Scary: Only 13 Countries Have Emissions Reductions Plans That Match Their Promises Or Something

Having plans and actually implementing them are two separate things, but, in Warmist World, action is not necessary. All you really need to do is virtue signal

Only 16 countries have emissions reduction targets matching their promises to avoid catastrophic climate change

Just 16 countries have set clear goals for cutting greenhouse gas emissions that will allow them to match their ambitious pledges to tackle climate change.

In a new report, climate experts have warned of discrepancies between big promises made on the global stage and domestic targets backed up by law.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a warning earlier this month of catastrophic outcomes without drastic emissions cuts over the next decade.

In light of this, and with an upcoming major UN summit to discuss the world’s approach to global warming, the authors of the report say nations need to set clear plans about how they are going to stop pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

“We have 12 years to get our act together, and in order to do that you really need to know what you are going to be doing in the next six months, in the next two years, in the next 12 years,” explained Dr Michal Nachmany from the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.

“So you need to set really clear targets in order to know you are on track to meeting those goals.”

I have a clear target: keep doing what I’m doing. Warmists like Dr. Nachmany should have their own, which should involved giving up their own use of fossil fuels and making their own lives carbon neutral, rather than forcing their un-science beliefs on everyone else

In total, 157 countries have made international commitments to slash their emissions under the Paris climate agreement – known as nationally determined contributions, or NDCs.

However, to be worth anything these promises must be translated into domestic commitments and policies on renewable energy, green transport and sustainable agriculture to lay out a realistic pathway.

The analysis by Dr Nachmany and Emily Mangan from the World Resources Institute found that nations have been slow to mirror their NDCs in national policies.

So far only 58 countries (from 157) have backed up those commitments with economy wide targets for emissions reductions, and just 16 of those are as ambitious as the ones they promise in their NDCs.

That “historic” Paris Climate Agreement was, for all purposes, voluntary, because so many leaders didn’t want something that they’d have to take back to their legislative branches for approval. And the moment it was passed the hardcore Cult of Climastrology members were already saying it wasn’t enough. It really was simply about claiming they are Doing Something while not really doing something, especially when the citizens will protest when they realize that the results of any policies will make their lives worse, at least in 1st World nations and ones like India and China. The others are just pissed off that the sweet, sweet climate cash isn’t flowing in so they can build more airports and stuff.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “Scary: Only 13 Countries Have Emissions Reductions Plans That Match Their Promises Or Something”

  1. Professor hale says:

    Plans != results.
    Nor does each country have any way of actually measuring their carbon output. Just estimates. So they can easily meat their goals by just “adjusting” their estimates. But without the USA forced into the Carbon -buying market, there is no point.

  2. Dana says:

    Our esteemed host wrote:

    That “historic” Paris Climate Agreement was, for all purposes, voluntary, because so many leaders didn’t want something that they’d have to take back to their legislative branches for approval.

    Previous comment should be deleted; it posted before I was finished with it.

    By ‘many leaders,’ our host really meant that Barack Hussein Obama didn’t want a treaty that he’d have to submit to the Senate for ratification, because he knew full well that it would have been rejected.

    There’s a real problem with Presidents signing international agreements that they know they cannot get ratified. If the elected representatives of the people won’t ratify a treaty, then the President who knowingly signs such garbage is going against the will of his own people.

  3. Professor Hale says:

    “…the President who knowingly signs such garbage is going against the will of his own people.”

    Never stopped Democrats before. There is way too much money to be made from this scam to let the “people” stand in the way. 79% didn’t want Obamacare either. Guess what we got.

Bad Behavior has blocked 6857 access attempts in the last 7 days.