Controlling the money - by Richard... Friday, December 18, 2009

Controlling the money - by Richard... Friday, December 18, 2009

With almost savage delight, one can always enjoy the BBC's unerring ability to miss the main story as it continues to pour out its endless propaganda for and on behalf of the warmists.

Thus do we find Navin Singh Khadka, one of the Beeb's team covering the slugfest in Copenhagen, earnestly briefing us about the "Fight to control Copenhagen climate change fund", completely, utterly and totally missing one of the biggest scandals of our time.

Khadka is telling us that, apart from the headline battles in Copenhagen, "behind the scenes an equally big issue is being thrashed out. It's a fight for control of the massive new fund that will challenge our changing climate."

Too right there is a fight - he's got that bit right, but what he doesn't say is that the reason for it is that the existing funds are in the hands of a "carbon mafia" which is spending the so-called "green funds" on such delightful, carbon-busting projects as one of the largest coal-fired power stations in the world.

This is the $4.14 billion 4GW Mundra power project in India's Gujarat State, being developed by Coastal Gujarat Power Limited. But it will come as no surprise to readers to learn that the Coastal Gujarat Power Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of Tata Power Limited, which it acquired in April 2007.

Thus, while our masters in the EU are closing down our existing coal plants, and no new plants are being permitted unless fitted – at enormous expense – for carbon capture, money from the long-suffering taxpayers of the UK and the rest of the developed world are being used to subsidise the building of a plant that will emit 25.7 million tons of CO2 per year for at least 25 years, adding another 643 million tons to an atmospheric carbon load.

And the ultimate irony is – actually, it is beyond irony – is that the plant will qualify for the UN's Clean Development Mechanism "carbon credits" which can then be sold on the carbon market, which UK generators will need to buy in order to continue producing electricity and keep the lights burning.

Approved by the World Bank on 8 April last year, the project is being part-funded by the Bank's International Finance Corporation (IFC), with an "A Loan" of up to $450 million, plus an investment of $50 million in equity. This was followed on 25 April by another loan from the Asian Development Bank (ADB), amounting to $450 million, both loans being on preferential terms because of their "green" development status.

What gives the project its "green" status – and thus permits World Bank and ADB funding - is that it employs what is known as "super-critical" technology. This – in theory at least - improves the conversion efficiency (of fuel to electric power) to some 44 percent compared with only 34-36 percent for conventional coal-fired power plants.

Piling irony on irony, this is exactly the type of power station which E.ON wanted to build at Kingsnorth in Kent, to which the greenies objected so much, even though future provision was to be made for carbon capture and carbon credits had to be bought to permit the plant to run.

Yet, in India, this is the seventh such plant to be built (or in the planning), justified as "green" because the type reduces the average carbon emissions of India's electricity generation system as a whole, per unit of electricity supplied. Nevertheless, this plant will not actually reduce total emissions. It will provide new capacity to a region short of electricity, so overall emissions will increase. Only the intensity of emissions will decrease.

However, as regards the plant itself, it will reduce coal consumption by three million tons, compared with a conventional plant. This gives a "saving" of 28 million tons of carbon dioxide in the first 10 years of operations which can be turned in carbon credits at a notional future value of around $20 each. This would yield an income of $560 million, based on the approval of an earlier supercritical plant built in North Karanpura, India. Crucially, this can be leveraged, to generate the loans needed to build the plant.

Thus, while a similar British plant, like Kingsnorth – if it ever got planning permission – would have to pay for the carbon credits to allow it to produce electricity, based on the CO2 emitted, the India plant will be paid for the notional amount of CO2 it does not produce, compared with less efficient plants - that scheme also making it more attractive to build such plants in the first place.

This then is where the BBC's Navin Singh Khadka comes in with his observations about the "Fight to control Copenhagen climate change fund".

The craziness of using clean development money to fund projects that actually increase emissions and – horror of horrors – uses coal has had the greenies screaming with rage, while other developing nations are complaining that the amounts being devoted to such expensive projects are soaking up the cash available for truly "green" projects.

Thus, there is a move at Copenhagen – which Khadka has picked up – to strip control of the management of development funding from the World Bank and to give it to a new body under the aegis of the United Nations Convention Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) – which also administers the Clean Development Mechanism.

One of the champions of this switch is Pakistan – probably reflecting the overwhelming preponderance of funding which is going to India. "We have made it clear that we want the COP [Committee of the Parties] to have the authority over the new body that will control finance," said Farrukh Khan of, a co-chair representing developing countries in the financial negotiations.

However, both the United States and the EU oppose the formation of a new body. It is understood that the EU is insisting that existing institutions should be allowed to do the job as it believes that creating new ones will only cause delay, as has happened with the Climate Adaptation Fund that was formed two years ago to help developing countries adapt, but has yet to come online.

More particularly, the issue is about "control" as administration of the funds by another body would remove the ability of donors to dictate how they were spent. "It certainly is a big power game," said a senior European representative to Khadka. This man was actively involved in negotiations and told the BBC reporter: "The [new] fund will run into billions and getting to control it will mean you will be powerful in the world order."

Thus we see coal-burning power stations qualifying for green development money, justified by an "expert observer" noting that a Western politician said that his parliament would not allow him to give away money just like that, without knowing how much is being spent, who is getting it and what is it being used for. And if this is what is happening when we (supposedly) do know what the money is being spent on, and by whom, one can only imagine how it will be spent when we do not.

As for the rest, cheap electricity is a vital part of a competitive economy. Yet here we are burdening our own electricity suppliers with additional costs, some of which funds are then sent to our competitors in undeveloped countries, giving them an even cheaper cost base and even greater competitive advantage. No wonder we are going broke.

CLIMATEGATE THREAD

Print ready

Overtime - by Richard...

The slugfest has gone into overtime. World leaders are deadlocked on a deal to tame global warming, despite pleas for an agreement from US President Barack Obama,says AFP and just about everybody else.

"At the scheduled 6pm close of a summit, the climax of 12 days of negotiations in Copenhagen, leaders were still thrashing through the text of a draft accord - deeply split over how to curb carbon emissions and muster the funds to combat climate change."

Much more interesting is Navin Singh Khadka, one of the Beeb's team covering the slugfest in Copenhagen, earnestly briefing us about the "Fight to control Copenhagen climate change fund".

Khadka is telling us that, apart from the headline battles in Copenhagen, "behind the scenes an equally big issue is being thrashed out. It's a fight for control of the massive new fund that will challenge our changing climate." He has completely, utterly and totally missed one of the biggest scandals of our time.

Like, er ... why is this money – our money - being used to build a massive, coal-fired power station in India? Owned by you know who.

More later – still writing the piece.

CLIMATEGATE THREAD

Print ready

Wheels within wheels - by Richard...

Abyd Karmali, global head of carbon markets for Merrill Lynch, says the markets will be watching the slugfest to see whether Europe commits to deepening its emission cuts from 20 to 30 percent by 2020. This could increase demand for tradeable carbon allowances, reports The Daily Telegraph.

And this, of course, is the same Meryll Lynch that employs Adair Turner as its Vice Chairman for its European operation, the man who is also a trustee of WWF UK and an enthusiastic member of the International Climate Change Taskforce set up by the Labour Institute for Public Policy Research think-tank, co-chaired by Labour MP Stephen Byers.

And it will come as absolutely no surprise to readers to learn that the Taskforce's scientific adviser is a certain Dr Rajendra K Pachauri. I wonder if he gets paid for that as well?

Not of course that Meryll Lynch's Abyd Karmali and Dr Pachauri are strangers. They met in December 2008 (and not for the first time) at a very exclusive little "do" in Poznan hosted by theGlobal Leadership for Climate Action group, itself a spin-off from the Club of Madrid.

Karmali and Pachauri were getting together for a "High-level Discussion on Climate Technology and Finance", alongside Peter Betts, Director of the UK's Department of Energy and Climate Change, and Katherine Sierra, Vice President, Sustainable Development, World Bank.

In attendance also were Uday Khemka, Vice-Chair of the Sun Group of Companies, Peter de Waal, Senior Executive, Carbon Banking, of the Fortis Bank, Brian Martel, Managing Director of the Environmental Capital Group and Monique Barbut, listed as CEO of the Global Environment Facility. Alongside were sundry other worthies, including Achim Steiner, Executive Director of UNEP, the parent body of the IPCC, and Mohamed El-Ashry, Senior Fellow, United Nations Foundation.

Strangely enough, Pachauri was not there in his capacity as chairman of the IPCC. He is listed as "Director-General, TERI" – not bad for the boss of an obscure Indian environmental "consultancy".

And now we have Meryll Lynch's Abyd Karmali - who is also president of the Carbon Markets and Investors Association - watching the slugfest for developments, with a very clear idea of what he expects to happen ... hmmm.

PACHAURI THREAD

Print ready

Where's it gone? - by Richard...

A gang of thieves in Poland has stolen the infamous wrought-iron sign announcing "work sets you free" that spans the main gate of the Auschwitz concentration camp, reports The Times.

The first person to suggest that the EU commission did it and the sign will reappear over the European quarter in Brussels gets banned.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

Failing the test? - by Richard...

José Manuel Barroso is in battling mood at the slugfest, we are told. "We have come here to fight for an ambitious outcome," he says - seeming to imply that others have not. "We should not be seen making the traditional diplomatic negotiations," he says. "These negotiations are a test for global responsibility." It's a test we appear to have failed, says The Times.

Meanwhile, Gerald Warner says, "The pseudo-science of global warming is a global laughing stock and Copenhagen is a farce. In the warmist camp the Main Man is a railway engineer with huge investments in the carbon industry."

Just another dreary day at the office, it seems.

CLIMATEGATE THREAD

Print ready

Pier reviewed - by Richard...

The scene at Brighton, on the south coast ... with much more Mann-made global warming snow forecast.

Meanwhile, the slugfest goes on. Obama has been strutting his stuff at Copenhagen airport, with a carbon footprint the size of an er ... Boeing 747. Interestingly, the current press photos are all close shots, so you can barely see the snow in the background. National Review is calling the whole thing a "tree-ring circus". Why didn't I think of that?

CLIMATEGATE THREAD

Print ready

Going for the money - by Richard...

Despite the brave words Wednesday about holding out until the summer for a better deal, it looks as if the world's leaders are going all-out for a headline-grabbing agreement at the slugfest, determined not to leave Copenhagen until "the deal is sealed" – in the current vernacular.

Twelve figure numbers were floating around all yesterday, either a hundred billion dollars or euros depending on who you listened to, with increasingly wild emission cut figures proffered.

The reality, however, was broken by theNew York Times which "leaked" (no scruples here, unlike certain e-mails) a draft UN document which purported to show that even if all the highest promises on emission cuts were kept, the temperature would still go screaming up to 3°c above the baseline – whatever that is – risking, according to the warmists, "runaway global warming".

You have to work very hard to find out why the world leaders seem so unconcerned about this prospect, the game being given away by the Zimbabwe Herald whose journalists obviously haven't sussed the importance of what they are writing.

From this august journal, we learn that the negotiations were "rescued from the brink of collapse" when delegates agreed to compromise on the two contending positions by keeping the Kyoto Protocol and devising another agreement to encompass the United States and its allies who have refused to ratify Kyoto.

This is nothing to do with the headline billions and all the rest. Nope, the deal is that the Kyoto Protocol is saved – which is what all the fuss was really about. That safeguards the carbon market and opens the way for it to expand to the $2-trillion level by the year 2020. Against that, even €100 billion is chump-change - you can buy countries with that sort of money.

Their deal in place, the kleptocrats and the Corporatocracy can go away happy and plan how to spend all their ill-gotten gains, leaving the leaders to grandstand, make their deals, shake hands and strut through their photo-sessions before jetting off in olumes of "carbon" to be greeted as saviours by their underwhelmed peoples.

As for saving the planet, well no-one really believes that greenie shit anyway ... except the greenies, and they don't matter. There is plenty of pepper spray left and no shortage of temporary detention space. Now that the money men have got what they came for, all the rest is theatre.