For a long time, it has been obvious to me, and to any thinking person, that the climate apocalypse scare would sooner or later collapse of its own absurdity. But how? And when? [emphasis, links added]
During the past couple of weeks, I have noted a few markers. Maybe you have noted others. Here are a few.
The latest of the big annual UN climate conferences, known as “COP” (Conference of the Parties), this one number 30, took place this year in Belem, Brazil, from November 10 to 21.
These COPs are the events where big international compacts have been agreed to that have supposedly committed the world to a rapid phase-out of fossil fuels, let alone to massive “climate” payments from the rich to the poor countries.
It was at COP21 in 2015 where the gigantic Paris Agreement was reached, supposedly committing all countries to big reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.
Well, were you even aware that this year’s COP30 happened? In a piece today for the Civitas Institute, Steven Hayward notes that not one of the American television networks sent reporters to this year’s event.
Coverage in the American print and online media was also dramatically reduced. Hayward writes, “A few reporters at the conference filed stories wondering whether this would be the last COP meeting.”
The U.S. federal government did not send any representatives at all. Heads of state from China and India also skipped this Conference.
Those two countries, which are the largest in the world by population, are in the process of rapid economic development based on energy from fossil fuels. They are not about to make any commitments to slow down that development, let alone stop it.
Also noted by Hayward in the same piece: growing troubles for the environmental groups promoting the climate apocalypse scare. The Sierra Club is in the middle of what might well be called an implosion.
The New York Times reported the story on November 7. Excerpt:
“The Sierra Club calls itself the “largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization in the country.” But it is in the middle of an implosion — left weakened, distracted, and divided just as environmental protections are under assault by the Trump administration. The group has lost 60 percent of the four million members and supporters it counted in 2019. It has held three rounds of employee layoffs since 2022, trying to climb out of a $40 million projected budget deficit. … [T]his year, as the Trump administration returned better organized and better prepared than in its first term, the Sierra Club was the opposite. While Mr. Trump boosted coal power, canceled wind farms, and rolled back pollution limits, the club was consumed by internal chaos, culminating when its board fired its executive director, Ben Jealous, a former president of the N.A.A.C.P.”
And then there is 350.org. This organization is the baby of uber-climate-activist Bill McKibben, with the “350” supposedly designating some limit of ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere that must never be exceeded, or else … something may happen that they think is really, really scary. (The current level of CO2 in the atmosphere is approximately 424 ppm.)
On November 13, even as COP 30 was going on, 350.org “suspended operations.” From Politico, November 13:
“Environmental group 350.org, which spearheaded the movement to block the Keystone XL oil pipeline, will “temporarily suspend programming” in the U.S. and other countries amid funding woes, according to a letter obtained on Thursday by POLITICO. … The letter to outside organizations from Executive Director Anne Jellema said 350.org had suffered a 25 percent drop in income for its 2025 and 2026 fiscal years, compelling it to halt operations. The group will keep three U.S. staff members in hopes of reviving operations in the future.”
How about the idea that use of fossil fuels was going to peak and then start going down as “renewable” wind and solar took over? That idea was always absurd.
Big subsidies for wind and solar may enable those essentially useless energy sources to expand, but nothing about that prevents the continued parallel expansion of market-driven investments in hydrocarbons.
Nevertheless, the (largely clueless) International Energy Agency (IEA) bought into the “peak oil” nonsense for years. A few days ago, the IEA reversed course and returned to reality.
From Yahoo Finance, November 22:
“The International Energy Agency (IEA) predicted in 2023 that the global peak in oil demand would likely take place by 2030, as governments worldwide introduced plans for a green transition and fossil fuel companies began to diversify their portfolios to include renewable alternatives. However, this month, the IEA has backtracked on this prediction, stating that oil demand could continue growing through to 2050. This reflects a U-turn by many countries on climate commitments and by oil and gas companies on energy diversification efforts.”
Even at the Krazy Klimate Konference that I attended last week, the signs of a change of course were there to be observed, if not stated aloud. Sponsors of the Konference included National Grid and Williams Companies.
National Grid is a UK-based entity that plays some role in running the UK grid; however, its name is misleading as to what it does in the U.S. The UK entity has purchased several utilities in the U.S. Northeast.
One of those is the former Brooklyn Union Gas, a supplier of natural gas via pipelines in Brooklyn and Queens in New York City. Thus, National Grid’s New York City business is threatened by the electrification mandates sought to be imposed by New York State and City.
Meanwhile, Williams Companies is a pipeline developer that has been trying for many years to build a natural gas pipeline across New York Bay, despite obstruction by the State government. The pipeline finally got approved a couple of weeks ago.
Anyway, the Krazy Klimate Konference had made slots for speakers from both National Grid and Williams Companies. The scheduled speaker from National Grid — its New York President, Sally Librera — did not show up for unexplained reasons.
The representative from Williams Companies, Liz Bowman, did show up and spoke. She talked proudly about the contribution of her company’s project to New York energy affordability and security, although never mentioning the contradiction between what Williams was doing versus the ambitions of all the crazy climate activists. While never stated explicitly, this was a big change from two years ago.
May the climate apocalypse continue to fade slowly into the rearview mirror.
Read more at Manhattan Contrarian
Based on global investment in clean energy technology, “fighting the climate” is alive and well outside the United States. The reduction in the United States is real but could end with the next Democrat president.
The vast majority of actively publishing climate scientists, over 99.9%, agree that humans are causing global warming, and a large majority of those experts also see it as a serious and dangerous threat. In one survey of scientists, 72% viewed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports as accurate, and an overwhelming 80% rejected the idea that there was too much uncertainty to justify immediate action, indicating a strong belief in the risks involved.
Politicians have tended to listen to the scientists, often on government payrolls. Too many scientists justify wasting money “fighting the climate”.
A 2025 Pew Research Center survey across 25 nations found a median of 67% of adults consider climate change a major threat. The share of adults who see it as a major threat has increased in many places since 2013.
Global investment in clean energy technologies like solar and wind is estimated to be substantial in 2025, with the IEA projecting a record total of $2 .2 trillion for all clean energy, About the same as 2024.
About the same as not “crumbling”.
Hey Richard, do you have a URL for the Pew Research information. If ‘yes’, please post it here as a reply.
Good luck getting him to reply with the link. He makes these outrageous claims of 99% of “climate scientists” agree that we are causing the climate to change by burning fossil fuels and other such claims as in this post of his.