Global tree canopy cover increased by 2.24 million square kilometers (865,000 square miles) between 1982 and 2016, reports a new study in Nature. These new findings contradict earlier studies that reported a continuing net loss of forest cover. —Ronald Bailey, Reason Online, 4 September 2018
Since the 1990s, climate scientists, environmental organizations and policymakers have been warning that it could be too late soon, that time is running out, but that we can still avoid disaster if we act now. But how can it be that ‘it’s five minutes to midnight out’ for more than 25 years? Shouldn’t it be far too late by now, given all the inconsequential warnings? Has the clock stopped working or does someone always move back the hand of the clock? –Oliver Geden, Auf ewig fünf vor zwölf, Süddeutsche Zeitung, 5 September 2018
In the past few years, more than 2,000 jobs have been eliminated in Germany in what more and more mirrors the decline of its solar panel industry virtually wiped out by competitors in China. —Bloomberg, 6 September 2018
Developed countries are not taking their commitment to generate $100 billion in climate finance seriously, experts meeting in the Thai capital said on Wednesday, possibly jeopardizing the 2015 Paris accord. “If they don’t commit to real finance, it’s all going to fall apart.” —Reuters, 6 September 2018
Proposed text from the United States, Japan, and Australia could water down climate finance guidelines, and casts doubt that this week’s Bangkok negotiations will deliver the clear climate rules United Nations leaders have been calling for. —Devex News, 6 September 2018
Australia does not need to quit the Paris climate agreement because our commitments are non-binding, and new coal plants can continue to be constructed, according to the resources minister, Matt Canavan. —The Guardian, 7 September 2018
Tree’s are growing like weeds as CO2 reaches normal levels . What do the eco-anarchists have against a greening world ? Or is it just pretend to raise cash for themselves ?
We have a surplus of farmland. Marginal land could grow lumber for an expanding population. Why haven’t the warmists promoted the business? Harvest carbon dioxide naturally, with a solid return on investment .
I know, I know…..stop making sense.
One would think that greening of the earth news would be welcome by green activists but no it just makes them sad because it undercuts their sales pitch .
“Help us save the planet” … and make ourselves some cash .
Maybe they have a point though . Sooner or later the largely unchecked forest
growth is going to lead to some whooping big fires which are for the most part man made .
Since there has been
a pause in warming the greening is attributed to the increase in CO2 alone.
You are right but there is more to it than that. Consider a garden that isn’t doing well because it doesn’t get enough water. Increase the water, and the growth improves. Continue to increase the water, and the point is reached where it no longer improves growth because the watering level is now adequate or beyond adequate. Now consider the fact that increasing carbon dioxide improves forest growth. Just like the garden that doesn’t get enough water, that means plants are not getting enough carbon dioxide. Increasing CO2 is good. However, contrary to what the environmental left tells us, mankind has no ability to impact this gas’s concentration. What we release into the atmosphere is insignificant compared to that released by nature.
From the article, “But how can it be that ‘it’s five minutes to midnight out’ for more than 25 years?” This reminds me of the nuclear clock that was always “five minutes to midnight.” This was by the Union of Concerned Scientist, or at least that is how I got the information. They were advocating a solution of the United States conducting a unilateral nuclear disarmament. The resulting in balance of power would have made the world much more dangerous, not safer. The clock never reached midnight.
From the article, “Australia does not need to quit the Paris climate agreement because our commitments are non-binding.” This is true of all nations that signed the agreement. The difference is Australia is being honest. Other nations are reversing actions to reduce carbon dioxide emissions but haven’t brought their official policies in line with their actions.