From Watts Up With That?
Essay by Eric Worrall
According to the Lowy Institute, “Misplaced faith in private sector solutions delays the redistribution of trillions…”
Private finance cannot lead the global response to climate change
Misplaced faith in private sector solutions delays the redistribution
of trillions from developed countries and multilateral institutions.In response to the looming trillion-dollar global climate finance shortfall, a broad array of policymakers, international bureaucrats, environmentalists, and financial institutions have called for the urgent scaling up of private climate investments.
The logic of private finance mobilisation starts by recognising that developing countries will need climate finance “amounting to US$5.8–5.9 trillion up until 2030”. In the face of such eye-watering sums, private finance offers an enticing solution. By leveraging comparatively small government financing into substantial private investments, governments and international organisations can turn “billions into trillions”, sidestepping the problem facing developed countries of how to justify domestically the global redistribution of trillions of dollars.
Alternatively, developing countries have advocated for a suite of multilateral measures, including sovereign debt cancellation, the redistribution of IMF-issued Special Drawing Rights (SDRs), increased concessional development financing, and even global carbon taxes. These proposals are often perceived to be concerned with global justice and equity, as opposed to efficacy. However, this distinction becomes blurred when the US$5.8–5.9 trillion climate finance needs of developing countries are interrogated more closely.
…
Private finance is clearly no panacea for the climate crisis. It is no wonder that the developing countries have long called for far more drastic levels of public and multilateral financing. Rather than seeking to pursue global economic justice alone, developing countries have been acutely aware that trillions of developed country government dollars need to be put on the table. If developing country financing asks are honoured, US$5.8–5.9 trillion would be well within reach. But the challenge remains getting developed countries on board. Proposals such as political economist Dani Rodrik’s “bridging compact” hold some promise, although any equivalent global consensus could only emerge following the recognition that a private finance-centred approach doesn’t provide a workable alternative.
…Read more: https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/private-finance-cannot-lead-global-response-climate-change
And they wonder why we call them climate communists.
Imagine what a rushed removal of $5.8-5.9 trillion from the economies of wealthy nations would do to schools, hospitals, roads, policing, all the things which matter to ordinary people?
The funniest part, China, which still insists it is a developing country, would be a net recipient of a large slice of this pie, which would have to be funded by borrowing money from China.
I believe the fake climate crisis movement is on the verge of collapsing under the weight of its own absurdity.
Back when climate advocates were stringing everyone along with the nonsense claim that renewables were affordable and would bring down energy bills, people accepted the falsehoods. The current green Aussie government won office on the back of a claim their modest green investments would bring down energy bills.
I don’t think anyone serious still believes the nonsensical claim that renewables are cheap.