Climate Change Initiatives

I am so damn old that I remember the first so-called ‘initiatives’ to save the planet from ruin…..as far back as the 1970s and ever since that ‘bold’ step the can has been kicked down the road at every ‘summit’…..the year 2000 was a target and then after another summit it was 2020 and then 2030 and now it is 2050 (but there has not been another ground breaking summit yet).

After all these ‘summits’ it is shown that only a fraction has ever been applied….

A recent analysis of global climate efforts by a coalition of researchers found that only a small fraction of the policies implemented over the past two decades have been effective in reducing carbon emissions. The study, which examined 1,500 climate initiatives across 41 countries, found that only 63 of these strategies made a meaningful impact on reducing greenhouse gas output.

“It is easy for countries to say they will reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases, but these statements do not mean that the policies they adopt will be effective,” said Jesse Smith, the senior editor at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. “This work illustrates the kinds of policy efforts that are needed to close the emissions gaps in various economic sectors.”

The research investigated the success of a variety of policies, including bans on coal plants, fossil fuel taxes and emissions trading schemes. However, the study’s lead author, Nicholas Koch, emphasized that the sheer number of climate regulations does not necessarily correlate with better outcomes. Instead, countries that successfully reduced their greenhouse gas emissions did so by employing a diverse mix of policies tailored to their unique circumstances.

“Meeting the Paris Agreement’s climate targets necessitates better knowledge about which climate policies work in reducing emissions at the necessary scale,” the report reads. “Our insights on effective but rarely studied policy combinations highlight the important role of price-based instruments in well-designed policy mixes and the policy efforts necessary for closing the emissions gap.”

The study also noted that there is no “one-size-fits-all” solution to reducing emissions. Different nations have varying needs and resources, meaning that the most effective strategies for lowering emissions will vary across the globe.

(san.com)

Then there is the waste of cash…..money spent on impotent measures to change the climate degradation.

And as usual the US leads the waste (it is something we do expertly….waste taxpayer money)….

Among the world’s wealthiest countries, the U.S. leads the way in spending public money on so-called climate “solutions” that have been proven to “consistently fail, overspend, or underperform,” according to an analysis released Thursday by the research and advocacy group Oil Change International.

The group’s report, titled Funding Failure, focuses on international spending on carbon capture and fossil-based hydrogen subsidies, which continues despite ample data showing that the technological fixes have “failed to make a dent in carbon emissions” after 50 years of research and development.

The report details how five countries account for 95% of all carbon capture spending, with the U.S. investing the most taxpayer money in the technology, at $12 billion in subsidies over the last 40 years.

Norway comes in second with $6 billion going to carbon capture and storage, while Canada has spent $3.8 billion, the European Union has spent $3.6 billion, and the Netherlands has poured $2.6 billion into the technology, with which carbon dioxide emissions are compressed and utilized or stored underground.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/carbon-capture-2669098434

Sounds like the old “Nero fiddled while Rome burned” approach by our government and others….no one is serious about climate change….and that will eat us all up and spit out our charred remains for future archeologists to find and analyze.

What a wonderful world we are leaving for our grand kids.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Leave a Reply