Global carbon emissions stood still in 2016, offering climate hope

All of the world’s biggest emitting nations, except for India, saw falling or static carbon emissions last year. Photograph: Nicolas Asfouri/AFP/Getty Images

The volcano in Hawaii (Mauna Loa) continue to report increasing level of CO2, temperature hasn’t risen since 1936 (satellite era, no warming for 20 – 30 years) and mans emissions of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) hasn’t risen in 3 years.

Doesn’t look like there’s much correlations anywhere .. Can it be??
Is it because there’s no correlation??

Looks like it, doesn’t it!? (Also looks like the low IQ frauds forgot to coordinate their narrative and adjust the underlying data ???)

This BS story is from the dishonest climate church headquarter news outlet “The Guardian”

The new data is a welcome sign of progress in the battle against global warming but many challenges remain, including methane from cattle

Global emissions of climate-warming carbon dioxide remained static in 2016, a welcome sign that the world is making at least some progress in the battle against global warming by halting the long-term rising trend.

All of the world’s biggest emitting nations, except India, saw falling or static carbon emissions due to less coal burning and increasing renewable energy, according to data published on Thursday by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (NEAA). However other mainly developing nations, including Indonesia, still have rising rates of CO2 emissions.

Stalled global emissions still means huge amounts of CO2 are being added to the atmosphere every year – more than 35bn tonnes in 2016 – driving up global temperatures and increasing the risk of damaging, extreme weather. Furthermore, other heat-trapping greenhouse gases, mainly methane from cattle and leaks from oil and gas exploration, are still rising and went up by 1% in 2016.

“These results are a welcome indication that we are nearing the peak in global annual emissions of greenhouse gases,” said climate economist Prof Lord Nicholas Stern at the London School of Economics and president of the British Academy.

“To realise the goals of the Paris agreement and hold the increase in global average temperature to well below 2C, we must reach peak emissions as soon as possible and then achieve a rapid decline soon afterwards,” Stern said. “These results from the Dutch government show that there is a real opportunity to get on track.”

Jos Olivier, the chief researcher for the NEAA report, sounded a note of caution: “There is no guarantee that CO2 emissions will from now on be flat or descending.” He said, for example, a rise in gas prices could see more coal burning resume in the US.

The flat CO2 emissions in 2016 follow similar near-standstills in 2014 and 2015. This lack of growth is unprecedented in a time when the global economy is growing. As the number of years of flat emissions grows, scientists are more confident a peak has been reached, rather than a temporary halt. In July 2016, senior economists said China’s huge coal burning had peaked, marking a historic turning point in efforts to tame climate change.

Stern said many of the big emitting nations had achieved significant reductions in 2016: “However, all countries have to accelerate their emissions reductions if the Paris goals are to be met.” He said this could also drive development in poorer nations: “We can now see clearly that the transition to a low-carbon economy is at the heart of the story of poverty reduction and of the achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.”

The new Dutch report shows CO2 emissions from China, the world’s biggest emitter, fell 0.3% in 2016. US CO2 emissions fell 2.0% and Russia’s by 2.1%, with the EU flat, although UK emissions tumbled by 6.4%, as coal burning plunged.

It’s impressing, despite the fact there’s no “greenhouse gases” i the real world, it rose slightly  ???

Let’s do another story about the “green”, low IQ airheads (because it is fun!)

Climate change: Ministers should be ‘sued’ over targets

By Paul Homewood

Ministers should tighten the UK’s official climate change target – or face the courts, the government’s former chief scientist has said.

Prof Sir David King is supporting a legal case forcing ministers to shrink carbon emissions to zero by 2050.

He says the current government goal – an 80% emissions cut by the same date – is too weak to protect the climate.

Ministers have promised more ambitious climate policies in their forthcoming and long-delayed Clean Growth plan.

But Prof King told BBC News the government knew the 80% target cut behind that plan was too weak.

Some 18 months ago, Environment Secretary Andrea Leadsom promised a 100% emissions reduction to keep the UK on track with its obligations under the 2015 Paris climate deal.

But ministers have failed to enshrine that 100% cut within the Climate Change Act.

Potential catastrophe

“This is crazy,” Prof King told the BBC. “The government knows very well what needs to be done – but it isn’t doing it.

“If it takes legal action to force ministers to behave properly, then so be it – I’ll support it.”

Prof King is backing a preliminary legal action by a tiny group, Plan B, run by former government lawyer Tim Crosland.

It argues that Business Secretary Greg Clark is obliged under the act to tighten targets if the science shows it is needed. This is the basis of the case.

Mr Crosland has written to Mr Clark and says if there is no satisfactory reply after 14 days, he will take the case to the High Court for judicial review.

“The science has clearly hardened since the Climate Change Act was agreed,” he said.

“If scientists are telling us our current course of emissions potentially takes us to catastrophe, then to stick to the current course is irrational.

“The best available science tells us the risks of crossing tipping points rise very sharply between 1.5 and 2C. And that means the UK cutting emissions to zero.”

Counter-productive?

His case would be argued in court by Jonathan Crow, Attorney General to Prince Charles, and a former senior Treasury lawyer.

Mr Crosland says his co-claimants are a rabbi “who learned not to ignore a humanitarian crisis”; young people fearing for the future; and a supporter from Mauritius representing island states at risk from rising sea water.

Other groups are similarly frustrated with long delays in the government’s climate strategy, and some are also considering legal action.

There are fears, though, that pushing for a zero emissions strategy when the government cannot yet reach its lower target may be counter-productive.

ClientEarth, one of the UK’s most successful environment groups over the past decade, has pioneered the use of the courts to deliver environmental policies.

Jonathan Church, a climate lawyer with the group, said: “We hope that Plan B’s claim will help draw attention to the urgency of the challenge we face and ensure that our government keeps its eye on the goals agreed in Paris.

“But targets do not on their own reduce emissions.”

He added that the focus now should be ensuring that the Climate Change Act fulfils its purpose.

The government said it would consider Plan B’s letter and respond in due course, adding: “The UK is a global leader on climate change”.

A spokesperson said the forthcoming Clean Growth plan, which will outline how reduce emissions will be reduced, would be “ambitious and robust… and build on the economic opportunities across the country”.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41401656

Trust Mr Harrabin for failing to point out the elephant in the room!

Prof King of course lost most of the little credibility he had years ago. One can only hope the High Court uses a bit of common sense and tells him exactly where he can stick his legal action.

Ref.: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2017/09/27/climate-change-ministers-should-be-sued-over-targets/

……………………

Imagine what will happen when the grown ups gets back and discover what these low IQ, “green” criminal, rent and grant seeking activists has been doing, there will be hell to pay!