One of the major themes at recent United Nations climate conferences has been the idea that wealthy nations should provide climate reparations for poor nations while encouraging those developing countries to shun fossil fuels in favor of so-called green energy.
NOTE: This is a highly problematic strategy at best and insanity that will do more harm than good at worst.
Moreover, it will reinforce and exacerbate the wealth inequality that currently exists between the developed and developing world.
This year, the United Nations (UN) held its biennial Convention of the Parties (COP) in Baku, Azerbaijan, a tiny country with vast oil reserves.
Things got off to a rollicking start when Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev stunned those in attendance by declaring fossil fuels are a “gift of God.”
Further:
[Oil and gas] are natural resources and countries should not be blamed for having them, and should not be blamed for bringing these resources to the market, because the market needs them.
Aliyev then chastised mainstream media news outlets that disparage fossil fuels as “Western fake news.”
Aliyev is absolutely correct
in his full-throated defense of fossil fuels.
However, that did not stop UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres from describing Aliyev’s statement as “absurd.”
According to Guterres:
[The] clean energy revolution has arrived, and nothing can stop it.
Actually, the insistence that the world must fully embrace the so-called clean energy revolution is absurd. Despite decades of time and trillions of dollars, the clean energy revolution is not even close to becoming a reality. In the United States, for example, solar and wind account for about 14 percent of the total electricity generation. On the other hand:
[F]ossil fuels provide more than
60 percent of the grid’s electricity.
Fossil fuels do much more than power our comfortable, contemporary lifestyle. Literally thousands of products, from adhesives to yarn, would not exist without fossil fuels. As the U.S. Department of Energy plainly states:
Petrochemicals derived from oil and natural gas make the manufacturing of over 6,000 everyday products and high-tech devices possible…
Modern life relies on the availability of these products.
Instead of demonizing fossil fuels and calling for their immediate elimination, it would make all the sense in the world for powerful institutions like the UN to champion their use for poor nations, in particular, that are struggling to thrive in the modern era.
But the UN and other influential organizations would rather engage in a massive wealth redistribution scheme in which wealthy countries like the United States send hundreds of billions of dollars to poor nations to atone for their sin of utilizing fossil fuels over the past several decades.
In the final hours of COP29, UN Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell enthusiastically announced that a deal had been reached in which rich nations would pledge to provide $300 billion to poor nations under the banner of climate reparations.
Stiell said:
This deal will keep the clean energy boom growing and protect billions of lives.
It will help all countries to share in the huge benefits of bold climate action: more jobs, stronger growth, cheaper and cleaner energy for all.
But like any insurance policy—it only works—if the premiums are paid in full, and on time.
It is easy for bureaucrats like Stiell to proclaim climate reparation payments will be a boon for poor nations. But even a cursory analysis tells a different story.
Since World War II, prosperous nations have sent enormous amounts of money to developing nations. While some of these funds have undoubtedly helped these emerging nations get their feet on the ground, a strong argument can also be made that giant amounts of foreign aid have hindered development by making these poor nations dependent on rich nations.
Perhaps it would be better if the UN encouraged these developing nations to become as self-sufficient as possible by using fossil fuels to provide reliable and affordable energy so they can compete with developed nations in an increasingly globalized economy.
Final thoughts: Perhaps President Trump will see fit to cease funding the corruption and stupidity of the UN.
