower®, we are now the world’s second-ranked photovoltaic energy operator”

          http://de.total.com/en-us/making-energy-better/new-energies

          second ranked. wow!

          Thanks to a changing world, even investments in dirty power get difficult!

          1. DirkH

            So, semiconductor fabs are “clean” and burning hydrocarbons is “dirty”?
            Maybe you should one day learn something about chemistry. And, maybe the lifetime of solar cells, hint, you constantly need to replace them.

          2. sod

            “So, semiconductor fabs are “clean” and burning hydrocarbons is “dirty”?”

            Yes. That seems to be the mainstream position these days.

            “the lifetime of solar cells, hint, you constantly need to replace them.”

            That is false. They can work for 30 years and you can of course recycle part of them.

        2. DirkH

          sod 31. October 2015 at 4:41 PM | Permalink
          ““So, semiconductor fabs are “clean” and burning hydrocarbons is “dirty”?”
          Yes. That seems to be the mainstream position these days.”

          That seems to be complete bullcrap to me. Hint, we offsourced it to the far East for a reason.

          ““the lifetime of solar cells, hint, you constantly need to replace them.”
          That is false. They can work for 30 years and you can of course recycle part of them.”

          They continue working with ever diminishing electricity production. That is what I mean with the need of constant replacing. I really have to explain every single word to you it seems. Is that because you’re so smart you can’t grasp simple facts anymore?

          And yes, you can recycle EVERYTHING. AT A COST. It costs you ENERGY. And it is most of the time more costly than mining, refining and producing from scratch.

  10. Il Presidente della Polonia Andrzej Duda volta le spalle al Processo di Ratifica del Trattato di Kyoto, mettendo a rischio il Trattato di Parigi! : Attività Solare ( Solar Activity )

    […] Fonte: Poland president throws wrench into kyoto treaty ratification process […]

  11. Stephen Richards

    hasn’t been the best ever

  12. Doet Vladimir (Ras)Poetin de Buckler nog voor Amerika Trump, Carson, Rubio of Cruz kiest? - Climategate.nl

    […] Zou het kunnen dat we nu met klimaat ook een oost-westsituatie gaan zien waarbij het oosten gelijk heeft en het westen niet? Dan zitten we altijd goed. Of we krijgen Trump/Carson/Rubio/Cruz en krijgen dan een dubbele implosie van het wereldwijde klimaatbeleid. Of we krijgen Hillary en daarmee een verdere socialisering van Amerika en een verdere implosie van Amerika als wereldmacht. Volgens de theorie van het machtsvacuum kan het dan niet anders dan dat Rusland zijn invloedsfeer naar ons gaat uitbreiden en dat we door Poetin van de klimaatfraude worden bevrijd. Polen is met de net gekozen nieuwe rechtse president Duda al om! Zie hier. […]

  13. JJM Gommers

    Duda understands that the pressure on the fossil fuel industry is mainly geopolitically driven, interesting how the bargain with his counterparts will turn out.

  14. David Appell

    Sorry, but Poland simply isn’t significant enough to throw a “wrench” into the Paris conference. They simply aren’t that important via a via CO2 emissions.

    1. David Johnson

      Yes they are

  15. Poland’s President Andrzej Duda Throws Wrench Into Kyoto Treaty Ratification Process, Puts Paris Treaty At Risk! | wchildblog

    […] From NoTricksZone, by P Gosselin, Oct 2015 […]

  16. Kurt in Switzerland

    David,

    Yet Poland IS significant because, apart from collective teeth-gnashing by NGOs and the rest of the Climate Pious, there are no significant negative consequences to Poland’s rejection of the bullying. Yet caving in to the bullying would have been devastating to the Polish economy. Had Poland played the piety game, she would have been lauded for her courage by the usual suspects: blah, blah, blah.

    The demonization of fossil fuels has always been a bizarre, tendentious argument. Furthermore, it rejects reality: fossil fuels will remain extremely valuable to the global economy for many decades to come, from being a source of thermal energy in manufacturing, to processing and electricity generation, as propellants, and as a source of raw material in modern polymers. (Many of these are fundamental in so-called green energy technologies). Thinking otherwise is rivers in Wales & Egypt.

    Dee.
    Nile.

    Andrzej Duda, by standing up for Poland’s economy over EU Climate Catastrophism, is the modern-day incarnation of the young lad in H-C Andersen’s “The Emperor’s New Clothes” — for he has pointed out publicly what many have been thinking privately. Now others may follow.

    1. Kurt in Switzerland

      Meant for David Appell, of course.

  17. Dick Cobus

    Why waste all this money on solar and wind that is too expensive per kw. Just look at Ontario Canada. There is of course a great solution in “fusion” power not fission. Spend your money there.