Paris Accord 2015
OPS-17 I (being an engineer) have focused on the science first. But the economic analysis (which you won’t get from our ideological political and media sources) is just as important. I don’t believe in the IPCC, Global Warming alarmist science, since they have chosen to arbitrarily ignore most of the solar forcings, but we can still use that science to discuss the economics. The widely heralded 2015 Paris Accord will do virtually nothing to slow down the “Global Warming” that has been projected by their unvalidated computer models. The forecasted Grand Solar Minimum (GSM), on the other hand will drop the global temperatures significantly and potentially devastatingly. But I digress, we’re here to use the IPCC “science”. Assuming that every country adheres to their “non-binding” 2030 commitments (and I’m sure they will (NOT)), the temperature reduction would amount to only 0.048 ºC in the year 2100. That reduction (assuming it actually occurs) cannot even be confirmed since the errors in both global temperature measurements and computer model projections are both significantly larger. Even if the 2030 commitments (more wasted money) were extended out to 2100, the temperature reduction would only be 0.17 ºC (still too small to confirm).
From the Canadian perspective, being the leader in the climate change war is totally ridiculous, absolutely meaningless and a totally useless form of virtue signaling. Canada’s contribution to CO2 emissions is only 1.6% of the total world contributions. Canada’s contribution to temperature reductions will be a whopping 0.00077 ºC (based on 2030 commitments) and will soar to 0.0027 ºC with extended commitments. Given that the biggest emitters (China, India, US, Japan, etc.) are not making reductions (and are in fact adding to emissions), our reductions will be meaningless. Especially since the main goal of the economic eco-terrorists is to shut down the energy industry in Canada. News flash, the demand for oil is continuing to go up. If our oil/coal/gas are turned off, that energy will just be produced elsewhere in the world with greater emissions at both the source and in transport. Destroying the economy won’t protect the environment (the environment will in fact be harmed).
I would suggest a simple compromise. Delay Canada’s reductions until 2030. At that time, China, India and the rest of the world will maybe actually begin to make reduction contributions. The delay will not even be noticeable in the temperature record (not surprising since Canada’s total CO2 emission temperature reductions are already too small to measure). In my opinion, the delay will ultimately be beneficial since the effects of the GSM will be very evident by 2030, and the folly of “Global Warming” hysteria will be resoundingly exposed. The money saved by not subsidizing renewables over the next ten years wouldn’t hurt either.
