Follow the money

In the Wall Street Journal, Bret Stephens does what Woodward and Bernstein did in the 'good old days': Follow the Money.
Consider the case of Phil Jones, the director of the CRU and the man at the heart of climategate. According to one of the documents hacked from his center, between 2000 and 2006 Mr. Jones was the recipient (or co-recipient) of some $19 million worth of research grants, a sixfold increase over what he'd been awarded in the 1990s.
Last year, Stephens writes, Exxon spent a grand total of $ 7 million on 'grab-bag of public policy institutes'. That is the sum total. Kinda pales in comparison with the $19 million for Phil Jones alone, doesn't it? The grand total spent on 'green' issues is vastly greater.
[T]he European Commission's most recent appropriation for climate research comes to nearly $3 billion, and that's not counting funds from the EU's member governments. In the U.S., the House intends to spend $1.3 billion on NASA's climate efforts, $400 million on NOAA's, and another $300 million for the National Science Foundation. The states also have a piece of the action, with California—apparently not feeling bankrupt enough—devoting $600 million to their own climate initiative. In Australia, alarmists have their own Department of Climate Change at their funding disposal.

And all this is only a fraction of the $94 billion that HSBC Bank estimates has been spent globally this year on what it calls "green stimulus"—largely ethanol and other alternative energy schemes—of the kind from which Al Gore and his partners at Kleiner Perkins hope to profit handsomely.
(emphasis mine - KV)

All this makes you wonder which side of the debate is actually in it for the money...

[Instant UPDATE] Here's a surprise (not!). From Fox News: Document Reveals U.N.'s Goal of Becoming Rule-Maker in Global Environmental Talks.
The purpose of the paper, put together after an unpublicized day-long session in Switzerland by some of the world's top environmental bureaucrats: to argue for a new and unprecedented effort to move environmental concerns to "the center of political and economic decision-making" around the world — and perhaps not coincidentally, expand the influence and reach of UNEP at the tables of world power, as a rule-maker and potential supervisor of the New Environmental Order.
This puts van Rompuy's recent utterings in a whole new, quite sinister light, doesn't it?

[UPDATE001] Very useful website: The Green Agenda.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...