EU Leaders Said to Delay Decision on 2030 Carbon Target … EU carbon prices rose as much as 3 percent to a 13-month high of 6.88 euros on the ICE Futures Europe exchange in London today, buoyed by the commission's plan to start temporary curbs on supply as soon as next month … Most governments in the 28-nation bloc need more time to reconcile differences over a proposal by the EU's regulatory arm calling for tighter emissions restrictions and an overhaul of renewable energy policies by 2030, said the people, who asked not to be identified because of policies against speaking publicly. – Bloomberg
Dominant Social Theme: Global warming solutions are in doubt but need to be applied.
Free-Market Analysis: One has to give globalists credit for continuing to promote the global warming meme.
After 17 years without a temperature uptick, after a series of exposés that show the warmist position was manufactured by a handful of supporters with a chokehold on journal publication, after physical evidence in the Antarctic that shows global COOLING, those invested in global warming continue support it.
In fact, we've read – predictably enough – the current cold weather throughout the US and Canada, and parts of South America besides, is also the result of global warming. When its warmer, the temperature change is due to global warming. When it's cooler … same thing.
And in the meantime, the legislative/regulatory process drags on. Every new deadline brings a crisis and dire predictions from supporters. And then, just when the entire international effort seems to be unraveling, some brave bureaucratic hack or another will step forward and "courageously" deliver the final vote to implement yet another draconian solution to the "problem."
And now again we are facing the umpteenth problematic deadline. And the warmists are out in force, backpeddling as they must while still vowing to move ahead on various deadlines to reduce dread carbon.
EU presidents and prime ministers will debate the issue in Brussels for the first time on1March 20 and may back setting a deadline for a decision later this year, they said. The delay may be a setback for the global effort to fight climate change and for United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, who is convening world leaders on Sept. 23 to set out ways to curb fossil fuel emissions.
The EU has for decades been at the forefront of that process, and hesitation on its part may remove a spur for the U.S. and China to act.
"It's very important that EU leaders set a time horizon in March for endorsement of the commission's proposal — that's a signal that Europe must send globally," said Tomas Wyns, a researcher at the Institute of European Studies at the Brussels Free University. "Hopefully that will be June. Otherwise it may only be October or at the end of the year."
The European Commission's proposal calls for carbon dioxide emissions to be cut by 40 percent by 2030, double the goal for 2020. It would require an average annual investment of 38 billion euros ($52 billion), according to an EU policy paper on Jan. 22. The current pace of reductions would lead the EU to a 32 percent cut by 2030.
Environment ministers will not aim to adopt a unanimous political statement on the 2030 package at their gathering, leaving the matter to the EU leaders, according to the two people with knowledge of the matter. Only after EU leaders back the strategy for the next decade will the commission be able to start drafting legislation on how to achieve the targets.
The law proposed by the commission will then need to be adopted by member states and the European Parliament. That process typically takes a year or two …
We can see from the above that no amount of pushback will deter warmist forces. The truth is seemingly held in little regard. In fact, this past September, a group of 50 international scientists produced a report supporting the viewpoint that global warming did NOT result from human-related greenhouse gas emissions.
It also pointed out that "no empirical evidence exists to substantiate the claim that 2°C of warming presents a threat to planetary ecologies or environments" and "warming will [not] be more economically costly than an equivalent cooling."
The report was given play in the conservative alternative media including Breitbart (from which the following points are taken). Unfortunately, and predictably, it was a UN report released in October that garnered significant mainstream attention. And the UN report predictably claimed definitive action was necessary to avert further atmospheric warming.
The September report, "Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science," released by The Heartland Institute, weighed in at 1,200 pages and was a work of considerable scientific scholarship. Here are some findings:
The summary: "We conclude no unambiguous evidence exists for adverse changes to the global environment caused by human-related CO2 emissions."
It is very obvious now that the power elite uses what we call dominant social themes to promote a variety of themes that are intended to result in further globalist solutions. What we call the Internet Reformation has exposed many of them – from Peak Oil to the "war on terror" to central banking and various scarcity memes that are designed to demand "international action."
The exposure of these memes has not seemingly resulted in lessened support from those who promote them, though it has resulted in considerable skepticism from the mass of the population that was supposed to believe them.
It is this expanding conflict between skeptical masses and a global elite that will likely shape the history of the 21st century. One desires an elite "step-back," but elites have staunchly defended their themes even when they have been obviously exposed.
We can see the same sort of pattern occurring again with global warming. They forge ahead regardless. And thus we are reminded of Upton Sinclair's 1927 novel Oil and the famous movie made from it entitled, "There Will Be Blood." We hope not.