Gwen. Janice's graph (in the discussion) is more telling and appropriate.

Supertroll,

Clear evidence that the "Do Nothing" response is best. In the UK we must strive even harder to do nothing, in fact, we should follow the examples of India and China, and do the opposite of anything recommended by Climate Scientists.

There is also a very clear message for developing countries. They should not wait for the US to send them billion$ via the UN. The money isn't coming, and they are not allowed to develop anyway. Climate Science has already cost them 20 years of economic development, and they have nothing to show for it.

Josh's cartoon from 2016 is even more relevant in 2017.

The story it accompanies just demonstrates how little science they have to discuss in Bonn. Not much understanding of politics or economics either.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/11/07/claim-usa-should-stay-in-the-paris-agreement-because-syria-has-signed/

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/gallery/2017/nov/08/politicians-and-activists-gather-for-cop23-bonn-climate-talks-in-pictures

"Politicians and activists gather for COP23 Bonn climate talks - in pictures"

No Climate Scientists then, because the Science is settled?

Here are the four important things to look for, in the Conclusions of COP 23

https://www.ecowatch.com/cop23-signs-watch-2502350369.html

A mention of Mann's Hockey Stick would be interesting demonstration of confidence.

The provisional list of participants is now available on the UNFCCC website:

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2017/cop23/eng/PLOP.pdf

Apparently they might be starting to learn some lessons - the provisional list shows a "mere" 19,115 people turning up to the Bonn shindig - down by around 1/3 from recent years.

We should know more soon - the full list is apparently to be released on 17th November.

Meanwhile the results of the Paris Agreement are now beginning to manifest themselves. With most countries submitting INDCs committing themselves to substantial increases in their GHG emissions, it seems that researchers are shocked to learn that man-made emissions are now increasing!

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2017/cop23/eng/PLOP.pdf

"First CO2 rise in four years puts pressure on Paris targets" (says Matt McGrath, who is - naturally - busy increasing his own CO2 footprint by attending the shindig in Bonn).

"Global emissions of CO2 in 2017 are projected to rise for the first time in four years, dashing hopes that a peak might soon be reached.
The main cause of the expected growth has been greater use of coal in China as its economy expanded.
Researchers are uncertain if the rise in emissions is a one-off or the start of a new period of CO2 build-up.
Scientists say that a global peak in CO2 before 2020 is needed to limit dangerous global warming this century."

Well, that ain't going to happen unless they throw Paris out of the window and start again.

"The most important element in causing this rise has been China, which is responsible for around 28% of the global total. Emissions there went up 3.5% in 2017, mainly because of increased coal use, driven in the main by a growing economy."

You don't say!

"India's emissions are projected to grow by about 2%, which is a considerable decrease from around 6% per year over the last decade.
However, experts believe that this may be a temporary drop-off caused by a number of factors that have hampered the consumption of oil and cement."

Yeah, right.

"Europe also saw a smaller decline than expected, falling by 0.2% compared with 2.2% over the last 10 years.
One common theme around the world is continued use of gas and oil, says Prof Le Quéré.
"There have been lots of ups and downs in the use of coal but in the background there has been no weakening in the use of oil and gas. And that is quite worrisome.""

Quelle surprise!

The message is clear. If you want to develop, burn coal.

When can we expect temperatures to rise, in line with CO2?

Sea level in Fiji has not been rising.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/11/13/fiji-flooding-is-fake-news-from-cop23/

Surely the COP attendees bring their own energy and enthusiasm with them and the sites mistaken for diesel generators are, in reality, locations of batteries to store the excess?

Are they running on bio diesel, chip fat or lard?

Or maybe, the solar panels are disguised as trees?

Nov 14, 2017 at 7:32 PM | tomo

Yes, it does seem strange that a gas generator was not procured for this prestigious demonstration. COP23 went to extra expense to hide the generators far from the party goers.

tomo, anybody would have thought its only about the money

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/nov/15/climate-change-will-determine-humanitys-destiny-says-angela-merkel

"Negotiators agreed a deal on this on Wednesday, involving new stock takes of action in 2018 and 2019 and on progress towards the $100bn a year in climate funding that rich nations have promised to deliver by 2020."

"The divisive issue of “loss and damage” – compensation for poor nations for the climate change damage – has been defused for now, with an expert meeting to address concerns next year. Progress has been made in drawing up the draft rules for implementing the Paris agreement, an essential step ahead of agreeing them in 2018."

All may not be well in Bonn:

https://www.politico.eu/article/china-europe-climate-buddy-act-flounders/

"China, Europe climate buddy act flounders
One side’s ‘bifurcation’ is another’s step too far."

"The EU is pushing to level out the share of responsibility between rich and poor countries for man-made climate change and for reducing emissions. For its part, Beijing wants developing countries to have greater leeway to meet targets set out in the 2015 treaty.

The differences are likely to grow more stark at next year’s COP24, when the complex set of rules for meeting the goals of the Paris climate agreement is due to be finalized."

"“China was putting differentiation in anywhere and weren’t agreeing to the text,” Mark Lutes, head of the World Wildlife Foundation’s delegation, said of last week’s technical talks.

China is particularly emboldened on the issue now that the U.S. — which has always been staunchly opposed to differentiation — has stepped to the side in the wake of Trump’s call to quit the Paris accord."

"Now developing countries are returning to the idea that wealthy countries should bear more of the emissions cuts. More than a century of their pollution, after all, is what many scientists say caused a lot of the problem of global warming. In response, developed nations point to burgeoning greenhouse gas emissions from countries like China, India and Brazil to say that everyone should shoulder the weight.

“We thought we put it away in Paris, that we went beyond that. But bifurcation is coming back,” said a European diplomat in Bonn, asking not to be named. “It’s quite a big fight and it’s a very important issue for the EU.”

The call to differentiate burdens and standards is especially loud in talks over the transparency and accounting system that will be used to keep track of emissions reductions, financial aid and other steps intended to tackle climate change. It is part of a broader set of rules that countries are negotiating at the COP23 to help them meet the Paris climate agreement’s voluntary goals."

"The EU and U.S. have long argued for a single, robust system to make sure everyone is measuring and reporting their emissions and aid in the same way. Without it, there’s no way to know, for instance, that one ton of CO2 cut in one country isn’t then emitted somewhere else. The poorest and most vulnerable countries are also keen to adopt a tough system, particularly to verify that developed countries fulfill their promise to spend $100 billion a year in public and private aid on climate change from 2020."

Mark Hodgson

The US are not going to do anything more by way of CO2 cuts, or cash payments. China were only ever paying lip service, Russia couldn't care and India aren't interested. Australia is unhappy about it, whilst electorates within the EU are feeling the financial pinch.

Trudeau has a big bill to sell to Canadians. He could come up with a Polar Bear Tax, as they seem to be prospering in the current climate, but 50% of every dead seal may not meet with Greenpeace's approval.

http://joannenova.com.au/2017/11/un-green-climate-fund-good-for-bankers-bureaucrats-but-not-so-much-the-poor/

"The UN climate fund was set up in 2010 but has yet to send a single dollar of project money to its star sinking island (which isn’t sinking, but is poor).

The NY Times has a long article describing how billions of dollars is being spent, but somehow it seems to be going to the wrong places. Given the lack of accountability, voters, and elections, who could have seen that coming?

The  GFC GONGO is ruled by a Board of 24 people who jetset to Korea, hand out other people’s money, and get applause. In 2012 they were seeking immunity from all laws and taxes. Presumably they succeeded. In 2014, they were caught funding a new coal power station in Indonesia to reduce carbon emissions. I wondered if that was rorting, cronyism, or ‘success’. Greens were not happy. Now we find out that the rest of the money is ending up with the renewables industry, investment bankers, and bureaucrats"

The IPCC was founded on false assurances, and has enhanced its own importance with lies, whilst trashing economies and human lives. It has outlived its usefulness for more than 20 years, yet it still clings to life and power.

COP23 should honour the achievements of Robert Mugabe.

The full list of people attending COP23 has now been put on the website:

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2017/cop23/eng/inf04.pdf

I'll have a look at who is there, later.

Nov 17, 2017 at 9:01 AM | Mark Hodgson

70 (?) from Zimbabwe must make it one of the country's highest earners of foreign money.

I wonder if they will all fly home.

I wonder if they will all fly home.

Nov 17, 2017 at 9:54 AM | golf charlie

Actually, may be not. They will stay to offer China support, as the Chinese bloc vote at the UN gets larger, with the blessing of countries that want to develop.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/17/zimbabwe-was-mugabes-fall-a-result-of-china-flexing-its-muscle

"A visit to Beijing last Friday by Zimbabwe’s military chief, General Constantino Chiwenga, has fuelled suspicions that China may have given the green light to this week’s army takeover in Harare."

"If so, the world may just have witnessed the first example of a covert coup d’etat of the kind once favoured by the CIA and Britain’s MI6, but conceived and executed with the tacit support of the 21st century’s new global superpower."

"China, Africa’s biggest foreign investor, has more at stake in Zimbabwe, and more political influence, than any other state. This is largely due to its extensive investments in the mining, agriculture, energy and construction sectors. China was Zimbabwe’s top trade partner in 2015, buying 28% of its exports. But the Chinese connection is about more than money."