Posted on 11/21/2017 5:17:12 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
The recent round of U.N. climate negotiations ended Friday in Bonn, Germany. While no important decisions were made on climate finance — transfers from wealthy to poor countries to support climate mitigation and adaptation — the question of who pays for global climate gave rise to heated debates.
Trump’s decision leaves the United States alone outside the Paris agreement. While U.S. noncooperation shouldn’t deter other countries from pledging climate action, my recent research with Thijs Van de Graaf shows that it threatens industrialized countries’ promises of climate finance for mitigation and adaptation in poorer countries.
If the United States refuses to finance climate mitigation and adaptation in developing countries, then industrialized countries will have a hard time keeping their promise to offer $100 billion in climate finance every year from 2020.
These funds would support renewable energy, energy efficiency, forest conservation and other projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The money would also help poorer countries adapt to the consequences of climate change. For example, climate finance could fund levees to protect cities from flooding.
Trump’s hostility to climate policy poses a threat to future climate cooperation because it threatens to break a promise that industrialized countries made together in the 2015 Paris talks. Other industrialized countries would reap lots of goodwill and long-term benefits from filling the gap, but it remains to be seen whether they are willing and able to put together the funds required.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
FULL TITLE: Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris agreement means other countries will spend less to fight climate change
Johannes Urpelainen is the Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz Professor of Energy, Resources and Environment at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. He is also the founding director of the Initiative for Sustainable Energy Policy (ISEP).
The agreement is a farce. We WERE the money tree. Duh...
“...limate finance could fund levees to protect cities from flooding..”
How about NOT building cities in flood area to begin with? It’s always the USA taxpayer that has to pay for every global Bolshevik scheme. It never ever ends.
They say that like it is a bad thing!
Of course, my feeling is, if European countries want to take it on themselves to simply transfer wealth to third world countries run by tyrants who will happily accept it and pissing it away without any benefit to their own country...then I am good with that.
As long as they don't insist US taxpayer monies are used in the same fashion, I say go for it. A fool and their money are soon parted...:)
I believe Obama already gave them a HUGE down payment.
Losing an opportunity to extract $100B per year from American taxpayers still stings the globalists.
These funds would support renewable energy, energy efficiency, forest conservation and other projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
...
Those funds would end up going to cronies and be cycled back to crooked politicians. Scams like this are how politicians steal from us.
Grrr.
Well, you know the First Rule of Holes...Stop Digging!
Hope you don't mind my addition to your excellent comment:
It’s always the USA taxpayers' grandchildren that has to pay for every global Bolshevik scheme. It never ever ends.
We're broke. Enough with us paying everyone else's bills.
Maybe they can get Soros and Tom Steyer to chip in the billions they won’t be getting from the taxpayers.
How about those other countries PAY FOR THEIR OWN DAMN LEVEES?
Are they telling us that without money from the U.S. nothing can be done?
And here I thought the Brits, the Frogs , and the KRAUTS cared about the environment, guess just not as much when it’s their own MONEY that has to be spent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.