Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

IPCC Official: “Climate Policy Is Redistributing The World’s Wealth”
Watts Up With That? ^ | November 18, 2010 | Anthony Watts

Posted on 11/18/2010 8:45:15 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach

Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 14 November 2010

Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, says the German economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer. The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated. – Ottmar Edenhofer

For those who may not know, Ottmar Edenhofer is the co-chair of the IPCC Working Group III.

Former WG III Co-Chair Bert Metz (left) congratulates Ottmar Edenhofer on his election in Geneva.

Interview by: Bernard Potter

NZZ am Sonntag: Mr. Eden, everybody concerned with climate protection demands emissions reductions. You now speak of “dangerous emissions reduction.” What do you mean?

Ottmar Edenhofer: So far economic growth has gone hand in hand with the growth of greenhouse gas emissions. One percent growth means one percent more emissions. The historic memory of mankind remembers: In order to get rich one has to burn coal, oil or gas. And therefore, the emerging economies fear CO2 emission limits.

But everybody should take part in climate protection, otherwise it does not work.

That is so easy to say. But particularly the industrialized countries have a system that relies almost exclusively on fossil fuels. There is no historical precedent and no region in the world that has decoupled its economic growth from emissions. Thus, you cannot expect that India or China will regard CO2 emissions reduction as a great idea. And it gets worse: We are in the midst of a renaissance of coal, because oil and gas (sic) have become more expensive, but coal has not. The emerging markets are building their cities and power plants for the next 70 years, as if there would be permanently no high CO 2 price.

The new thing about your proposal for a Global Deal is the stress on the importance of development policy for climate policy. Until now, many think of aid when they hear development policies.

That will change immediately if global emission rights are distributed. If this happens, on a per capita basis, then Africa will be the big winner, and huge amounts of money will flow there. This will have enormous implications for development policy. And it will raise the question if these countries can deal responsibly with so much money at all.

That does not sound anymore like the climate policy that we know.

Basically it’s a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization. The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War. Why? Because we have 11,000 gigatons of carbon in the coal reserves in the soil under our feet – and we must emit only 400 gigatons in the atmosphere if we want to keep the 2-degree target. 11 000 to 400 – there is no getting around the fact that most of the fossil reserves must remain in the soil.

De facto, this means an expropriation of the countries with natural resources. This leads to a very different development from that which has been triggered by development policy.

First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.

Nevertheless, the environment is suffering from climate change – especially in the global south.

It will be a lot to do with adaptation. But that just goes far beyond traditional development policy: We will see in Africa with climate change a decline in agricultural yields. But this can be avoided if the efficiency of production is increased – and especially if the African agricultural trade is embedded in the global economy. But for that we need to see that successful climate policy requires other global trade and financial policies.

Full Interview h/t to Dr. Benny Peiser at the GWPF


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: climatechange; climategate; globalwarming; globalwarminghoax; gorebullwarming; ipcc

1 posted on 11/18/2010 8:45:22 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge; steelyourfaith; Grampa Dave; SierraWasp; tubebender; Carry_Okie; Brad's Gramma; ...

Major News ping!


2 posted on 11/18/2010 8:46:14 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
69 Responses to IPCC Official: “Climate Policy Is Redistributing The World’s Wealth”

**********************************EXCERPT*******************************************

  1. crosspatch says:

    Well doesn’t that just put the “D” in “Duh”. I have been saying that it was just a scam to scare people into buying into a “wealth redistribution” scheme for years.

  2. Curiousgeorge says:

    How many years have people been saying this? 4, 5? At least. So it’s now coming out in the open as if it were a good thing. That’s the spin. The progressive agenda is a GOOD THING . It’s a good thing that we will all be “equal” ( equally miserable in reality). My answer to that: BITE ME.

  3. Juraj V. says:

    Well timed earthquake, or meteorite blast. Accept no substitutes.

  4. DirkH says:

    He’s from the IPCC and says this publicly? Did they drug him? Is the IPCC collectively suicidal now?

  5. JEM says:

    Nice to see he’s not even shy about admitting it.

    Okay, this guy goes in the ‘evil’ bucket…

  6. Scott Covert says:

    The Green Revoloution does a collective Facepalm.

    “You’re supposed to keep that a secret!”.


3 posted on 11/18/2010 8:47:57 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Clive; scripter; Darnright; WL-law; bamahead; carolinablonde; SolitaryMan; ...

Thanx Ernest_at_the_Beach !

 


Beam me to Planet Gore !

4 posted on 11/18/2010 8:48:19 PM PST by steelyourfaith (ObamaCare Death Panels: a Final Solution to the looming Social Security crisis ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: steelyourfaith

The Battle is going to the next level now!


5 posted on 11/18/2010 8:51:06 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

ping for use in my daughters upcoming ‘climate change’ report.


6 posted on 11/18/2010 8:53:16 PM PST by texas_mrs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: texas_mrs
More from the comments:

**********************************EXCERPT********************************************

Donna Laframboise says:

November 18, 2010 at 3:10 pm

I’ve done a post today about how at least four people named to work on the IPCC’s AR5 report are employees of something called the United Nations University.

So one UN body – the IPCC – appoints employees of another UN entity, whose “research” is assisted by still other UN bodies. That research is then brazenly presented to the press under the guise of a Media Training Workshop sponsored by the UNFCCC – the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Talk about inbreeding and nepotism.

Should UN Employees be IPCC Lead Authors?

7 posted on 11/18/2010 8:55:40 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
More:

*******************************EXCERPT***************************************

Geraldo Luís Lino says:

November 18, 2010 at 3:40 pm

Almost twenty years ago, Maurice “Mr Carbon” Strong spilled all the beans about the true agenda of the environmentalist movement to the also Canadian prize-winner journalist Elaine Dewar. It’s all in her book “Cloak of Green” (Toronto: James Lorimer, 1995), that is mandatory reading for the understanding of this stuff. Last January, Potsdam Institute’s Herr Hans Joachim Schellnhuber also admitted to Der Spiegel that he was – literally – the inventor of the 2 degree “magic limit” mentioned by his countryman Edenhofer. So, there’s nothing new in such “confessions,” they come out from the self-sufficiency and arrogance of those who regard themseleves as the self-appointed movers and shakers of the world.


8 posted on 11/18/2010 8:57:55 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
More:

**********************************EXCERPT********************************************

James Sexton says:

November 18, 2010 at 3:42 pm

Anyone still under the misconception that the U.N. is about world peace? It is well past time for the nations of the world to withdraw from such an enterprise. What is interesting, though, is that this economist is correct in many assertions he made.

That is so easy to say. But particularly the industrialized countries have a system that relies almost exclusively on fossil fuels. There is no historical precedent and no region in the world that has decoupled its economic growth from emissions. Thus, you cannot expect that India or China will regard CO2 emissions reduction as a great idea. And it gets worse: We are in the midst of a renaissance of coal, because oil and gas (sic) have become more expensive, but coal has not.

But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.

But the most important quote, Ottmar Edenhofer: So far economic growth has gone hand in hand with the growth of greenhouse gas emissions. One percent growth means one percent more emissions. The historic memory of mankind remembers: In order to get rich one has to burn coal, oil or gas. This remains true today and will tomorrow.

9 posted on 11/18/2010 9:00:14 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Sheesh, they don’t even pretend anymore


10 posted on 11/18/2010 9:01:37 PM PST by RightGeek (FUBO and the donkey you rode in on)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
More:

***********************************EXCERPT****************************************

Andrew30 says:

November 18, 2010 at 4:08 pm

I expect that he is just cashing out. He has just written a new book and he is on a book tour. Controversy will help increase media attention (though in this case the MSM may completely censor this interview), which will increase sales. The book is not about the environment; it is about making him some money and perhaps line up a new job after Cancun.

11 posted on 11/18/2010 9:02:21 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RightGeek

See #11.


12 posted on 11/18/2010 9:03:02 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Well, there you have it. The agenda is now on the table after decades of dissimulation.


13 posted on 11/18/2010 9:03:56 PM PST by TigersEye (Who crashed the markets on 9/28/08 and why?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightGeek

If they’re bold enough to say something like this, they have an Ace up their sleeve. Something’s up. They just put a effing bull’s eye on all of them.


14 posted on 11/18/2010 9:04:43 PM PST by Hoosier-Daddy ( "It does no good to be a super power if you have to worry what the neighbors think." BuffaloJack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Thanks for that. Just ticks me off so much how our schools are teaching this crap, meanwhile the country wonders what we can do to improve education.


15 posted on 11/18/2010 9:07:45 PM PST by texas_mrs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Hoosier-Daddy
Could be desperation...Obama has only two more years....

And the ClimateGate one year anniversary was just a few days ago.

16 posted on 11/18/2010 9:08:17 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
More from the comments:

***********************************EXCERPTS*************************************

kramer says:

November 18, 2010 at 5:09 pm

Jimbo said:
As a result Cancun will be a bigger failure than Coenhagen. How many rich countries would agree to this? What if just China said no way?

The democrats (and a few RINOs) in our country would. For example, remember Clinton and Gore? They tried to get us to sign onto Kyoto and according to Cass Sunstien, America would have probably paid up to 80% of the costs of Kyoto and China and India would have probably received the bulk of these funds.
http://www.georgetownlawjournal.com/issues/pdf/96-5/Posner-Sunstein.PDF

I believe this move by Clinton to get us signed onto Kyoto was payback for the illegal contributions the communist Chinese government gave Clinton (and the DNC) in the ’90s. (Clinton also paid them back with PNTR and the result since then has been millions of jobs lost to China over the last 10 years.) What a legacy he left behind. And I didn’t even get into his role in the subprime economic mess.

17 posted on 11/18/2010 9:09:47 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Of course it is. (Thanks for posting, Ernest.)

Life, liberty and the pursuit and destruction of totalitarians.


18 posted on 11/18/2010 9:14:09 PM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Earlier thread:

UN IPCC Official Admits 'We Redistribute World's Wealth By Climate Policy'

19 posted on 11/18/2010 9:17:27 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

It all boils down to this:
Henry Kissinger declared in the 1970’s, ‘If you control the oil you control the country; if you control food, you control the population.


20 posted on 11/18/2010 10:17:56 PM PST by steveab (When was the last time someone tried to sell you a CO2 induced climate control system for your home?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Link to article at WUWT.....guess i messed up the link on the original post of the article.:

IPCC Official: “Climate Policy Is Redistributing The World’s Wealth”

21 posted on 11/19/2010 5:12:50 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Now we have :

105 Responses to IPCC Official: “Climate Policy Is Redistributing The World’s Wealth”

22 posted on 11/19/2010 5:13:55 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
We are in the midst of a renaissance of coal, because oil and gas (sic) have become more expensive

Because of ill-conceived environmental regulations perhaps?

23 posted on 11/19/2010 5:16:01 AM PST by Brett66 (Where government advances, and it advances relentlessly , freedom is imperiled -Janice Rogers Brown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
More from the comments:

*************************************EXCERPT***************************************

kramer says:

November 18, 2010 at 4:36 pm

I’ve been saying this for years. These “greens” want to use AGW to redistribute wealth, both within and between nations, they want us to transfer our technology and tech know-how to the world, they are using AGW to help start a global government that will manage the world’s resources, and they expect our standard of living to be significantly lowered in order so that there’s more oil and other natural resources for the rest of the world to use.

AGW probably really means (in the inner green circles)

Apportioning Global Wealth.


24 posted on 11/19/2010 5:19:01 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
More:

********************************EXCERPT**********************************************

galileonardo says:

November 18, 2010 at 9:08 pm

Betsy says: “I think you all are missing something here. The AGW folks want to keep Africa as poor as possible, other than various oligarchies, so that Africa won’t emit any ‘evil CO2′.”

Bingo, despite some of the protests I see. I was reading through the comments waiting for someone to point out what is the real goal of the global governance/redistribution agenda. The agenda isn’t about helping the poor. It is about the effort to “make sure there is not another United States.” I wrote about this at length a while back on The Air Vent (thanks Jeff):

http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/uns-ideal-global-government/#more-10157

A few comments here have touched upon the real agenda, but I am surprised at how many of the posters here are surprised. I’m sorry to echo crosspatch’s comment right out of the gate, but DUH! None of this was conspiracy theory or far-fetched in any way and the UN’s Emissions Scenarios was written a decade ago. As I point out in my article, this information is all out there in their own words! This might have been a hint:

“Massive income redistribution and presumably high taxation levels may adversely affect the economic efficiency and functioning of world markets.”

Whodathunkit. Using their own figures, the dent in global GDP by 2100 following their Sustainable Development B1 Scenario will be $200 trillion annually! The annual per capita income among the poor will be $35,000 instead of $70,000. Those are their numbers folks.

So, as Betsy points out, this is about controlling the world’s resources, stifling development in Annex 2 countries, and “de-developing,” as John Holdren calls it, the U.S. and other Annex 1 countries. As I note in the article, the only things sustained under SD B1 are misery and poverty, and that prolonging of poverty will be a death sentence for millions. As others have pointed out, the climate agreements transparently reflect this agenda. The only conspiracy involved was the conspiracy of not admitting to the real global governance agenda despite the readily-available evidence to the contrary.

I cannot tell you how many times I was called a conspiracy theorist, involved in black helicopter talk, wearing a tin-foil hat, etc. when bringing this up. Always the response was the same old nothing to see here with a “crackpot” thrown in for good measure. Well I’ll be sure to share Edenhofer’s admissions with the next AGW zealot who tries to claim that the IPCC is all about the science. The claim is right but they have the wrong scientific field in mind. These puppets are activist scientists engaged in wholly political science. Thanks for yet another exoneration AGW cultists, not that any skeptic needed it.

And the thing that angers me to no end is Edenhofer’s admission that this is not about the real environmental issues facing the planet. As an environmentalist myself, this diversion of resources, attention, and, last but not least, scientific credibility, has been one of my primary bones with these AGW control freaks all along. This “movement” has set back real climate science and true environmentalism for who knows how long.

While Hansen, Mann et al were pre-occupied with their misguided AGW advocacy, the last white rhino in Krugersdorp was killed, ridiculously huge areas of habitat was destroyed to make way for ends-justify-the-means biofuels and solar arrays, and many other environmental/humanitarian issues that could have been directly affected with proven results were put on the back burner to focus on the CO2 phantom menace. By-and-large the real environmental degradation taking place worldwide remains largely unaddressed. It is a travesty. Thanks for nothing. Since many of you are surprised and most might miss this in the article I reference above, here are some of the terms/phrases from the Copenhagen negotiating text I gathered that you should familiarize yourself with:

Historical climate debt; transparent system of governance; compensate for lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and dignity; environmental justice; green fund; levies on CO2 emissions; taxes on carbon-intensive products and services; levies on international and maritime transport; levies on international transactions; penalties or fines for non-compliance; ODA additional to ODA targets; adaptation debt; 2 per cent of gross national product; and uniform global levy.

Open up your wallets folks. Oh, I almost forgot. As Doug says, this won’t go down without a fight. I’d say it’s high time to put up your dukes if you haven’t already. I hate to keep quoting myself, but the fastest way to true environmental stewardship is wealth. Get out of the world’s way or, quite simply, you’ll be pushed out of the way. I sure intend on fighting this fight until this people-punishing agenda in dead and buried. Ding. Ding. Cheers!


25 posted on 11/19/2010 5:34:28 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: All
Related thread:

US Government in Massive New Global Warming Scandal – NOAA Disgraced (450 / 600 F Temp Readings!?)

26 posted on 11/19/2010 5:40:34 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: All
More from galileonardo...see post # 25.

Started a thread with postings from "the Air Vent":

UN’s Ideal – Global Government ( with funding via carbon credits )

27 posted on 11/19/2010 5:59:28 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach ( Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Everyone should have a couple copies of this book to pass along to friends.


28 posted on 02/03/2012 12:37:55 PM PST by Baynative (The penalty for not participating in politics is you will be governed by your inferiors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

“First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.”

I wonder what his Freeper name is!?

I’m not sure whether to thank the little bastard or say FUOE. (Excuse my french - but this REALLY makes me angry).


29 posted on 02/03/2012 12:46:46 PM PST by 21twelve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson