UN Paris pact could be used to levy carbon taxes, block infrastructure projects.
Chris Horner: Rejoining the UN Paris climate treaty will immediately subject U.S. energy policy — and thereby economic and to some extent trade policy — to a UN “climate conciliation commission”... Already, as the United Kingdom has shown, developed nations’ courts can be expected to cite the Paris climate treaty in blocking infrastructure development. The UK’s Court of Appeal ruled earlier this year that Heathrow Airport cannot be expanded because that would violate the UK’s ‘net zero’ commitment under Paris.
Then, Canada offered a reminder how progressive politicians will raise taxes in the name of complying with Paris: In Ottawa, “The parliamentary budget officer says the federal carbon tax would have to rise over the coming years if the country is to meet emission-reduction targets under the Paris climate accord.” Now we are reminded that the U.S. can also expect a forum for antagonistic nations to bring their complaints about U.S. policy and claims of non-compliance with Paris’s required “Net Zero” agenda for resolution. ...
Paris requires, and mandates the U.S. revisit and tighten “Green New Deal”-style policies every five years. This is among the many reasons why the Paris climate agreement is a treaty, and also why it never would have been ratified. However, very soon, Americans may nonetheless be subject to its long-envisioned climate court."
WAPO: We have to "manage our expectations," researchers warn.
"The young climate activists clamoring today for rapid cuts to the world’s fossil fuel emissions could be well into their 30s or 40s before the impact of those changes becomes apparent, scientists said in a study published Tuesday. As if curbing climate change wasn’t tough enough already, the new research finds that even if humans sharply reduce greenhouse gas emissions now — cutting carbon dioxide, methane and other pollutants by at least 5 percent or more a year — it could still take decades before it’s clear those actions are beginning to slow the rate of the Earth’s warming. ...
Even with an immediate halt to all carbon dioxide emissions, the study found that proof of a change would probably not emerge until 2033...
Countries around the world have agreed in principle to slash their emissions over time as part of the Paris climate accord, but it remains uncertain whether there will be political pressure to pull back if the impacts aren’t immediately visible."
Dinesh D'Souza responds: "What an incredible racket the climate brigade has created. Not only have their models been wildly wrong for DECADES, but now they say they won't even be able to prove their ideas work for 3 more decades! No accountability and no dissent allowed."
Harvard Mag: These are all important questions—but even they ignore a central certainty that no one appears to be addressing: what Dan Schrag calls “climate change’s dirty little secret.” “Even if we could become carbon-neutral tomorrow,” says the director of the Harvard University Center for the Environment, “the climate will keep changing for thousands of years, the ice sheets will keep melting, and the seas will continue to rise.”
Climate Depot's Marc Morano: "So now an allegedly esteemed Harvard professor admits that controlling the climate is futile. Are we supposed to be surprised at this 'secret' that climate skeptics have always known? Even the climate activists will now have to concede that the climate will not stop changing if we refuse to enact the UN Paris pact and the Green New Deal."
Philip Stott, professor emeritus of Biogeography at the University of London, points out that “climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically-selected factor [CO2], is as misguided as it gets. It's scientific nonsense."