Most people here will have seen Monkton’s little speech about the perils of signing up to the new UN climate change treaty.
Be sure to check out Lord Monkton’s own powerpoint display…. I wonder if he can get an Oscar if he films it?
Some of his figures appear to be quite devastating
What most people probably dont know is just how much of an income stream the UN is already receiving from the “processing fees” attached to issuing those credits.
From the UNs own background paper.
C. Share of proceeds to cover administrative expenses
7. At COP/MOP.1 Parties decided6 that the share of proceeds to cover administrative expenses of the CDM shall be:
(a) USD 0.10 per CER issued for the first 15,000 tonnes of CO2 equivalent for which issuance is requested in a given calendar year;
(b) USD 0.20 per CER issued for any amount in excess of 15,000 tonnes of CO2 equivalent for which issuance is requested in a given calendar year.
8. These arrangements are to be reviewed at the next session of the COP/MOP.
9. The share of proceeds to cover administrative expenses takes the form of cash rather than CERs, at least initially. Cash payments were specified because continued operation of the CDM needed immediate funds and a predictable cash flow. Collection and sale of CERs as the share of proceeds to cover administrative expenses might yield more, or less, revenue. But the timeneeded to implement a system to sell the CERs collected would certainly have delayed receipt of urgently needed funds.7
10. The COP/MOP decision relating to the share of proceeds for administrative expenses does not limit its decision on the share of proceeds to assist in meeting the costs of adaptation; the share of proceeds to assist in meeting the costs of adaptation could be collected as CERs reflecting decisions 17/CP.7, 19/CP.9 and 12/CP.10 or as a cash payment if so specified by a future COP/MOP decision.
Now coming from the mob who oversaw “oil for food” under Saddam it doesnt exactly fill me with confidence.
It is difficult (well for me anyway) to find out just how much of the carbon market is made up of UN certified carbon credits. However for conveniences sake I will use Wikis figures.
Carbon emissions trading has been steadily increasing in recent years. According to the World Bank’s Carbon Finance Unit, 374 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e) were exchanged through projects in 2005, a 240% increase relative to 2004 (110 mtCO2ewhich was itself a 41% increase relative to 2003 (78 mtCO2e).In terms of dollars, the World Bank has estimated that the size of the carbon market was 11 billion USD in 2005, 30 billion USD in 2006and 64 billion in 2007
So if I was to be conservative and use 2005 figures, at the lower rate of .20 USD per tonne how much does that yield in play money for the UN?
Nearly $74,000,000 USD using 2005 figures. It can be assumed the figures are actually much, much higher given the massive growth in trading since then.
Now can somebody tell me how this isnt a form of taxation payable to the UN directly? After all it is based on energy, the most essential part of any economic activity, if this treaty is enacted and followed just how is this not a global consumption tax?
And we are supposed to embrace the UN climate change statistics as a neutral player in this game? The UN is pushing as hard as it can to obtain a revenue stream free from pesky things like donor nations, this will allow it to do so.