Surprise: Four Out Of Five Countries Are Late On Their Climate Change (scam) Dues

It seems like lots of countries love the notion of Doing Something in theory. Giving up their own money? Not so much

France, Germany, US among 166 countries late on UN climate dues

Four out of five countries are late in making their contributions to the UN climate change body’s operating budget.

Under Donald Trump, the US is actively refusing to fund international climate efforts. The majority of member states support cooperation in principle but have been slow to pay.

China, Brazil, France and Germany are among those failing to honour the agreed timeline for payments, a UN Climate Change statement on Thursday revealed.

The body’s executive secretary Patricia Espinosa focused on the positive, thanking 31 countries who paid their 2018 share by the due date of 1 January.

That’s weird. Isn’t Paris in France?

Negotiators approved a budget of €57 million ($71m) for 2018 and 2019, to support the climate talks process and implementation of the Paris Agreement.

Countries are expected to contribute according to a UN formula based on relative wealth and development status. Despite Trump’s stance, the formula implies the US will fund 21% of the core budget.

Good luck with that. They’ll be lucky to get anything.

At the last UN climate conference, French president Emmanuel Macron said Europe would replace the shortfall left by Trump’s refusal to contribute to the UN’s climate science body. This week, he said he had decided to “make France a model in the fight against climate change”. Yet his own country’s dues to the larger UN climate budget remain unpaid.

Hey, it costs a lot of money dealing with all the crime, terrorism, sexual assault, rape, fires, garbage, etc that comes from allowing in all those “refugees”.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

20 Responses to “Surprise: Four Out Of Five Countries Are Late On Their Climate Change (scam) Dues”

  1. Jeffery says:

    Wow. The other countries are following the US lead.

    Maybe they reason if the biggest polluter in humanity’s short history won’t act responsibly, why should they?

    Anyway, let’s face the fact that we will not do enough to forestall warming of at least 2C, maybe more. Let your kids and grandkids worry about it.

    • Dachs_dude says:

      Sorry, wrong again. China takes the lead there.

    • Dachs_dude says:

      As far as I know, you haven’t done anything other than to complain that OTHER people aren’t paying.
      But as a hypocritical liberal, I can’t expect any less, can I?

    • Dana says:

      So, you do believe that President Trump is leading the world! That’s great, because he’s (mostly) leading in the right direction.

      Still, there’s one rather notable difference: Mr Trump openly said that the global warming climate change deal was a bunch of quackery, and that we were withdrawing from it, while those other countries claim to continue to support it. At least our President isn’t being a hypocrite on this. The left never actually put their money where their mouths are.

      Not that this is anything new. The younger President Bush ‘unsigned’ the United States from the idiotic Kyoto Accords, an act widely criticized, but Kyoto was honored primarily in the breach, as the vast majority of those other signatory nations did not achieve their commitments.

      Of course, this article reflects what I have said, many times, about ‘international law.’ If there actually international law, the international gendarmes could step in and fine those non-paying countries, and simply take the money from their treasuries. That can’t happen, because there is no enforcement mechanism to compel compliance, other than military force.

  2. Jeffery says:

    Great news on climate.

    In the 18 Jan 2018 issue of Nature, Cox et al (p. 319) calculate the most likely CO2 sensitivity (how much expected warming at equilibrium from a doubling of atmospheric CO2, aka ECS or equilibrium climate sensitivity) to be between 2.2 and 3.4C, with the top IPCC value (i.e., 4.5C) to be very unlikely. This refinement may take the worst potential warming out of play!

    This recalculation suggests that at equilibrium the most warming we would see from doubling CO2 from 280 to 560 ppm would be 3.4C, with 2.8C being the most likely. That’s good news since there’s no reason to think we WON’T reach 560 ppm CO2, based on the lack of action, so far.

    Ironically, this finding may give us more impetus to reduce CO2 emissions as it takes the worst case scenarios off the table. Maybe this is manageable after all, if we decide to take action.

    Climate change from human generated CO2 is not a hoax, Chinese or Communist or otherwise – it is real. The Earth is warming from our actions. Even the American right is beginning to accept this reality. Five years ago you denied that the Earth was warming. Two years ago you agreed it had warmed but that warming had stopped. One year ago you acknowledged warming but denied that man was involved. Now many of you admit that CO2 is significantly contributing to warming but there is little to be done, ’cause socialism.

    The challenge is what to do about it, if anything. You children and grandchildren will thank you for having an honest discussion.

    • drowningpuppies says:


    • Dachs_dude says:

      Jeffey said: “Ironically, this finding may give us more impetus to reduce CO2 emissions as it takes the worst case scenarios off the table. Maybe this is manageable after all, if we decide to take action.”

      Yep, we can control the weather on a global scale, (sounds like science fiction), simply by instituting socialism on a global scale!!! You’re an idiot if you believe that.

      Why is the answer always MORE government control and taxes regardless of the question?

      • Dachs_dude says:

        Jeffrey said: “The challenge is what to do about it, if anything. You children and grandchildren will thank you for having an honest discussion.”

        LOL!!!! YOUR children will curse you as you sold your freedom, wealth and standard of living down to 3rd world levels to enrich your Democratic overlords who consider you a useful pawn.

        Al Gore still has his ocean front property. I hope you enjoy making this charlatan rich.

        • Jeffery says:

          This is another straw man argument from the denier right.

          How does a tax on carbon pollution enslave billions and impoverish people?

          • drowningpuppies says:

            Another misinterpretation of the definition of the “straw man argument” by the little straw man guy himself.
            Try looking it up little guy.

          • dachs_dude says:

            Jeffrey, don’t you know how a tax works? The government charges a tax of say $4.00 per gallon of gas. That extra $4.00 per gallon goes to the government to send to the UN for “climate social justice” or some such nonsense.

            Say Jeffrey’s car takes 10 gallons a week to run. My wife’s car does that. At $2.499 a gallon that’s $25 a week to run. So far so good, right?? Now add $4.00 per gallon and we’ve just increase Jeffrey’s gas bill by $40 per week or $2000 per year!!!! That’s $2000 less that Jeffrey has to spend. But Jeffrey’s OK with it, right?? What about the food that’s trucked in or the electricity or the heating oil bills. Just how much extra income do you have sitting around to spend on the basics like food, electricity, heat and transporation? Would amounts like these cause a hardship to you? What if your heating oil bill, went up by 3 times? Mine is $1500 per year and I have a small house that I keep the thermostat low in the winter. How about $4500 per year for heat?
            With gas and heating oil alone increasing by $6500 per year, are you saving money for retirement still? Or are you now unable to afford to heat your house or travel to work?
            C’mon Jeffrey. A tax on the basics is as regressive as you can get.

          • dachs_dude says:

            My guess is that Jeffrey thinks that the extra $6500 per year is easily absorbed by those OTHER people he want’s to pay for this.

            How is taking large amounts of money out of people’s pockets in taxes NOT impoverishing or enslaving them?

  3. Bob M says:

    “Maybe they reason if the biggest polluter in humanity’s short history won’t act responsibly, why should they?”

    By golly, you’re right! Says right there China hasn’t paid up.

    • Dachs_dude says:

      You got it right Bob M.

    • Jeffery says:


      You are confused or mistaken.

      The US has emitted more CO2 over the past century than any other nation. China has surpassed the US in yearly emissions but still trails in overall emissions.

      Recall too, that CO2 has a long half-life in the atmosphere, so history matters.

      • drowningpuppies says:

        Don’t stop, little guy, you’re on a roll today with your staggeringly ignorant comments.

  4. Jl says:

    Here’s a link to over 75 papers saying a doubling of CO2 would only lead to about a .5 degree temp rise.

    • Jeffery says:

      We’ve been through this before…

      75 papers accumulated by “skeptic” non-scientist Pierre Gosselin, including those authored by Willie Soon (Koch Ind), Boris Smirnov, D Evans (jo nova’s hubby), the Idso’s (paid by Exxon and Peabody) etc. A collection shithole papers from cranks, gadflies and right-wing conspirators. In every area of science there are always those who rail against a scientific consensus – who claim HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, vaccines cause autism, canals on Mars, the Earth is flat, N-Rays, turning lead into gold, polywater, 10,000 yr old Earth, cold fusion, evolution is a scam, psychic surgery, tobacco is not harmful, curative magnets, pyramid power, water memory (homeopathy), … Some do this for attention and ego, money, ideology, some are true believers… scientists and pseudoscientists are human and have diverse motivations. This is where the so-called skeptics find themselves – at the fringes of a mountain of overwhelming evidence that the Earth is warming from human-generated CO2.

      Please pick your five most powerful papers from the collection and let’s discuss.

      Why did Gosselin ignore the papers with higher ranges? Because, as he admits, he doesn’t believe CO2 is causing warming. Gosselin is making a political argument, not a scientific one.

Bad Behavior has blocked 9938 access attempts in the last 7 days.