As climate alarmists around the world head to a tropical paradise on Bali next week to discuss how developed nations should pay to solve global warming, an inconvenient truth has emerged: many countries that are part of the Kyoto Protocol are going to dramatically overshoot their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions limits.
While it seems a metaphysical certitude that America's green media will largely boycott such revelations so as not to put a damper on the hysterical proceedings, the fact that taxpayers in countries missing these targets will end up footing the bill also appears likely to be ignored.
As reported by Bloomberg Friday (emphasis added throughout, h/t Benny Peiser):
Japan, Italy and Spain face fines of as much as $33 billion combined for failing to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions as promised under the Kyoto treaty.
The three countries are the worst performers among 36 nations that agreed to curb carbon dioxide gases that cause climate change. The 1997 Kyoto accord designed to slow global warming demands that polluting nations buy credits for their excess emissions from other industrial polluters or investors.
``They're looking at a huge bill now,'' said Mike Rosenberg, management professor at the University of Navarra's IESE Business School in Barcelona. ``That is because none would pay to reconvert factories, power plants and paper mills'' to trim gases blamed for the planet-warming ``greenhouse effect.''
Why will they miss these targets? Hold on to your seats:
Spain, Italy and Japan are likely to miss their Kyoto commitments because they underestimated economic growth and future emissions from factories and utilities.
Hmmm. So, Spain, Italy, and Japan emitted more GHGs than they thought because their economies were stronger than expected. Think Spanish, Italian, and Japanese citizens benefited from this added growth?
Yet, because this expansion was better than forecast, businesses and citizens in these countries will be penalized:
Spain will pass 40 percent of the cost for the extra emissions on to businesses, Secretary of State for Energy Ignasi Nieto told journalists in Madrid July 31. The rest will come from taxes.
Do the math: that means in Spain, 60 percent of the penalties will be paid by the citizens. Interesting form of capitalism, dontcha think: grow your economy too much, pay a fine!
But there's more:
In Italy, taxpayers will foot 75 percent of the bill for extra permits. ``Italy's behind, and we need to keep cutting emissions,'' said Environment Minister Alfonso Pecoraro Scanio on Sept. 13 in Rome.
Japanese taxpayers will pay for two-thirds of that nation's excess, New Carbon Finance estimated, based on the current sharing between state funding and industry.
And, as reported by the Irish Independent Wednesday, Ireland faces similar difficulties (emphasis added, h/t Benny Peiser):
TAXPAYERS face having to fork out more than €270m so that Ireland can "buy its way" into meeting the Kyoto agreement on greenhouse gas emissions.
Ireland is set to overshoot its Kyoto targets by almost 100pc as things stand, according to the latest figures from the European Commission.
Welcome to green capitalism, coming to a country near you without any warning from your media.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Well, gee, Noel, give them
November 30, 2007 - 10:21 ET by motherbeltWell, gee, Noel, give them a break; at least they tried!
They had good intentions!
Isn't that what it's all about?
Results don't matter......
Spain will pass 40 percent
November 30, 2007 - 10:26 ET by motherbeltSpain will pass 40 percent of the cost for the extra emissions on to businesses,....[ ] The rest will come from taxes.
Actually, the citizens are going to foot 100% of the bill, whether they call it taxes or not..
Businesses (and corproations) don't pay taxes; people pay taxes (in the costs passed on to them by businesses to cover their taxes).
Who is receiving the taxes?
November 30, 2007 - 10:28 ET by KC MulvilleAs I understand it, countries that miss their targets have to pay. The question is, who gets the money? (I'm not asking a rhetorical question. I honestly don't know, and I'd welcome an informed answer.)
They always say, follow the money. OK. Where is the money going?
That's an interesting
November 30, 2007 - 10:31 ET by motherbeltThat's an interesting question, KC. And if it's a UN or Kyoto-run commission, what are they going to do with the money?
If the answer is to help countries revamp to meet the standards, why not let the offending countries keep it to use for that? Will they be taking it from one country to give to another?
Nah, that wouldn't happen.... "eyeroll".....
Nah, nah, we trust them, right?
November 30, 2007 - 10:50 ET by KC MulvilleIn Pennsylvania, where I grew up, they used to have a motor vehicle inspection law that required a mechanic to certify that your vehicle was fit to drive. (I haven't lived in PA for a while, and don't know if it's still the same.) Of course, the mechanic had a huge financial incentive to "discover" items to repair. Needless to say, the mob made a lot of money on that.
So, from experience, I'm suspicious. Are the people who benefit from the Kyoto overages the same people who decide whether a penalty is asssessed in the first place? Of course, if it's under the watchful eye of the United Nations (can you say "oil-for-food?"), then those countries being played for suckers better wake up fast.
As I say, I don't know. Maybe Kyoto has a foolproof system worked out. Foolproof. (LOL!)
KC, not only does PA still
November 30, 2007 - 13:19 ET by Roger the ShrubberKC, not only does PA still have yearly inspections, but they added a new layer of bureacracy a decade or so ago, where certain counties have to pay an extra $30-40 a year to have their "emissions" checked. Gas stations and mechanics who did inspections had to pay thousands of dollars to purchase these special machines, pay to keep them updated and maintained, etc.
My favorite part is this: Say you lived in Allegheny county, the home of Pittsburgh. You need emissions checked. If you live in Fayette County, which is about 30-40 miles outside of the city limits, you do not, even if you drive into Pittsburgh every single day to work.
Ain't government great?
Wow
November 30, 2007 - 14:46 ET by KC MulvilleSee, I grew up in the Philly suburbs, and whenever I saw something like that, I'd assume it was a mob scam. Think of Tony Soprano. His crews have to "earn," and they're always coming up with these kinds of schemes.
But this is government. Government is filled with the same schemes as the local mob. At least the mob will show up and pay respect at funerals.
Well, things have not
November 30, 2007 - 16:47 ET by Roger the ShrubberWell, things have not changed, KC. A Philly mob boss runs the show in Harrisburg these days....
Offsets
November 30, 2007 - 11:06 ET by lostincyberspaceI would guess that offsets could be puchased directly, or through another broker, from the European Climate Exchange or similar agency. Here in the U.S. the Chicago Climate Exchange(CCX) is available. 501 (c) (3) compaines, or others, such as the National Carbon Offset Coalition work with farmers and landowners in conjunction with the CCX.
Kyoto scam will be more
November 30, 2007 - 11:19 ET by sguild2Kyoto scam will be more expensive than the oil for food scam.
It already is
December 4, 2007 - 18:25 ET by jimpeelAccording to the numbers -- 33 billion -- the Kyoto scam has already surpassed the oil for food program by 11 billion dollars; and it took only three -- count 'em -- THREE countries to do it.
Another article on Japan.
November 30, 2007 - 11:22 ET by Dave in TexasJapan plans to buy carbon credits from Hungary to achieve Kyoto Treaty goal.
"Hisata refused to say how much carbon credit Japan would buy or how
much it would cost. Hungary, which has about 10 million tons of carbon
credits to sell, is also being approached by other potential customers,
he said.
The Asahi newspaper reported Monday that 10 million tons of
greenhouse gas would cost about 20 billion yen (US$185 million; €125
million). Hisata, however, refused to confirm that."
I doubt that Japan will be buying all of Hungary's credits, but it's still going to be several million dollars that they're paying for a bunch of nothing. I think it's pretty funny that all that money is going to end up going to a European country. Everyone knows that the real goal of Kyoto was to transfer money to places like Africa and South America. Oops.
I guess there is no thought
November 30, 2007 - 11:52 ET by dscottI guess there is no thought about actually reducing one's use of fossil fuels by taking the $33 billion and building nuclear power plants, thus avoiding future emmission of said CO2???? Nah, that might actually lead to oil independence from the ME and thus upset the shieks and limit funding of petrodollar terrorism??? Never allow common sense to dictate a response to a problem, the PC way is always best. <sarcasm>
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
VERY Interesting!
November 30, 2007 - 11:54 ET by c5thenSo the lesson learned will be to grossly overestimate economic growth so as to "cover" the carbon emmissions. Then the worst that could happen is that all countries in Kyoto will have a surplus of carbon-credits to sell. (thus making them worth less - or worthless)
Looks like it's also time to pull money out of International Indexes and Mutual funds because european and asian economic growth will be greatly exagerated now and won't meet expectations. Of course this will be a good thing for US stocks and mutual funds as that money will have to go somewhere.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Fred08.com
Socialism
March 29, 2008 - 12:20 ET by dboWow, what a shocker! It's almost like it never really was about CO2 emissions but about transferring money from wealthy nations to poor nations (not to mention transferring money from average citizens to Al Gore's pocket). I hate to say I told you so idiot lefties.
Which One?
November 30, 2007 - 13:21 ET by okiehawk44Which one of the carbon tax credit companies is owned by or a majority of the stock held by the Albert Gore family? This too is not a rhetorical question. Some folks are making money off this hoax (global warming) and the rest are paying. So who's making the money? No one that I know is. So who is it? Name and address would be nice -- some of us are taking notes.
http://www.generationim.com/
November 30, 2007 - 14:00 ET by dscotthttp://www.generationim.com/ Generation Investment Management, in fact Noel and others have commented on this already: http://newsbusters.org/node/11149
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity. dscott's corollary: The line between malice and stupidity is called depraved indifference.
Hissssssssssss . . .
November 30, 2007 - 17:35 ET by Junk Science SkepticDo you hear that sound? That's the sound of all of the hot air escaping out of the Kyoto fantasy now that reality has set in.
The U.N. et al may be able to get away with fleecing the taxpayers in Japan, Italy, and Spain this first time around, but quicker than you can say regime change, look for the heads of these contries to be deposed, and look for the new leaders to pull out of Kyoto faster than AlGore leaving a Weight Watchers meeting.
Long before Kyoto made its way into the MSM and the general public, and long before anybody could have predicted the levels of actual CO2 increase/reduction for various countries, I was against U.S. involvement in Kyoto for strictly non-technical reasons.
Like virtually all international treaties after WWII, Kyoto was framed with an enormous built-in disadvantage for the U.S., and like virtually all treaties, the U.S. would be held to the absolute letter of the document, while other signatories had no intention of meeting their end of the agreement right from the start.
So forget about the technical failings of Kyoto, forget the fact that it was never going to accomplish anything other than the redistribution of wealth, . . . just the typical f*** the U.S. structure of virtually every international treaty was reason enough for the U.S. to stay out of Kyoto. History will certainly look back on the decision to keep the U.S. out of Kyoto as one of the few positive outcomes of the Clinton administration.
Last I heard, all but two of the Kyoto signatories had increased their CO2 output since signing the treaty. Guess who has reduced their CO2 output dramatically since Kyoto? That's right, the U.S. of A., and we didn't need to sign any phony treaty to do it.
Sorry that I can't find the reference right now, but a few years back I read that North America actually absorbed more total CO2 than it emitted. The technical term was that the region was a net carbon sink, as opposed to being a net carbon source.
So if we were already "cleaning up" more CO2 than we were producing, and now we're producing less CO2, how come other countries aren't obliged to pay us, if the real goal is CO2 reduction?
Thompson/Giuliani 2008
Junk SS....Just ignore the Treaty
November 30, 2007 - 19:42 ET by JayTeeThe UN can't enforce bathroom rules.....let alone the Koyoto Treaty.
The UN is toothless, tell Japan to keep their $$$$'s.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
JSS, check this and this
December 1, 2007 - 22:47 ET by MikeBJSS, check this and this out.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Uh oh.
November 30, 2007 - 17:47 ET by acumenUh oh. Australia's last election may turn out to be the most expensive to date. Say g'day to lower taxes mates....and don't even think about firing up the bar-b.
Kyoto is a Joke
November 30, 2007 - 18:10 ET by PopularTechThe Truth about Al Gore and Kyoto (Video) (2min)
APEC unlikely to accept binding gas targets in climate change fight (Herald Tribune)
Australia rejects Kyoto pact (BBC)
Canada joins anti-Kyoto bloc (National Post, Canada)
- Canada alarmed over Kyoto costs (BBC)
- Canada report defends saying no to Kyoto target (Reuters)
China rejects binding targets on greenhouse emissions (Forbes)
- China surpasses United States in emissions (United Press International)
- 750,000 a year killed by Chinese pollution (Financial Times, UK)
Greece fails on Kyoto targets (Kathimerini, Greece)
India rejects greenhouse gas limits (Herald Sun, Australia)
Italy breaks EU ranks on Kyoto (The Parliament)
Japan emissions to rise, reaching Kyoto goals hard (Reuters)
- Japan's Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rise 6.4% From 1990 Levels (Bloomberg)
- Japan plans to buy carbon credits from Hungary to achieve Kyoto Treaty goal (Herald Tribune, Australia)
Lithuania decides to take EU to court over CO2 cut (Reuters)
New Zealand - NZ to bring in carbon trading, but still lag Kyoto (Reuters)
Spain Lags Behind in Kyoto Protocol Compliance (Tierramerica)
Turkey rejects Kyoto (Today's Zaman, Turkey)
UK Revealed: cover-up plan on energy target (The Guardian. UK)
- UK public rejects Kyoto Protocol (International Policy Network)
US Senate Rejects Kyoto 95-0 (Byrd-Hagel Resolution, 1997)
- George Bush rejects mandatory limits on emissions (The Times, UK)
- UPI Poll: Don't ratify Kyoto treaty (NewsDaily)
- U.S. Carbon Dioxide Emissions From Fossil Fuels Declined By 1.3% In 2006 (Science Daily)
- U.S. Greenhouse Emissions Fell 1.5% in 2006 (USA Today)
The Anti "Man-Made" Global Warming Resource
No room for 75 extra PRIVATE jets on Bali. Car pool no Jet pool
November 30, 2007 - 19:13 ET by upcountrywaterThey could land in Sidney and jet pool from there, well maybe not.
iranian uranium; iranian uranium, iranian uranium..
So when ARE the Russians going to finish the iranian atoms for peace power plant?
Sounds like things are
November 30, 2007 - 19:35 ET by ckc1227Sounds like things are going according to plan if you ask me. Kyoto established unrealistic goals, knowing that signing countries could never meet them. Signing countries discover that it's easier(cheaper) to pay off the UN than it is to meet the targets outlined by the Kyoto treaty.
Result? Cha ching$$$ to the UN. What a shocker.
This is just a tip of the
December 1, 2007 - 06:34 ET by danboThis is just a tip of the AGW iceberg. Add in the increased cost to everything due to the sham. Cost of food due to ethnol. Cost of energy due to having to shift to sources that are expensive and don't work. Increased taxes. The list goes on.
There was the storming of the Bastille. How long will it be till there's the storming of the UN.
Brought to you by the same humanitarians as food for oil.
"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."
- Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT