Leave aside the fact that President Obama’s response to horrific acts of terrorism in both Paris, France, and San Bernardino, California, was to focus on global warming, which he thinks is the greatest threat facing the United States and the world, while, according to every poll taken in recent months, it ranks at or near the bottom of the American people’s concerns.
Instead let’s focus on the terms of the climate-change treaty that he and the leaders of the other nations approved in Paris, France, last month. Actually, there are few if any real “terms” in the accord, at least in the sense of enforceable provisions. Rather it is a laundry list of promises to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions — promises that will never be kept because the accord contains no sanctions or other penalties to be imposed if those nations who signed the accord don’t keep their promises. Even our secretary of State, John Kerry, who was knee-deep in the negotiations in Paris, admitted that there are no penalties in the accords.
There are, however, “mandatory reporting requirements,” which Kerry called “a form of enforcement, if you will,” which would be laughable if it wasn’t coming from our number one foreign diplomat.
Indeed, tell the Chinese that “mandatory reporting requirements” are a “form of enforcement.” Under pressure they recently admitted that they had underreported their coal burning by nearly 17 percent. Coal being the dirtiest fossil fuel, and China being both the world’s number one burner of coal and number one carbon-dioxide polluter, that extra 17 percent amounts to a huge increase in the CO2 released into the air. In fact, that extra 17 percent equals the annual coal consumption of most Western European nations. And speaking of promises, China promises that it will begin reducing carbon emissions … in the year 2030.
As for India, the world’s third largest carbon-dioxide emitter (after China and the U.S.), it has said that it will increase its coal-fired electric-generation capacity three fold by 2030, meaning tripling its carbon-dioxide emissions. How’s that for “mandatory reporting requirements?”
Given the emptiness of this agreement, President Obama won’t (of course) submit it to the Senate for approval, knowing it would be summarily rejected, just as the Senate voted 95 – 0 to reject the last major international climate-change treaty, the Kyoto Protocol of 1997.
Two final thoughts. First, in flying President Obama to the Paris Climate Change Conference and back, Air Force One emitted approximately 600,000 pounds of carbon dioxide, which equals the CO2 burned annually by 35 homes, according to EPA’s own calculations.
Second, among the senators who voted against the 1997 Kyoto climate-change protocol was the junior senator from Massachusetts, John Kerry.
