Spiegel Commentary On COP21: “Not Going To Be A Big Success”…”At Most A Small Step Down A Long Road”

In Paris thousands, if not tens of thousands, of climate delegates, activists, government officials are now meeting for the 21st time with the aim of hammering out a binding climate treaty to “rescue the planet”.

Not only has the endless string of conferences been getting on the nerves of informed skeptics, but also on those of some major media outlets, like Spiegel here.

Spiegel journalist, doomsday believer,  writes he has totally low expectations over the outcome of COP21 and what may be agreed on. He writes:

The climate summit in Paris is not going to rescue the planet. There is not going to be a treaty that will solve the problem of global warming.”

In short nothing substantial is going to happen – no matter how historic some may proclaim the outcome to be in the end. The travelling circus will continue for years and years. Seidler is sure of it, and predicts of COP21:

In the end the news of a big success will not come to pass. There is not going to be a treaty on the table that is going to save the planet. […] At most there will be a small step down a long road.”

Seidler does believe the planet is on the way to catastrophe, and that urgent action needs to be taken, but he is not optimistic anything is going to happen in Paris. On latter point many of us agree.

Perhaps the strategy of taking of small steps is intentional and is the way out of the madness. Move slowly and eventually the problem will go away before any real painful changes ever get enacted. By 2017 we will be feeling the full impact of the expected La Nina, and the embarrassing temperature plateau will have persisted over 20 years. Moreover the US may have a president who may have a far less sympathetic stance on the issue. The timeframe for reaching the theoretical 2°C target will also become even more absurd. Goalposts will be moved yet again, all accompanied by howls of laughter.

Indeed lots of sand is yet to be poured into the gears of the treaty machinery as it moves down “the long road”.

One reason Seidler is so pessimistic is that the treaty needs to be agreed upon by some 190 nations, all of whom are trying to tweak the text in their own favor. In the end it gets so complicated that no one is able to really understand it.

For Seidler the conference circuses are tough to witness, but in the end he concludes they are at least budging the process forward in the right direction. Seidler concludes, “All the senselessness makes sense.”

 

18 responses to “Spiegel Commentary On COP21: “Not Going To Be A Big Success”…”At Most A Small Step Down A Long Road””

  1. Pointman

    “Some people want other people to give them money. Other people don’t feel like giving them money. In summary, that was four months of negotiations in Bonn, and Paris won’t be any different.”

    https://thepointman.wordpress.com/2015/11/26/cop21-doing-the-the-climate-can-can-in-paris/

    Pointman

  2. DirkH

    I think it is time again to point out the absolute absurdity of the warmunist theory. As sod does not know ANYTHING about the very pseudoscience he peddles he might actually learn something. So listen sod.

    Warmunist theory says that 5% of the Greenhouse effect is caused by CO2 and 95% by water vapor. Now, they say, and let their computers talk, as CO2 rises a bit, it leads to a small rise of average temperature, allowing the atmosphere to take up more water vapor, which makes the Greenhouse effect even worse, and so on, until Venus-like conditions turn the planet into an unlivable hell.

    To shorten this: DRY atmosphere doesn’t warm measurably, MOIST atmosphere warms FAR more.

    So let’s compare two different areas of the landmass of the planet with different moisture levels. Rainforest and Desert. Both receive huge amounts of insolation.

    Now, as we can easily observe – and as is acknowledge by the very Green Warmunists themselves, as they plead for a protection of the rainforest – a rainforest has far less temperature extremes than a desert, making it the most biodiverse area of the planet.

    Now get THIS: The warmunists WANT those hot places to be moist – and at the SAME TIME they propagate a theory that says that ATMOSPHERIC MOISTURE WILL KILL THE PLANET.

    Quite amazing isn’t it. Now what is missing in the fraudulent warmunist computer models? Simple. THE STEAM CYCLE. A moist atmosphere is a STEAM ENGINE. And what does a steam engine do? IT TRANSPORTS HEAT.
    The HOTTER the more EFFICIENT. And from where to where does it transport heat? Well there’s only one direction according to thermodynamics: from HOT to COLD.

    And that’s the total and utter crazyness of warmunism in a few short sentences.

    1. DirkH

      …I should have added – for those who do not even know about the lapse rate – that as an atmospheric steam engine transports heat from hot to cold it necessarily, invariably, and always, moves heat UPWARDS – from where it gets radiated to space by our good old triatomic molecule friend with the broad absorption AND emission bands, CO2.

      Of which we make more and more.

  3. Mikky

    Global Warming is both too big to fail (the AGW industry would collapse, and anarchists would have to go back to attacking McDonald’s) and too big to succeed for the same reason, whatever happens at COP21 the AGW industry will keep its extortion racket going.

    Sceptics are the ones who should be pessimistic, if temps continue to not rise the AGW industry will claim the credit, if they do rise the AGW industry will say “told you so”.

    1. Dave in the states

      The problem with warmists claiming credit if the “pause” continues, or if there is cooling (likely), is that co2 emissions have been and will continue to rise no matter what. This invalidates the co2 correlation. And it is the assumed co2 correlation that sustains the movement. Why, as Dirk pointed out above, as co2 is actually a very minor player in the overall climate system? Because co2 and its sources can be taxed. Always follow the money.

  4. Graeme No.3

    Mikky:
    and if temperatures fall?
    I know they might try to claim the credit but they won’t be heard over the rude laughter and cat-calls.

  5. John F. Hultquist

    Seidler does believe the planet is on the way to catastrophe, and that urgent action needs to be taken.

    If he is under 30 and lives to be 90 he may recognize some changes. With luck I will make it to 2035. While I will see some new things, I won’t see a major transition. Consider:

    The world’s economy is large, complex, dependent on carbon based fuel, and can change very slowly. Consider the sales of autos in the USA. There will be about 18.24 Million sales in 2015 and slightly under 60% are light trucks. I think the Ford pickup (F-150) is the biggest seller and because of the change to aluminum panels the company has lagged in its desired production schedule.
    From 1993 through 2014 the average has been 15.35 Million sales per year. Most use gasoline.

    Consider all the highways, bridges, parking lots and buildings, and all that goes with these vehicles. The average age of cars is about 11.5 years. {We still own a 1980 Chevy pickup.} I haven’t mentioned commercial (“18-wheelers”) trucks that move raw materials and finished products.

    So this is just in the USA. The wealth accumulated in this package is so great it cannot be calculated, and meanwhile it grows and will continue to do so, regardless of what happens in Paris or the next big Party.

  6. Ian G

    This is what GISS has done to temps since 2010 so as to ‘eliminate the pause’.
    GISS graph showing temps to 2009. Scroll down to P3 of the report. Only 2005 is above 0.6C.
    http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2010/20100127_TemperatureFinal.pdf

    Now here is the latest graph of temps up to 2014 by GISS. Note the number of years from 1998 – 2009 above 0.6C now compared to the original.
    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif

    So, if the warmists get everything they wish for, of course the temps will go down. The boys at NOAA and GISS will make sure the temps decrease.

  7. Mike Spilligan

    Maybe Seidler knows what the COP21 final communique says (it’s almost certainly already written as a final draft) – so “low expectations” it is and any shortfall on even those can be quickly painted over. Another triumph for mediocrity.

  8. sod

    The article is cautious.

    But China is currently facing extreme smog problems.

    http://fortune.com/2015/12/01/chinas-toxic-smog/

    Basically everyone finally is starting to understand that we need to take action. And because action was taken in the past, we have solar and wind as real alternatives to enormous amounts of coal power.

    So we will see. Just wait a little longer!

    1. DirkH

      Well there ‘s a simple solution; flue gas scrubbing.
      You end up with clean air and affordable energy.
      You hate that, right?

      1. sod

        “Well there ‘s a simple solution; flue gas scrubbing.”

        These are installed in China. Sometimes they do not get used. Sometimes it just is not enough.

        And the coal ash accidents in the USA are also telling a story about coal remains.

        1. DirkH

          Okay, genius: INSTALLING flue gas scrubbing AND USING them. Are you happy now?

  9. sod

    oh and by the way, in the real world, things are already changing. Also in Spiegel, a report about the new split up of RWE. The title “die guten ins Töpfchen” is from the cinderella stoy, in which the doves put the good stuff into a pot.

    In this case, the good stuff are the grid and the alternative power sources. But listen to the boss himself:

    “Terium sprach von einer kleinen Revolution, die RWE jetzt vorhabe, räumte aber auch große Versäumnisse ein. Der Konzern habe zu viel Geld in den Ausbau der konventionellen Kraftwerke gesteckt – auch wegen interner Widerstände. “Es gab zu wenig Veränderungsbereitschaft, und das ausgerechnet in der Energiewende. Vielerorts wurde bei uns lieber der Kopf in den Sand gesteckt”, sagte Terium.”

    http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/rwe-die-wichtigsten-antworten-zum-geplanten-umbau-a-1065476.html

    “too much money into the growth of conventional power plant”. “too little change”, “sticking the head into the sand”.

    1. DirkH

      As to the fate of RWE, who cares. THe centrally planned warmunist energy cost ramp up / trillion dollar theft / subsidation business has victims amongst real energy producers just like amongst the Warmunist fetish companies – currently that Spanish solar wreck and US SunEdison. (Fetish companies because their business model is not selling energy but raking in taxpayer money)

      What do we learn from this? a) Stay away from the energy business if you’re not a government crony with advance inside information – it is not a market anymore but a feast of statist/socialist gang-bangers – and b): As goes the energy business so goes the economy: BELLY-UP.

      1. David Johnson

        I couldn’t have put it any better myself

  10. matthu

    There won’t be any need to demonstrate evidential cause in court.

    Large companies will become obliged to take out insurance against climate change as part of Corporate responsibility and insurance companies will become inured to settling these payments rather than fighting them in court.

    This will generate large funding for insurance companies and lawyers and a continual flow of resources from the developed world to the undeveloped.

  11. Mervyn

    The Paris Climate Conference is being attended by global warming propagandists … and when one listens to what leaders like Obama have had to say, it makes it evident that these people are all living in a ‘mixed up world of make believe’ … like they have been transported into a world of delusion where climate snack-oil salesmen are trying to flog their global warming potion.