The People’s Republic of China, the undisputed Pollution King of the world, is ramping up its production of coal-fired power plants — not only in China, but in dozens of other countries as well. But, strangely, China remains the new darling of the climate-change alarm choir. The communist regime, which is notorious for pumping colossal volumes of deadly toxins into the air, water, and land, is being celebrated as the new global environmental champion.
As The New American reported recently, California Governor Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown has traveled to Beijing and embraced the totalitarian rulers of the PRC in an unconstitutional (and treasonous) alliance of defiance and “resistance” against the U.S. position on the UN’s Paris climate accord. Governor Brown, who poses as a human-rights champion, was also more than happy to disregard Communist China’s record of mass murder and its current religious persecution, Internet censorship, and police-state oppression — since fighting “climate change” must trump all other concerns.
New Coal Plants Galore — 1,600 Worldwide
However, China, the new climate-change champion, is leading the charge in a global building splurge that will see 1,600 of those dirty, villainous coal-fired power plants all across our planet. Even the New York Times, one of the most fervent voices of catastrophic global-warming alarmism — and one of the most vociferous critics of Trump’s decision to dump Obama’s Paris climate deal — has admitted that China’s coal plans make it “virtually impossible” to meet the Paris accord goals.
“When China halted plans for more than 100 new coal-fired power plants this year, even as President Trump vowed to ‘bring back coal’ in America, the contrast seemed to confirm Beijing’s new role as a leader in the fight against climate change,” the Times reported. “But new data on the world’s biggest developers of coal-fired power plants,” the story continues, “paints a very different picture: China’s energy companies will make up nearly half of the new coal generation expected to go online in the next decade.”
“Over all, 1,600 coal plants are planned or under construction in 62 countries,” the Times reports. And Chinese companies such as SPIC, China Datang, Shenhua, China Huadian, China Huaneng, and China Guodian account for 45 percent of the construction. The Times story continues:
These Chinese corporations are building or planning to build more than 700 new coal plants at home and around the world, some in countries that today burn little or no coal, according to tallies compiled by Urgewald, an environmental group based in Berlin. Many of the plants are in China, but by capacity, roughly a fifth of these new coal power stations are in other countries.
Then the Times makes the startling admission: “The fleet of new coal plants would make it virtually impossible to meet the goals set in the Paris climate accord.”
Promises, promises — and INDCs
So how is it that Communist China, the rogue pollution outlaw, still manages to occupy top billing as the sainted poster child for the UN’s Paris climate agreement? Well, for one thing, the “Never Trump” fanatics would fawn over Satan himself if he put on a green cap and pledged never to exhale another CO2 molecule. But secondly, and more importantly, the fact-free/truth-free Fake News media are willing to promote the false story that China is the new environmental hero in the hope that it may shame, frighten, and pressure the American public into urging President Trump to reverse his opposition to the Paris climate deal.
The truth is China didn’t even have to promise to clean up its act; like the other eco-villains that signed onto the phony Paris accord, they merely offered a non-binding intention to clean up — and in the distant future, at that. It’s another UN charade, a fictitious commitment to reform, called an Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC), by which each country sets out its energy plan for the next 13 years, up to 2030.
But, as Christopher Booker observes in his July 15 column for the U.K.’s Telegraph, the INDC ploy is a typical UN sham. Booker’s article, entitled “Donald Trump took the heat, but the rest of the G20's posturing won't hide their rising emissions,” points out:
China, the world’s largest CO2 emitter, is planning to double its yearly emissions.
All the major “developing” nations, led by China and India, paid lip service to the conference’s intentions, showing how they would be investing in “renewables” such as wind and solar, so long as they were generously subsidised to do so by the “developed” nations out of a Green Climate Fund worth $100 billion a year.
But they then explained how, to keep their economies growing, they planned to build huge numbers of new fossil fuel power stations, which would lead to a massive increase in their CO2 emissions…. So 13 of the countries which signed that G20 communiqué last week, intend to contribute to what the INDCs show will within 13 years be a 46 percent rise in global emissions.
$Trillions for an absurdly tiny 0.05°?
The UN Paris deal has been sold as an absolute must-do, if the planet is to hold global warming and its supposed apocalyptic consequences to an increase of less than 2°C over pre-industrial levels. However, without even going into the arbitrary and unscientific manner in which the two-degree limit was set, or the fact that CO2 levels have little impact on global temperatures, the fact is that the net impact of the much ballyhooed Paris accord, under any conceivable scenario, will be so miniscule as to be undetectable. And it will have virtually zero effect on global temperatures.
Danish climate researcher Dr. Bjørn Lomborg points out that “if we measure the impact of every nation fulfilling every promise by 2030, the total temperature reduction will be 0.048°C (0.086°F) by 2100.” That’s less than five-hundredths of one degree! As many scientists and statisticians have observed, that amount is not even distinguishable from the various “noise” factors included in the temperature data.
Lomborg used the same MAGICC climate model software that was developed with funding from the U.S. EPA and that has been used in all five of the UN IPCC reports. He notes further: “Even if we assume that these promises would be extended for another 70 years, there is still little impact: if every nation fulfills every promise by 2030, and continues to fulfill these promises faithfully until the end of the century… the entirety of the Paris promises will reduce temperature rises by just 0.17°C (0.306°F) by 2100.”
Lomborg, who is a “green energy” advocate, admits that “Subsidizing inefficient renewables is expensive and doesn’t work. The IEA estimates that we get 0.4 percent of our energy from wind and solar PV right now, and even in optimistic scenarios the fraction will only rise to 2.2 percent by 2040. Over the next 25 years, we’ll spend about $2.5 trillion in subsidies and reduce global warming temperatures by less than 0.02°C.”
“A complete transformation of the economic structure of the world”
If the Paris accord will have negligible impact on global temperatures while still costing trillions of dollars, who could possibly be for it? That’s not difficult to answer, if one considers who will be the recipients of those trillions, not to mention, who will be the beneficiaries of the power transfers that go with it. As former UN climate chief Christiana Figuerres stated in 2012 at the UN’s Doha Conference: “It must be understood that what is occurring here, not just in Doha, but in the whole climate change process is a complete transformation of the economic structure of the world.”
Photo of Chinese coal-mining operation: AP Images