China’s CO2 Charade Shows Who The Real Climate Deniers Are

china smogOn the eve of the Paris summit, we learn that China has been fudging its carbon emission data for years. That this is a surprise to anyone shows how blind climate change advocates are to reality these days.

China apparently has been burning 17% more coal annually than it has claimed over the past 15 years. And as a result, it’s been emitting a billion tons more CO2 a year than it had admitted. The New York Times points out that this difference alone is equal to what Germany’s entire economy produces each year from burning fossil fuels.

In other words, if Germany shut down its entire economy, it wouldn’t compensate for China’s “error.”

Anyone who’s ever seen photos like the one above of Chinese cities choked in smog could have guessed that they are probably not pursuing “clean energy” at the pace they claim. But the fact that this vast undercount went on so long only points to a much larger problem with the entire climate change agenda.

Even if you believe in the dire warnings of climate scientists, and even if countries like China don’t cheat, nothing agreed to at the Paris summit next month will change anything. The summit is eagerly awaited by environmentalists because more than 150 countries are supposed to sign pledges to cut carbon emissions.

Problem is, the pledges made would still result in a global temperature increase of 6.3 degrees, or nearly twice what climate scientists say would be cataclysmic, according to Climate Interactive, the source of carbon data used by the U.S. and other countries.

Indeed, the inconvenient fact that no one pushing for CO2 reductions will admit publicly is that the only way to prevent “disastrous warming” is for the entire world to go entirely carbon-free in just six decades, and then start removing CO2 from the atmosphere after that — with technology that doesn’t yet exist.

The reason is that CO2 stays in the atmosphere for centuries. So simply reducing emissions, or holding them steady, won’t do, because it will still lead to an increase in CO2 levels. That’s science, folks.

But does anyone in their right mind believe that eliminating fossil fuels entirely in a generation is even a remote possibility?

The idea that no one would cheat on any carbon reduction pledge is even more unrealistic. If China can hide carbon emissions equal to all of Germany’s for more than a decade, why should anyone trust it, or any other country for that matter, to be honest about its future emissions?

Keep in mind too that China has only agreed to “stabilize” its CO2 emissions starting in 2030, which means they will be free to do whatever they want for the next 15 years, while the U.S. and other industrialized nation’s strangle their own economies in the name of “saving the planet.”

Also, about a quarter of the emissions reductions being pledged are, as Reuters put it, “conditional on receiving financial and technical support to make them happen.”

In other words, a lot of the pledges are being made by developing countries hoping to get a piece of the $100 billion climate change fund that Obama & Co. want to create. Anyone want to guess how much of that money will end up financing graft and corruption instead of clean energy?

Then there’s the argument that doing anything is better than doing nothing. But there’s a problem with this line of reasoning too.

Put simply, either the climate scientists are right and there’s nothing that we can realistically do to prevent what they claim will be catastrophic global warming, or they are wrong and there’s no reason to waste money on cutting emissions. Either way, the right course would be to wait and see what happens and spend the money as needed down the road to adapt.

Climate change advocates castigate skeptics as “deniers.” But those denying reality are pushing the U.S. and other countries to adopt costly and pointless climate change policies.


Comments (6)

  • Avatar



    China can’t reduce it’s emissions because it hasn’t finished relocating almost all western countries manufacturing to China .
    That could take up to 20 years then they will just roll in and take the resources they need . Respectfully no doubt .

    I doubt China has been hiding the equivalent of Germany’s emission for years crap . How did this claimed oversight suddenly come to light now ?

    What was the basis to the previous estimate and who specifically did the calculations?

    Until proven otherwise this “sudden discovery ”
    is complete garbage .

    The more likely scenario for this set up is that in order for ” developing ” countries to get their fledgling beaks stuffed with western cash they
    are going to have to prove emission reductions .
    China has already said they won’t be reducing emissions till at least 2030 but if they want the cash they have to play ball .

    Simple solution, adjust the numbers artificially high and then adjust those numbers to ensure the cash keeps flowing and the west can justify the launch of the biggest scam in history .

    They are simply taking a page out of NOAA’s play book and no doubt have the full support of the people rigging this heist .

    The New York Times have played their role but it is disturbing that business rags are buying it without doing their homework .

  • Avatar

    Al Shelton


    It is the smog that needs to be stopped. Not CO2.
    There is no proof whatsoever that CO2 is causing global warming. That is the first thing to make note of. Forget about whether or not it is in the atmosphere for centuries. The world needs more CO2 not less, for crying out loud.
    CO2 is NOT a pollutant. It does not have to be taxed; reduced; captured and stored; regulated; or anything else.
    Good grief Charlie Brown………….!

    • Avatar



      So true. Sick and tired of pictures implying CO2 is visibly polluting. What a crock.

  • Avatar

    Paul homewood


    Be very careful here.

    China is bigging up historical emissions so it can claim reductions in future.

    They already fiddle gdp figures. When their economy slows, they adjust gdp up, and vice versa

  • Avatar



    You are right Al Shelton .They picked the wrong thing to light their hair on fire about but it has served a purpose and that really was the intent after all .

  • Avatar



    The corporate “sustainable ” energy welfare recipients favorite new trick “Levelized Costs ” is used to hide the massive competitive price gap between their schemes and traditional energy supplies . This allows the proponent to cherry pick assumptions about costs that they then put into their business case to fool end users who are stuck paying double or triple the market rate of other energy supplies .

    Energy price forecasters typically always overstate future cost because their clients ,oil and gas producers use the inflated numbers to get banks to extend credit .

    The greenie promoters then use that over inflated data to project 20 years out and falsely claim that despite the initial higher cost of their scheme theoretically over time there is no premium cost . That is how they get their local utility Board to approve the scams .

Comments are closed