CO2 Emissions and the IPCC

OPS-45 How effective are CO₂ emission reduction schemes? A look at the data shows that despite the trillions of dollars spent to date, the efforts to date have been almost totally ineffective. The IPCC was established in November 1988 (32 years ago). The Kyoto Accord was put in place in December 1997 (23 years ago). And the last stupid iteration of this unnecessary, economic suicide inducing UN agenda (the 2015 Paris Accord) was agreed to in December, 6 years ago. The trillions in proposed spending laid out in the various idiotic “Green New Deal” initiatives will be just as ineffective. And the proof is in their “science” (OPS-17 – Paris Accord 2015). If every country were to meet their 2015 Paris Commitments (they are not even close), the temperature reduction in 2100 would be a whopping 0.048 °C. Extending those commitments/expenditures over the rest of the century would increase that temperature reduction to 0.17 °C (still less than the error in those forecasts). Where is the economic sense in spending trillions of dollars each year on an unsubstantiated problem that will drop the temperature by a statistically unmeasurable amount?

#climatechange #delaythegreen #globalwarming #showusthedata

If you do not agree that “Global Warming/Climate Change/Disruption/Emergency/Latest Horrifying Descriptor” is unsubstantiated, I am still waiting for anyone (scientist or not) to bring forward an empirical CO₂/Temperature dataset that shows CO₂ driving the climate on any statistically significant historical time scale. A basic scientific requirement to move the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) alarmist NARRATIVE away from just a religious belief.

THAT DATASET DOES NOT EXIST!!!

There have been some short slow downs and minor drops in CO₂ emissions, but most of those are probably a function of economic induced slowdowns related to recessions rather than IPCC policy. The most recent example, being the ill-advised totalitarian lockdowns implemented to “flatten the curve”. That temporary 14-day lockdown that is still in effect a full year later. Just for giggles (data links below), you should compare South Dakota (No mask mandates, no lockdowns) to North Dakota (Mask Mandates from November 14^th to January 18^th). Both states have very similar profiles for both new daily cases and deaths (despite the very different approach). You can also look at Wyoming and Montana. They produce similar profiles for both new daily cases and deaths (especially when the numbers are adjusted for population). That analysis can be extended to Sweden as well. Their numbers/profiles are very typical for Europe, despite keeping their businesses and schools open with no lockdown or mask mandates.

United States Coronavirus: 30,081,657 Cases and 547,234 Deaths – Worldometer (worldometers.info)

Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19) – Statistics and Research – Our World in Data

The Scientific Method – YouTube – Tony Heller looks at the COVID-19 information for Montana/Wyoming (He also reviewed North and South Dakota in a separate video).

For a change of pace, I wrote a song back on Day 25 of the 14-day lockdown. The ramifications of the lockdowns laid out that day have just been confirmed and magnified over the last year. The lockdowns need to end! Isolation 2020, available at climatechangeandmusic.com

There have been some short slow downs and minor drops in CO₂ emissions, but most of those are probably a function of economic induced slowdowns related to recessions. The most recent example, being the ill-advised totalitarian lockdowns implemented to “flatten the curve”. That temporary 14-day lockdown that is still in effect a full year later. Just for giggles, you should compare South Dakota (No mask mandates, no lockdowns) to North Dakota (Mask Mandates from November 14^th to January 18^th). Both states have very similar profiles for both new daily cases and deaths (despite the very different approach). You can also look at Wyoming and Montana. They produce similar profiles for both new daily cases and deaths (especially when the numbers are adjusted for population). That analysis can be extended to Sweden as well. Their numbers/profiles are very typical for Europe, despite keeping their businesses and schools open with no lockdown or mask mandates.

I need to make one more point on the general situation we find ourselves drowning in. Whether you believe the IPCC science or not, we should be putting these ridiculous CO₂ green initiatives on hold for ten years (in my opinion indefinitely) and focus on fixing the financial mess that our leaders COVID-19 policies have immersed us all in. The temperature improvement in 2100 will be exactly the same based on delaying the 2015 Paris Accord 2030 commitments (0.48 °C). Assuming that the Paris commitments are extended to 2100, the ten-year delay would mean the temperature reduction in 2100 would be 0.15 °C instead 0.17 °C (a difference of only 0.02 °C). Ask yourself a simple question, is an unmeasurable 0.17 °C temperature reduction worth the roughly 80 trillion dollars of proposed spending? That works out to roughly 470 trillion dollars per 1 °C (or we can lower that number to 47 trillion dollars per 0.1 °C). Seriously, how are those economics justifiable? Refer to OPS-17 – Paris Accord – 2015, OPPS-8 – Canadian Deficits – November Update and OPPS-9 – Common Sense for more detail (#delaythegreen). There are many real problems that could be resolved with 80 trillion dollars versus throwing money we do not have at a problem that does not exist. Remember you can shoot my arguments down by producing that elusive empirical CO₂ dataset mentioned previously.