Looking at the political speech from our EU MEPs today.
Expanding international commerce has destroyed EU economy, it has taken away the basic jobs that funded the well-being and now we must decrease support of developing countries.
So politically increasing climate support is not popular. #COP30

You can't at the same time say that state subsidies are OK, but EU can't use CBAM to limit fossil steel and cement.

Actually general voters in USA and EU are not happy that manufacturing moves away and there is unemployment.

Sure there is need of aid and encouragement of growth in developing.

The big political problem is that there are four groups of developing countries:
- very small, whose CO2-emissions actually don't matter in frame of 2050 goal
- fast growing, power hungry, fossil clinging (over 200% growth of CO2)
- two big uns (China, India)
- the rest
so not a single entity

Another way of looking at CBAM is to ask; why didn't you do anything since Kyoto? You can't epect to sell goods to EU made using fossils forever!

IMHO one way of looking CBAM is that Chinese sales to EU are growing too fast. CBAM is one way of limiting Chinese cement and steel. It ill also affect chinese EVs.
But having unlateral measures towards China is a trade war!
Main real sticking point is state subsidies.
But probably 100 other ways.

Internet brings us mainly entertainment. Facts are dull and realism is boring.
More cat videos!

Excellent example of once you commit to a stupid idea, you keep on plowing money to it hoping that a miracle will occur.

Below is the change from 2005 to 2022 based on EDGAR
In EU+ best have reduced Total GHG emissions (No LULUCF) by 2-3% per year. The average about 1.5 % reduction by year.

Yes, we wantmore money!
Gimme, gimme, gimme!
No, even of we get money ee will not promise to do anything.
Except to spend it.

It is not law; there is no requirement of progress, there is no individual country targets and there is no penalty for failure.
It is a typical example of an agreement where politicians can shake hands and congratulate each other without any need to do anything.
Just a statement of wish!

Yes, "everybody" is ridiculing IEA because it is conservative in its predictions
Plain fact is that even countries do not know how the transformation will happen. e.g. in Finland we have now political fight about whether our plege for 2035 carbon neutrality will be fulfilled or not. (It will not) /2

"Everybody" is always amazed by IEA.
The plain fact is that IEA must use member state's own predictions. It can not state that e.g. Norway will ... if Norway has other policy in place.
Therefore where we are going is much clearer view that without additional effort nothing will happen. /1

Worth to remember that huge number of countries have agreed on Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) to protect 30 % of the land, oceans and costal areas. The countries as whole agree but each contry individually does not have to do anything.
biodiversity.europa.eu/policy/biodi...

Bunkers should be ~the by treaty non taxable fuel i.e. ships, planes coming from and going to international destinations. Not domestic trafic, nor military trafic & fishing etc.
domestic trafic is allocated to each country where the activity occurs.

Maybe one could do a graph with G20?

From "We are all going to die soon" to "We are going to suffer long before dying"?

Thanks again for the powerpoints! They are very useful to understand and explain what is going on.

We want money!
We need cash!
Others should pay!

It is not my fault!
#irony