Skip to comments.U.N. optimistic the U.S. will finally hop on that climate-change bandwagon
Posted on 11/25/2012 7:54:34 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Ugh, here we go again: Self-righteous globalism-loving environmental zealots hellbent on getting developed nations to voluntarily contract their relatively prosperous economies, ostensibly in order to combat climate change, while trying to dictate the type of green development theyd like to see happen in poorer countries.
As Ive noted before, environmentalists are hopefully sniffing the air now that President Obama has won a second term, banking on the more flexible Obamas willingness to once again take up the mantle of climate change especially in the wake of this past summers droughts and superstorm Sandy. From the AP:
[A]s a re-elected president talks about global warming again, climate activists are cautiously optimistic that the U.S. will be more than a disinterested bystander when the U.N. climate talks resume Monday with a two-week conference in Qatar.
They will focus on side issues, like extending the Kyoto protocol an expiring emissions pact with a dwindling number of members and ramping up climate financing for poor nations.
They will also try to structure the talks for a new global climate deal that is supposed to be adopted in 2015, a process in which American leadership is considered crucial.
We need the U.S. to engage even more, European Union Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard told The Associated Press. Because that can change the dynamic of the talks.
Yes, you do need the United States, because our economic prosperity that you semi-secretly hate so much is what provides the lions share of the funding for the United Nations and is the reason that so many climate scientists and environment officials even have jobs. Why is it that all of these environmentalist gurus just cant grasp the concept that environmental quality and a high standard of living are not mutually exclusive? A thriving and robust economy is whats going to bring about the technological innovations, efficiency, and renewable energy sources that theyre looking for and putting self-imposed limits on what we can and cant do is only going to bring about completely unnecessary misery.
As Jazz wrote this morning, the U.S. is standing on the edge of a potential economic boom that could be propelled forward by our vastly abundant energy resources recently unlocked by new technologies and the possibility of the Obama administration putting quixotic restrictions on our economy to comply with globalists ideas of sustainability-virtue, does not bode well.
OK. Let’s propose that those UN nations with high birth rates lead the way by encouraging smaller families (without abortion of course). I’m saying this because of the hypocrisy involved. Mexico City is one of the worst air pollution cities in the world. Is that the fault of the US? When Germany reunited, East Germany was an environmental disaster. Is that the fault of Western society? The Chinese will in no way allow issues regarding climate, or the environment, stop what they feel is their rightful march to economic dominance (which won’t happen - unless we let it happen).
Carbon is an excuse....they just want the money!
Money and control.
Hurricane Sandy was no Super storm.
It hit where a hurrican hadn’t hit that hard since 1938, but the 1938 storm was much worse.
It was a Hurricane with some unusual pattern, but the winds were not that high— Hurricane Andrew had winds of 200 mph, If that had hit where Sandy did it would have been a super storm.Sandy was indeed a bad storm, did a lot of damage, but it was just anther hurricane.
The “climate change bandwagon” is just another way to “access” our wealth
Gonna jump on the climate change unicorn !
Meanwhile China’s has surpassed the US in annual emissions AND total 1965-2011 emissions.
US emissions have been horizontal for decades, China’s is near vertical.
1938 hit further east but you are correct, it was stronger. Hazel (1954) was stronger too (holds the record for highest winds in NYC). Both storms spared NYC of a surge (1938 too far east and Hazel too far west). Sandy’s surge was mostly bad luck.
If youre making a case against global warning causing this thing, fine, but to claim this wasn’t a big storm will lose your credibility.
Joe Bastardi has an interesting and credible take on it.
Sandy was the size of Europe.
Everyone from the Jersey Shore, to Manhattan and to the South Shore of LI - highly populated- got the heck out of there way early.
Excerpts from CNN, (which cannot bias numbers such as these):
Sandy had already claimed at least 67 lives in the Caribbean, including 51 in Haiti, which speaks to the respect for weather that the locals in the Northeast have for weather. Look at the stats on evacuations 400,000 out of Manhattan ordered out days prior. Mayor Bloomberg doesnt need the credit, these people know to get off low lying beach/river front and way before the traffic jams. They have bug out places- family and friends in and up state.
In 1938, The Long Island Express” Hurricaine, contained a low pressure reading of 946 millibars; Sandy had a minimum pressure of 943 millibars. Generally speaking, the lower the pressure, the stronger the storm.
The 1938 storm was not on satellite photo, so there were no true evacuations. Have you seen the photo for this one?
Also, people in their 70s and 80s remember Donna (which accouts partly for the high incidence of women named Donna in the area who are in their 50s.
New York, lower Manhattan’s Battery Park recorded nearly 14-foot tide, smashing a record set by 1960’s Hurricane Donna by more than 3 feet. The city had already halted service on its bus and train lines, closing schools and ordering about 400,000 people out of their homes in low-lying areas of Manhattan and elsewhere.
Flooding forced the closure of all three of the major airports in the area, LaGuardia, John F. Kennedy and Newark Liberty. Water seeped into subway stations in Lower Manhattan and into the tunnel connecting Lower Manhattan and Brooklyn
It was less damaging to life and limb because people got out of there. It hurts to know this, as just before Katrina hit, I watched mayor nagin staring at the camera looking for help instead of driving buses into the low lying areas to evacuate, and then, not closing off the inbound THREE empty EMPTY lands of highway as the outbound hwy was jammed. The stupidity was discouraging.
But this was a big storm, so. . .
“Climate Change’ is the buzzphrase for transferring wealth from smart hard working countries to stupid lazy corrupt countries... (with lots of skim between...)
The communists were counting upon the money made from their
“climate change” scam to subsidize their goat of global communism. Communism cannot pay for itself. It requires the extortion of money from non-communist party members for it to survive.
Saying nothing about global warming here, as I find it irrelevant- heck, a couple of people I know from the area are named after hurricanes which hit in the 1950s and 1960s.
This area is no stranger to hurricanes - the south has no claim to them.
Respectfully, guys, high winds are an important component of stregnth of a storm, but they are not the whole picture. Tides and storm surge, area covered, legnth of time over affected area, and water and rain damage.
Actually, one should imagine if this had hit in a time like 1938 with no forecasting how many would have been killed.
Entire towns along the coast were evacuated and just now becoming inhabitable.
Also, the 1938 Hurricane had higher barometric pressure readings than did Sandy.
Just as a matter of fact, the eye of 1938 hurricane hit Westhampton, 60 or so miles from NYC. It was a very bad storm and flooded providence RI completely, to the Northeast. It did not do so much damage to the east toward Montauk as Sandy did to her east.
Sandy hit Atlantic City 160 (one hundred sixty) miles to the south of Mnhattan, causing severe damage theare and beyond way into Long Island (Breezy Point and The Rockaways.
Everyone inland in NJ, LI, Conn has damage -trees down etc. It’s not fully poered up yet.
they don’t complain, and that has much to do with the perception that it wasn’t a big storm.
Mna made global warming shouldn’t enter into the discussion, as far as I’m concerned.
In fact this headline is so stupid. the U.N. should be talking about nothing else than our Ambassador hving been killed until they get to the bottom of it.
Also, the 1938 Hurricane had higher barometric pressure readings than did Sandy.
Extratropical transition caused a temporary drop in Sandy. The surge from Sandy hit at astronomical high tide. Had the surge from Hazel hit NYC at high tide instead of low tide it would have exceeded Sandy's surge
I agree that Sandy was a strong storm, but not as strong as several 19th century storms and a couple of 20th century storms.
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.