The Great Carbon Credit Swindle

Neoliberal propaganda outlets have been breathlessly pushing the global warming meme since Al Gore morphed into a crackpot scientist three years ago. On Friday the Democrat-controlled House capitulated to special interest groups by passing the Waxman-Markey Energy Tax Bill.

The legislation buys into the global warming fantasy to the tune of $1 trillion. Democrats have been hoodwinked into creating this boondoggle through assertions made using projected climate models based on false assumptions.

The documentary film The Great Global Warming Swindle, produced by Martin Durkin in the UK, tears apart the imaginary claims about carbon dioxide made by a cadre of environmentalists:

The global carbon market currently being run through the United Nations has been ripping off European taxpayers since its inception. Carbon credits are used to fund site upgrades in third-world countries. While market players profit handsomely, the factories earning credits are poorly audited and may emit pollutants more potent than carbon dioxide.

At the Gujarat Fluorochemical plant in India, the company pocketed about €18 million by selling its green reward points given by the UN. An investigation by Live found that the factory was continuing to pollute the local environment with high levels of fluoride and chloride. The conditions caused villagers to get sick and local crops to fail.

Mahesh Pandya was an environmental engineer who turned activist 13 years ago after meeting these villagers. A group had made complaints to the Gujarat High Court claiming GFL was making them ill and damaging crops. Pandya was asked by the court to sit on an expert witness panel, which discovered fluoride poisoning in people, land and animals caused by air and water pollution.

It discovered toxic effluent in the water stream and evidence of toxic waste not being properly disposed of by GFL. The documents presented to the court have been seen by Live. They recommended that GFL pay compensation and that villagers be diagnosed and monitored regularly. None of the recommendations have been carried out. The villagers have become so frustrated that they have now made a formal submission to India’s Human Rights Commission requesting an investigation.

For the sake of objectivity, Live took its own samples of water from Radha’s well, Vijay’s village pumps and two other locations, as well as soil samples. We had them tested at an independent government-registered laboratory in India. The results were shocking. They revealed dangerously high levels of fluoride and chloride – fluoride in the water was more than twice the international acceptable limit. All the water fell well below any safe drinking standards and the soil had worryingly high levels of these chemicals.

The global carbon market will accelerate job losses by taxing companies in developed nations while rewarding those in the third world.

In theory the carbon-credit trading scheme is a thoroughly modern and intelligent approach to reducing world pollution. The graphic above explains the system – in a nutshell, rich First World companies are financially encouraged to help poorer Third World companies clean up their manufacturing processes. They do this by accepting ‘carbon caps’, or limits, which if exceeded can be replenished by purchasing carbon credits – via specialist traders – from manufacturers in the developing world.

In practice, however, there are loopholes that seriously threaten the schemes’ credibility. The most significant are these: they take into account only greenhouse gases, money made through trading credits can be used to expand a business so increasing pollution and, perhaps most questionably, auditors of the scheme are paid for by the companies.

Carbon credits have become such a profitable commodity that market speculators – hedge funds, banks and pension funds – have enthusiastically bought into them. Traders buy and sell credits issued by both the UN and EU schemes. For trading purposes, one allowance or Certified Emission Reduction (CER) is equivalent to one ton of CO2 emissions.

Al Gore’s climate crusade is nothing more than a ruse funded by globalist elites to squeeze the middle class. The scientific claims made to back their political agenda are complete nonsense.

The Waxman-Markey bill will force Americans to pay a carbon tax under the false threat of ecoterrorism so that underdeveloped nations can acquire new technology. These actions will result in the offshoring of more American jobs. Given the current account deficit of hundreds of billions of dollars that the U.S. has with Asia, that region can afford to fund their own upgrades.

The increase in CO2 shown in Gore’s graph from An Inconvenient Truth actually comes at an 800 year lag to temperature changes. Oceans give off carbon dioxide as their temperature rises. Thus, CO2 is increased because of a rise in temperature, not the other way around. As Harold Ambler explained earlier this year, the capacity for carbon dioxide to capture heat is greatly exaggerated. Phony climate models assume that there is no limit to the ability of CO2 to absorb heat. However, in reality CO2 has already reached a near maximum absorption level. Therefore, an increase in carbon dioxide cannot cause warming.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Mr. Gore states, ad nauseum, that carbon dioxide rules climate in frightening and unpredictable, and new, ways. When he shows the hockey stick graph of temperature and plots it against reconstructed C02 levels in An Inconvenient Truth, he says that the two clearly have an obvious correlation. “Their relationship is actually very complicated,” he says, “but there is one relationship that is far more powerful than all the others, and it is this: When there is more carbon dioxide, the temperature gets warmer.” The word “complicated” here is among the most significant Mr. Gore has uttered on the subject of climate and is, at best, a deliberate act of obfuscation.

Why? Because it turns out that there is an 800-year lag between temperature and carbon dioxide, unlike the sense conveyed by Mr. Gore’s graph. You are probably wondering by now — and if you are not, you should be — which rises first, carbon dioxide or temperature. The answer? Temperature. In every case, the ice-core data shows that temperature rises precede rises in carbon dioxide by, on average, 800 years. In fact, the relationship is not “complicated.” When the ocean-atmosphere system warms, the oceans discharge vast quantities of carbon dioxide in a process known as de-gassing. For this reason, warm and cold years show up on the Mauna Loa C02 measurements even in the short term. For instance, the post-Pinatubo-eruption year of 1993 shows the lowest C02 increase since measurements have been kept. When did the highest C02 increase take place? During the super El Niño year of 1998.

…Meanwhile, the theory that carbon dioxide “drives” climate in any meaningful way is simply wrong and, again, evidence of a “flat-Earth” mentality. Carbon dioxide cannot absorb an unlimited amount of infrared radiation. Why not? Because it only absorbs heat along limited bandwidths, and is already absorbing just about everything it can. That is why plotted on a graph, C02’s ability to capture heat follows a logarithmic curve. We are already very near the maximum absorption level. Further, the IPCC Fourth Assessment, like all the ones before it, is based on computer models that presume a positive feedback of atmospheric warming via increased water vapor.

The true source of temperature changes are a combination of oscillating atmospheric cycles, the solar cycle, sunspots, and cosmic rays. We are actually entering another Maunder Minimum where a quiet sun with low sunspot activity will cause temperatures to drop for the next 25 years.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us