How sending climate aid abroad helps the U.S

E&E News ^ | January 9, 2023 | By Jean Chemnick

[Oldeconomybuyer]

For years, the world’s wealthiest nations have dragged their feet on sending climate aid to developing countries.

One obstacle — perhaps the biggest obstacle — is convincing politicians in the United States, United Kingdom and elsewhere that climate investments abroad can make a difference back home. As former President Donald Trump quipped in 2017 about one U.N. climate initiative: It’s “yet another scheme to redistribute wealth out of the United States.”

But experts say that viewpoint is shortsighted. They argue that climate investments in developing countries offer some of the cheapest and best opportunities to avoid runaway warming and preserve geopolitical stability. And they warn that the United States sells itself short when it under-funds international climate efforts, as Congress did last month with the latest federal spending bill.

“The U.S. has more capacity to adapt, but it’s ultimately at least as vulnerable — and some of the very wealthiest parts of this country are as vulnerable — as other parts of the world,” said David Nicholson, chief climate officer at Mercy Corps. “And I think the American audience often doesn’t realize that.”

An analysis released in September by the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, a group composed mostly of more developed countries, found that rich nations fell short of the annual $100 billion goal in 2020, mobilizing just $83.3 billion in climate finance that year. Oxfam released an analysis last year that showed even less investment. It said rich countries mobilized less than $25 billion in 2020 — not even a quarter of the Copenhagen pledge.

Short-changing these funds, some experts say, is a recipe for disaster. Not only does it make it harder for the world to fight global warming, but it also sets the stage for future economic problems, as climate-juiced disasters wreak havoc …

[Oldeconomybuyer]

[Tell It Right]

It’s 100% USDA choice bull crap.

[central_va]

They know it’s BS. They know I know it’s BS. It’s an in your face power grab.

[FlingWingFlyer]

How does sending money to a bunch of freeloading, “developing countries” help “da enviomen”? Why the hell would you want to “develop” them anyway? Just a bunch more pollution makers. The environMENTAL crowd are real morons.

[hinckley buzzard]

The article is based on the premise of “opportunities to avoid runaway warming.”. Since “runaway warming” does not now exist and will not happen, the entire article is devoid of meaning. Has no bearing on the natural world, only the political domain.

[Leep]

It help the crooked politician’s bank accts.. by laundering cash...as well as bribes and pay offs.

[MMusson]

Tell it to Sri Lanka.

[rktman]

Climmunists doing that climmunist thing they do so well. Making money vanish from you and appear in their accounts. It’s climagical. Hey gangreen———🖕

[moovova]

"How sending climate aid abroad helps the US Big Guy collect his 10%."

There...fixed it.

[Dead Corpse]

Art 1 Sec 8 says nothing about Congress being able to give away “climate aid”.

Period.

[drwoof]

“Climate aid”. Hmm.

[UnwashedPeasant]

And remember: the only solution to the Climate Crisis is more Socialism.

[lewislynn]

And remember: the only solution to the Climate Crisis is more Socialism.

That was so 1980's.
They're way beyond that, been there done that goal now.

[marktwain]

No Barf alert?

What a scam.

[AZJeep]

There is no runaway global warming!
And anyway, almost all that money will just fill the coffers of the few connected and rich bosses in the poor countries.
Like every time we give them money.

[Cobra64]

Gimme… gimme… gimmee. I want your money! That’s all we ever hear from these people. Tell India and China to clean up their filthy cities.

[ConservativeInPA]

Experts say it’s shortsighted, in other words, anything to do with free market capitalism doesn’t work. It’s much better to take from the productive and give their hard earned money to shitholes, that will remain shitholes because the are not productive. It works on the global scale and micro scale. Sending money from the productive to the unproductive in American cities does the same thing at the neighborhood level. Have you ever see a shithole neighborhood become prosperous? The only way that happens is through gentrification, but those dollars were not forcibly redistributed and the former shithole tenants have to move out of the neighborhood for it to work.

There are some in the world that will never be able to lift themselves up. Get used to it and let them live in shitholes.