Former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott
By Andrew Bolt ~
Professor Bjørn Lomborg says what few journalists or MPs dare – Tony Abbott was right to say the Paris agreement is another global warming con that causes lots of pain for no gain.
It is … remarkable that Tony Abbott has acknowledged Australia would not have signed the Paris Agreement if he had known in 2015 that the US would withdraw, and that trying to reach national targets would damage the Australian economy.As you read Lomborg’s piece, ask yourself why few journalists will admit to these truths, and why Malcolm Turnbull insists on forcing us to make such utterly pointless sacrifices:
Internationally, very few politicians have admitted the inherent failings of the Paris treaty, but the truth is that it was always oversold.
This begins with the treaty itself, which includes the fiction that pledges under the agreement will somehow keep the planet’s temperature rises to 2C or even 1.5C.
The 1.5C target is a fantasy. Studies show that achieving it would require nothing less than the entire planet abandoning the use of every fossil fuel by February 7, 2021. Given our reliance on fossil fuels, that would mean we stop cooling and heating our homes, stop all air travel, and the world’s farmers stop making half the world’s food, produced with fertiliser almost exclusively made from fossil fuels. The list goes on…
In Paris, many governments made vows they have not lived up to because they are finding — like Australia — that there are costs to doing so. In fact, research last year in Nature found that “no major advanced industrialised country is on track to meet its pledges”.
Few nations are forthcoming about their failures, but we know the EU vowed to cut emissions to 40 per cent below its 1990 level by 2030, but as of last year had enacted policies that would reduce them by 19 per cent…
While politicians enjoy rhetoric about saving the planet, very few are willing to implement policies that will achieve meaningful temperature cuts. Why? Because the costs of doing so through carbon cuts are high and the benefits quite small..
It pays to look at the evidence. The best estimates show global warming has roughly a zero net cost to humanity.
The most pessimistic study finds a cost of 0.3 per cent of gross domestic product, while the most optimistic suggests a net benefit of 2.3 per cent.
We usually hear only about the (real) problems of global warming, such as increased heatwaves, cooling costs and heat deaths. But we rarely hear that global warming will reduce extreme cold, heating costs, and the number of deaths caused by the cold (which right now outweigh heat deaths by seven to one)…
The Paris treaty, fully implemented, would achieve one-hundredth of the reduction to 2C (a level at which there are still significant impacts), and hence achieve benefits worth perhaps only one-tenth of 1 per cent of global GDP 100 years from now…
My peer-reviewed, published analysis shows the EU’s Paris promises for 2030, in the most optimistic circumstances, fully achieved and adhered to throughout this entire century, would reduce global temperatures by 0.053C by 2100…
More than $100bn will be spent this year alone on subsidies for solar and wind energy, yet this technology will meet less than 1 per cent of the globe’s energy needs.
GWPF 2017 annual lecture by Tony Abbott
The 2017 GWPF (Global Warming Policy Foundation) annual lecture is delivered by the 28th Prime Minister of Australia, Tony Abbott in London on the 9th October, 2017.