Copenhagen Climate Treaty & Climategate

Carbon Will Mature as Inflation Hedge

November 23, 2009

Reuters - The $126 billion global carbon market will mature so that investors will use it as a hedge against equities and inflation, Bache Commodities Ltd.'s emissions trading head told Reuters in an interview.

Crude oil or gold have often been used to hedge against inflation risk or equities, as investors believe they can offer some protection against rising consumer prices.

"The carbon market is expanding on a rapid basis," said Andrew Ager, head of emissions trading at Bache Commodities Ltd.

"As the U.S. gets cap-and-trade legislation and the Australian bill is passed, the market could mature to become a similar commodity to oil in the way it is used by hedgers as a strategy," he added.

The EU's flagship emissions trading scheme (EU ETS) began in 2005. Prices for permits traded under the scheme, called EU Allowances (EUAs), are the global benchmark for emissions markets.

EUAs frequently correlate to oil and German power prices, as well as natural gas and coal. A sign of the relatively young market's development is that these markets have started to look at carbon prices for direction.

"There's now a situation where oil, coal and gas traders are looking at carbon prices for direction. That's a complete 180 (degree turn)," Ager said.

"Say you have a portfolio of mining shares, it is possible to use carbon as a hedge as part of your portfolio. (Carbon) has even correlated with copper quite strongly recently. As people look at copper as an indicator of industrial growth, it makes sense."

Reuters estimates show EUA prices have shown a weekly correlation of 0.75 with copper since November 1, and 0.85 in the corresponding period the previous month.

The European Union's executive Commission is aiming for the world's major emissions trading schemes to link by 2020.

Progress toward this goal is being hampered by U.S. cap-and-trade legislation's slow progress through the Senate and reduced expectations for a legally binding climate treaty in Copenhagen next month.

"I hope to see a global carbon market sooner than 2020. There is at least a framework for a future market. Regulation may get stricter, there will be foibles and quirks but the underlying (market) structure is there," Ager said.

Ager expects London to continue its reign as the hub of the global carbon market, flanked by a U.S. exchange and an Asian/Antipodean exchange.

An Australian carbon scheme is scheduled to start in July 2011. The government gained bipartisan political backing for its revised carbon-trade plan on Tuesday, but some opposition members still threaten to vote against it or try to have the Senate vote, expected on Thursday, delayed until February 2010.

"You do need something to push the southern hemisphere. You need that link up for a 24-hour market," Ager said.

Major metal market player Bache Commodities expanded into emissions trading by opening a desk in London in June. Ager heads a team of three emissions traders.

More On Those Climate Emails

November 25, 2009

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution - To get up to speed if you haven’t been following this story closely, here’s my post on it yesterday.

Short version: A large batch of data from one of the world’s leading climate science centers was released on the Internet last week; this includes thousands of emails and other documents that reveal scientists at the center — people who have been intimately involved in the reports of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — may have been manipulating their data, and certainly intended to foil Freedom of Information requests and keep contrarian researchers out of peer-review journals if possible.

The focus on the story has turned from the emails the scientists exchanged to the computer code their center was using to produce its data sets, which have been an integral part of the IPCC’s reports...

U.S. Tariffs Would Chill Climate Pact and Trade

November 24, 2009

Reuters - Any threat by the United States to slap fees on imports from countries it perceives as weak on cutting carbon emissions could hamper trade relations and delay international efforts to combat global warming.

Lawmakers in states that produce cement, chemicals, steel and other energy-intensive products have called for such tariffs in climate legislation. They fear those industries looking to cut regulation costs could pull up stakes and move to countries that don't have strong climate plans.

But experts say the tariffs may do more harm than good.

"One of the big problems is retaliation," said Jeffrey Frankel, professor of capital formation at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. "Other countries will say 'If the U.S. is doing it, we'll put up our own trade barriers.'"

The manufacturers and labor unions are urging the U.S. Congress to include carbon tariffs, also known as border adjustments, in the long-delayed climate bill.

Under the version of the bill passed narrowly by the House of Representatives in June, fees would be levied on such goods from countries that do not adopt plans to curb emissions by 2018. Leaders in the Senate also see the tariffs as important if the bill is to win the required 60 votes.

Kenneth Green, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, said trade spats could put U.S. agricultural and high-tech exports at risk.

At issue is the chance that climate could add yet another layer of contention into already complicated U.S. trade relations with China and other developing countries. China and the United States are already at odds on trade over Chinese tires and U.S. exports of poultry and auto products.

Another potential problem under the measure is Congress could have a say in determining when a developing country is not matching the United States on future commitments to cut emissions. Those decisions could be subject to influence from industry.

"All you need to start a trade war is a perception of unfairness," said Michael Levi, a climate expert at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Indeed, poorer countries are balking at the threat of fees placed on their exports.

China and other developing countries have called for a ban on carbon tariffs, which have also been mulled by France. The issue could help keep rich and poor nations at odds beyond the U.N. climate talks next month in Copenhagen...

China Doesn't Want "Empty" Copenhagen Deal

November 24, 2009

Reuters - China will demand next month's Copenhagen climate summit culminates in a real deal, Xinhua news agency quoted a Chinese negotiator as saying, but appears to have accepted that a legally binding agreement must wait until 2010.

"We will try to make the summit successful and we will not accept that it ends with an empty and so-called political declaration," Li Gao, an official with the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), said at a forum on Wednesday.

"The Copenhagen conference will be a milestone and written into history, therefore, too much expectation has been put on it," Li was quoted saying, adding that talks so far had made some progress, but not enough.

December's Copenhagen summit was slated to settle a new framework to tackle global warming, but talks have been hobbled by a rift between developed and developing nations over who should cut emissions, by how much, and who should pay for it.

The Danish government, host of the talks, has proposed that the world delay a legally binding agreement until 2010 and instead aim to reach a comprehensive political deal.

U.S. President Barack Obama has backed the proposal but said he wants to see an agreement with "immediate operational effect."

In a boost to the Copenhagen meeting, the United States said this week it will propose an emissions reduction target with an eye toward winning support from U.S. lawmakers who must agree to put it into law.

The Obama administration had previously been reluctant to put an emissions reduction target on the table because the Senate has yet to pass a sweeping climate bill, hampering the U.S. position in the U.N. climate negotiations.

China has said only that it is "studying" the Danish plan, but Li appeared to tacitly accept it, saying that offers from rich nations on financing technology transfer and the cost of adaptation to a warmer world had paved the way for an agreement.

"It would be called a successful summit and possibly produce a framework," Xinhua quoted him saying in its English-language report. Li added that more detailed discussions would be completed in next year's meetings.

Beijing has invested large amounts of diplomatic capital in reaching a new deal. President Hu Jintao earlier this year unveiled the country's first pledge to curb carbon emissions -- by cutting so-called carbon intensity -- at a United Nations summit.

New Zealand Passes Revamped Carbon Law

November 25, 2009

Reuters - New Zealand's revised emissions trading plan passed into law on Wednesday, opening the way to controlling greenhouse gas emissions from industry, although critics say the scheme is too soft on big polluters.

The governing minority National Party with the backing of the small Maori Party pushed the legislation through a detailed clause-by-clause examination, without amendments, before it was given final approval.

"It is a critical and important first step in our nation's effort to do our fair share in combating climate change," Climate Change Minister Nick Smith said in parliament.

National had been pushing the law's passage ahead of next month's U.N. climate summit in Copenhagen. The scheme is only the second to pass into law after Europe's began in 2005.

New Zealand has set a target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by between 10 and 20 percent by 2020 on 1990 levels, depending on the outcome of the Copenhagen meeting that is meant to settle on the broad outlines of a tougher global climate pact.

The amended scheme will replace the previous Labor-led government's carbon trading plan and gives extra support to big carbon emitters and delays entry for the economically vital farm sector by two years.

New Zealand, with about 4.5 million people, produces only a fraction of mankind's greenhouse gas emissions. Per-capita emissions were about 16 tonnes in 2007, higher than some European countries, with about half the greenhouse gas pollution coming from agriculture, such as dairy farming.

An independent advisor on environmental issues to the parliament said the revamped scheme would give too many free carbon credits to polluters, and removed the incentive to move to low-carbon technology.

"It's virtually certain our emissions will grow and the burden on the taxpayer will be uncurbed," Jan Wright told Radio NZ.

New Zealand's total emissions increased by 24 percent from 1990 to 2008, which the government had previously said would make setting a target difficult. Under the U.N.'s Kyoto Protocol, New Zealand's emissions are supposed to show no increase from 1990 levels during the pact's 2008-12 first commitment period.

The government said it wanted New Zealand to be more closely aligned to neighboring Australia, where a revised carbon-trade scheme offering increased compensation to big carbon emitters, coal companies and electricity generators was unveiled this week.

Other changes to the New Zealand scheme include a delay to the entry of certain sectors, a cap on the price of carbon and support for forestry planting.

Under the revised scheme, there will be a transitional period from July 1, 2010, until January 1, 2013, in which emitters will only have to meet 50 percent of their obligations, and will be able to take up an option of paying a fixed price of NZ$25 ($18.25) per tonne of emissions.

The estimated annual cost to households would be halved under the new scheme, to NZ$165 from NZ$330 during the transitional period.

Wayne King of advisory firm Carbon Market Solutions in New Zealand agreed the amended scheme would not do much to reduce emissions, but said it would give certainty to business.

"It's good for the overall business to reduce the uncertainty ... in the context of forestry, it may be still quite positive because there's certainty around what you can and can't do," he said.

King said he expected it would take some time for a liquid carbon trading market to evolve in New Zealand and didn't think it would drive buying of more expensive U.N. offsets under the Kyoto Protocol...

U.S. to Bring Emissions Cut Target to Copenhagen Talks

November 23, 2009

Reuters - The United States will propose an emissions reduction target at U.N. climate change talks in Copenhagen in December with an eye toward winning support from U.S. lawmakers who must agree to put it into law.

A senior Obama administration official told reporters on Monday that Washington would make clear in the "next several days" what it planned to put on the table at the talks, and a greenhouse gas emissions goal -- in line with proposals in the U.S. Congress -- would be included.

The White House would also decide in the coming days when and whether President Barack Obama would attend the December 7-18 meeting, the official said.

The talks are meant to help forge a deal to fight global warming after the Kyoto Protocol -- a pact that binds countries around the world to cut emissions -- expires in 2012.

The United States, the world's biggest per capita emitter of greenhouse gases, is a critical player in the talks, but the Obama administration's position has been hampered by slow progress on a climate bill in the U.S. Senate.

Big emitters such as China, the world's top carbon polluter, are watching Washington for its position.

Most nations have given up hopes of agreeing to a binding legal treaty text in Copenhagen, partly because of uncertainty about what the United States will be able to offer.

The senior official said U.S. negotiators will propose an emissions reduction target that takes into account a pending bill in the Senate and a bill passed in the House of Representatives, even though a final law is not complete.

"We don't want to get out ahead or be at odds with what can be produced through legislation," the official told reporters.

"Whatever number we put on the table will be with reference to what we think can come out of the legislative process."

The official declined to say whether the proposal would involve a range or a single figure. He also downplayed the role that a U.S. law not being in place has played in the overall process.

"It would be a mistake to conclude that the international community's failure to reach a final treaty in Copenhagen was due to the lack of domestic legislation in the United States."

The U.S. House passed a bill that sets a 17 percent reduction target for emissions by 2020 from 2005 levels. A Senate version is shooting for a 20 percent cut.

Senate support for the figure that U.S. negotiators put forward will also be critical because it will have to ratify a treaty once one is finished.

The United States signed Kyoto but did not ratify it.

GOING TO COPENHAGEN, GETTING A DEAL

Denmark, which will host the meeting, still hopes that leaders can agree to a "politically binding" agreement in December under which developed nations would set goals for cutting emissions by 2020, developing nations would agree to slow the rise of their emissions, and the rich would come up with new aid and clean technology to help the poor cope with climate change.

Activists said it was a good signal that the Obama administration was planning to announce actual targets.

"I think it's good news that they've made a decision to put numbers on the table," said Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists. "It helps."

Meanwhile the U.N. World Meteorological Organization said on Monday concentrations of greenhouse gases, the major cause of global warming, are at their highest levels ever recorded and are still climbing,

The head of the agency, Michel Jarraud, said the trend could be pushing the world toward the most pessimistic assessments of the rise in temperatures in coming decades and said this underlined the need for urgent action.

Denmark wants top leaders to come to Copenhagen to illustrate that urgency.

It said on Sunday that 65 world leaders -- including those from Britain, Germany, France, Australia, Japan, Indonesia and Brazil -- have confirmed that they will attend a summit at the end of the December 7-18 period.

Obama's presence is seen as critical to the legitimacy of any deal that would be agreed.

"The president has always said ... if it looks as though the negotiations have proceeded sufficiently that going to Copenhagen would give a final impetus or push to the process ... that he would be willing to go," the U.S. official said.

Obama goes to neighboring Oslo in early December to pick up the Nobel Peace Prize, but world leaders have been invited to come to Copenhagen at the end of the two-week climate meeting.

Climate is likely to feature in talks between Obama and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Tuesday in Washington.

India has announced plans to boost solar power from near zero to 20 gigawatts by 2022, but tied chances of success to international finance and technology.

Separately, Indonesia rejected a World Bank study that ranked the nation as the world's third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, when taking emissions from deforestation and draining of peat bogs on top of industrial emissions.

Lord Monckton: Prosecute the Climate Change Criminals

November 23, 2009

Infowars - Lord Monckton, who challenged Al Gore on man-made climate change and was rebuffed by a gaggle of peevish Democrats, wants the climate “scientists” caught red-handed fiddling with climate stats prosecuted.

“They are not merely bad scientists — they are crooks. And crooks who have perpetrated their crimes at the expense of British and U.S. taxpayers,” writes Monckton. “With Professor Fred Singer, who founded the U.S. Satellite Weather Service, I have reported them to the UK’s Information Commissioner, with a request that he investigate their offenses and, if thought fit, prosecute.”

Monckton does not hold out much hope for that, however.

“But I won’t be holding my breath: In the police state that Britain has now sadly become, with supine news media largely owned and controlled by the government, the establishment tends to look after its own.”

The corporate media is doing its best to downplay the story.

“Revelation of a series of embarrassing e-mails by climate scientists provides fodder for critics, but experts believe the issue will not hurt the U.S. climate bill’s chance for passage or efforts to forge a global climate change deal,” reports Reuters. Anthony Leiserowitz, the director of the Yale Project on Climate Change, said the release of the emails will be remembered mostly as “embarrassment” to the researchers. “But there’s no smoking gun in the e-mails from what I’ve seen.”

No smoking gun? The so-called researchers colluded to modify climate data in favor of their man-made climate change fairy tale.

“The tiny, close-knit clique of climate scientists who invented and now drive the ‘global warming’ fraud — for fraud is what we now know it to be — tampered with temperature data so assiduously that, on the recent admission of one of them, land temperatures since 1980 have risen twice as fast as ocean temperatures,” writes Monckton in a blog entry today. “One of the thousands of emails recently circulated by a whistleblower at the University of East Anglia, where one of the world’s four global-temperature datasets is compiled, reveals that data were altered so as to prevent a recent decline in temperature from showing in the record. In fact, there has been no statistically significant ‘global warming’ for 15 years — and there has been rapid and significant cooling for nine years.”

Instead of demanding researchers answer questions about inventing and fiddling with data, the University of East Anglia has asked the cops to investigate the hackers who revealed the bogus work of “our globally-respected Climatic Research Unit” that supposedly produces “research [that] is, and has always been, fully peer-reviewed by the relevant journals, and is one strand of research underpinning the strong consensus that human activity is affecting the world’s climate in ways that are potentially dangerous.”

In other words, fake data used to impose a one-world government and global serfdom is “fully peer-reviewed.”

“In addition to supporting the police in their enquiries, we will ourselves be conducting a review, with external support, into the circumstances surrounding the theft and publication of this information and any issues emerging from it,” states a CRU update posted earlier today.

“It’s definitely a crime to do that in the U.K., and we have reported it to the police,” said Simon Dunford, a spokesman at East Anglia, which is conducting an internal probe.

The University of East Anglia should be consulting lawyers. Antonio Regalado, writing for Science Magazine, notes that “university researchers may also find themselves in legal jeopardy if they deleted emails requested under the U.K.’s Freedom of Information (FOIA) legislation, a crime under U.K. law.”

Professor Phil Jones, for instance, apparently engaged in a criminal conspiracy to destroy evidence formally petitioned under a Freedom of Information request.

“Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise,” Jones emailed Michael E. Mann, a climatologist and statistician at Pennsylvania State University, on May 29, 2008.

As noted above, deleting emails subject to a FOI request is a criminal offense in the United Kingdom, punishable with a fine.

The “arrogant fraudsters,” Monckton continues, “have refused, for years and years and years, to reveal their data and their computer program listings. Now we know why: As a revealing 15,000-line document from the computer division at the Climate Research Unit shows, the programs and data are a hopeless, tangled mess. In effect, the global temperature trends have simply been made up.”

Meanwhile, over at the Huffington Post, Katherine Goldstein and Craig Kanalley dismiss the CRU scandal out of hand. It provides ammo for the right-wing nuts who are — according to the ADL and the Department of Homeland Security — a threat to the nation.

“Despite the lack of evidence of some sort of conspiracy in the scientific community, this criminal activity has created fodder for right-wing groups and websites to promote their own agenda that global warming is not real. This comes at a time when international attention is more and more focused on the climate crisis in advance of the UN climate talks in Copenhagen in December,” they write.

Naturally, the climate change “progressives” — and the globalist foundations that support and nurture them — are worried about the CRU scandal because the United Nations conference on climate change is right around the corner. In December, the 15th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change will meet in Copenhagen to work on a successor treaty to the Kyoto Protocol.

As Lord Monckton explained in October, a realized Copenhagen treaty will establish a “one world Marxist government.”

On October 14, Lord Christopher Monckton gave a presentation in St. Paul, MN on the subject of climate change.

“The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, ‘climate debt’ – because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement,” Monckton warned. “They are about to impose a communist world government on the world. You have a president who has very strong sympathies with that point of view. He’s going to sign it. He’ll sign anything. He’s a Nobel Peace Prize [winner]; of course he’ll sign it.”

Replace “Marxist” with “bankster” and you get a better idea of what our rulers have up their sleeves. Moreover, wealth is never transferred to the third world. It is transferred to the global elite. Feel-good palliatives about feeding the poor are merely a parlor trick to steal your money and reduce you to indentured servitude.