The Green Climate Fund is just one of many reasons why President Trump should honor his campaign promise and withdraw the U.S. from the UN's Paris climate agreement.
Former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientist Dr. John Bates has gone on record that the organization knowingly released "unverified" global temperature data in violation of rules on scientific integrity which Bates had received a 2014 U.S. Department of Commerce Gold Medal for devising.
It appears government climate researchers have been making "assumptions" and "adjusting" the data to suit their narrative; namely cooling the past and warming the present. Confirmation of this data tampering may now be at hand.
The 2016 election marks a turning around of U.S. energy policy back toward true "all of the above," with a focus first on using domestic oil, natural gas, and coal resources -- and other energy sources -- to keep the price of energy low, helping consumers and attracting business development. Exploiting domestic resources also creates jobs -- which the American people have demanded.
India received $500 million in funding for solar panels to ratify the United Nations’ Paris agreement on global warming.
As European nations come to grips with the exorbitant costs of energy subsidies and over-reliance on "green" energy (and build new coal-fired power plants to offset those costs and address the intermittent nature of wind and solar energy), the U.S. has been heading in the opposite direction -- President Obama's onerous Clean Power Plan. Thankfully, the plan is held up in court, as the world is beginning to recognize the enormous costs of complying with the non-binding Paris Climate Agreement. The question remains, though, whether America will go the way of California, which already has electricity prices 40% above the national average and the highest retail gasoline prices in the U.S.?
The President's Clean Power Plan will impose heavy burdens on poor and middle-class Americans -- raising their energy costs to as much as 75% of their after-tax income (and an average of 20% for those with incomes under $50,000). Even worse, the EPA admits these rules will have little impact on climate -- but will vastly increase government's control over individual human behavior.