Registered Open New Year’s Letter to the UN Secretary-General António Guterres
Amsterdam, January 2, 2023 Professor Guus Berkhout
You have announced a Climate Ambition Summit in September 2023. For this Summit you make the usual plea for an extra effort to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. More specific, you say: “There will be no room for back-sliders, green-washers, blame-shifters, …….” These are big words, but are you aware that:
More and more people in the world wonder how it can happen that the UN still proposes far-reaching measures that totally fail to arrest global warming, but instead will result in an extraordinary negative impact on the world’s prosperity and well-being.
More and more people don’t believe anymore in an « existential climate crisis ». They realize that your familiar scaring-to-death narrative is based on over-heated computer models. Why do you keep on talking about an “upcoming climate hell”? One of your senior officials even declares that “we own the science, and we think the world should know it and the (social media) platforms also.”
Why does the UN ignore hard facts that clearly point out serious scientific flaws in the IPCC Assessment Reports? Why does IPCC refuse any open debate on these flaws? Does the UN not realize that critical organizations such as CLINTEL now embodies greater objective scientific knowledge than exists within IPCC?
More and more people loudly protest against the spread of the superstition that climate science is fully understood (« The Science is Settled »). That superstition regrettably has led to legislation on totally unnecessary social engineering measures with net-zero CO2 targets (mitigation).
Why does not the UN want to let the world see that the mitigation measures they propose are scientifically nonsensical, technically unfeasible, economically unaffordable and socially unacceptable?
And why does also not the UN want the world to know about the fact that CO2 is an essential building block for life on earth? More CO2 is indispensable in making the earth greener. Looking at all the facts, more CO2 will bring much more benefits than harm!
More and more people also wonder why an extremely expensive transition to intermittent renewables is pursued without realizing that the transition is leading to major economic problems.
Why does not the UN recognize that reliable energy supply with solar panels and wind turbines is technically impossible and economically unaffordable without the availability of low-cost, large-scale electrical energy storage?
And why then does not the UN recognize that mass generation of solar and wind energy will create a serious shortage on materials such as copper, cobalt and neodymium?
Economic development cannot happen without affordable and reliable energy supplies. In the coming decades we must make full use of affordable indigenous fossil fuels for power generation, with an ambitious plan for a network of modern nuclear power plants. Please note that with plenty of affordable energy, the global supply of clean drinking water can also be guaranteed.
Next, the UN must make full efforts to apply adaptation technology, especially for securing against extreme weather (« risk minimization ») and for growing tailor-made crops (« precision farming »).
In your forthcoming Climate Ambition Summit, don’t continue to make a plea for a ‘net-zero society’. Results of this policy clearly show that it will destroy our economies; billions will suffer. Instead, use your next Summit to organize an open debate between global experts who are in favor and who are against continuation of your net-zero policy. Clintel will be happy to cooperate with you to make this debate happen.
Looking forward to hearing from you,
Guus Berkhout President of Clintel
N.B. Cet article fait suite à Mieux vaut s’informer 1/1, publié sur SCE