For Ursula von der Leyen, the patron saint of the consulting industry, the “Green Deal” should finally bring what she has to show neither as a family nor as a defense minister: success.
While the consultancy industry close to it can look forward to a lush source of money, others clap their hands over their heads. Anyone who wants to spend a trillion euros in tax money like von der Leyen should be able to ensure success. From a factual point of view, there can be no question of this in this case. Because nothing will change in the climate, even if Europe reduces the CO2- would reduce emissions to zero.
It remains a mystery to me why none of Europe's “climate protectors” bother to soberly calculate what “climate neutrality” would bring. Even if we assume that CO2 is responsible for a rise in temperature. However, this is by no means claimed by 97 percent of the scientists, as a computational review of the Cook study, which is used time and again, shows.
The Paris climate agreement allows some countries to massively expand coal energy
Those who believe in man-made climate change consider the Paris climate agreement to be great, without going into its Potemkin facade. The fact that almost every country in the world has signed doesn’t mean anything. Including countries that have signed because as “climate victims” they can expect a lot of money from the “climate sinner countries” as reparation.
Yes, China and India have also signed. According to the Paris climate agreement, both countries are allowed to continue building new coal-fired power plants until 2030, and for CO2 even increase. While around 150 coal-fired power plants are in operation in Germany, China will build 300 new coal-fired power plants worldwide over the next five years; a total of over 1500 coal-fired power plants are currently being planned or under construction. These numbers alone show what impact the end of Germany's coal-fired power plant will have: namely none.
It remains incomprehensible why politicians so blindly ignore the actual lack of consequences and believe that they can save the world climate with symbolic acts. Even linguistically, it is wrong to try to save a climate. Climate already existed when the earth was still surrounded by poisonous gases. What the climate scared want to save is the fear of change. Desire to desperately maintain instantaneous conditions. Climate change is inevitable. The drift of the continents alone will ensure that Europe will one day be found in the southern hemisphere. But people don't want to think that far, they are mentally trapped in their limited time horizon.
"There is no debate about the causes of climate change in political Germany," regretted The World on July 04.07th 2011. Read here: https://www.welt.de/debatte/kommentare/article13466483/Die-CO2-Theorie-ist-nur-geniale-Propaganda.html?wtrid=onsite.onsitesearch
In the meantime, the slogan that Europe will be climate neutral by 2050 has become a raison d'etre. And just as the Commission President, contrived between France's Macron and Germany's Merkel, left her mark on McKinsey & Co's balance sheets, not much of substance will be left of the billion-dollar deal to save the world's climate. Definitely not a “saved climate”.