From The Daily Sceptic

By Chris Morrison

The latest fantasy figure for international climate aid is $300 billion a year, to be paid by a diminishing band of Net Zero fanatical countries (looking at you Europe). But at least, come 2050, when the world is awash with green riches with energy too cheap to meter, it will all be worthwhile, and the scam – pardon – worthwhile investment can stop. If only. Look no further than the three countries that on many counts have already hit Net Zero, namely Suriname, Panama and Bhutan, for guidance on future investment demands. All three countries are heavily forested and all demand billions of dollars to keep these ‘carbon’ sinks in place. Sustainability is the name of the game, or to put it another way: ‘Nice little forest we got here. Shame if anything happened to it.’

Suriname is a small South American country with a population of just 640,000 and an annual GDP of $4.5 billion. In its latest UN Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) it asks for $4.5 billion to be paid over the next decade to reaffirm its commitment to remaining carbon negative through “forest preservation”. Money is also sought from many other international sources, and the country is a leading light in the cash for ‘climate justice’ shake down. Panama is also keen on maintaining its carbon neutrality status, but, needless to say, such virtue does not come cheap. In its latest NDC, the country seems wary of producing cash figures but there is one mention of the need for $1.23 billion for 21 adaptation initiatives. A recently announced plan for a dedicated nature conservancy plan calls for new, additional, predictable, assessable and non-debt increasing international aid. In other words, a regular one-way lorry load of cash.

As the Daily Sceptic reported recently, the big winner in this giant Net Zero cash protection scheme is Bhutan. This small, landlocked country in the eastern Himalayas has huge hydroelectric power, while 93% of the land is carpeted with carbon dioxide absorbing forest. As the poster country for Net Zero, its demands for waterfalls of cash are suitably impressive. With a population of only 800,000 and a GDP of around $3 billion, it notes in its latest NDC that it requires “continued and predictable” financial support amounting to $13.7 billion over the next decade.

In the land of the Net Zero cult, cash might not be God, but it is a deeply religious experience. Sadly, the collection plate has come back a bit light of late. In America, President Trump has ruthlessly cut federal funds for both domestic and international Net Zero boondoggles. The United Nations, which is the ringmaster for pumping up climate panic, is talking about financial collapse after the Americans withdrew the feeding bottle. Indeed, the Secretary-General Antonio Guterres recently spoke of the organisation being on the “brink of bankruptcy”. But then this particularly clownish act often gives a passable impression of complete derangement having recently claimed that the era of “global boiling” had arrived.

No doubt some international aid does environmental good in the developing world once it has passed through the sticky fingers of those on the crowded bandwagon from politicians to NGOs. But the stories of waste and misappropriation are legendary. In 2023, a database of ‘climate finance’ was compiled by Reuters in collaboration with researchers from Big Local News. Drawn together from UN data filed by countries signed up to what was then a $100 billion annual pledge, it highlighted spending from 2015-2020 on new coal and gas-fired power stations, along with airport and hotel developments. At the time, it seems that a number of countries were sticking a ‘climate’ tag on already existing foreign aid commitments.

At least oil and gas plants are more useful than hopeless wind turbines. Different considerations were no doubt applied for the Italian contributions that helped a retailer set up a chain of chocolate and gelato stores across Asia. Persuading an Italian to open an ice cream shop does not normally require subsidies from the taxpayer. Meanwhile, the Belgians chipped in with funding for a romantic film about a green activist and a rugby-playing logger set in the rainforest. The film does not appear to have had a large distribution but one can only hope that in the end the chap managed to get his log over.

Getting screwed is the name of the game for long-suffering taxpayers in the developed world. In the last 20 years, average income in the Maldives has quintupled to around $19,000, helped by a massive growth in the tourism industry. The Maldives is one of those chains of Pacific islands where constant mainstream fears of inundation by sea level rise are matched by frequently ignored scientific data showing overall land growth. There has been huge recent development of infrastructure including hotels and airports. The country promises to reduce its emissions, but this is said to be “conditional” on collecting “adequate international support”. Primary areas for support are said to be renewable electricity and waste management. Many resort hotels continue to pump some untreated sewage into the sea.

The Maldives offers an idyllic tropical vacation for high-end tourists. It is not immediately clear why they, along with the increasingly wealthy owners of local businesses, cannot pay for necessary sewage facilities, rather than poorer taxpayers thousands of miles away who might only dream of such a holiday.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor. Follow him on X.