"The once-rigid link between economic growth and carbon emissions is breaking across the vast majority of the world, according to a recently released study.

Countries representing 92% of the global economy have now decoupled consumption-based carbon emissions and GDP expansion, according to the report by the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU).

Using the latest Global Carbon Budget data, it finds that decoupling is now the norm across advanced economies, with 46% of global GDP in countries that have expanded their economies while cutting emissions, including Brazil, Colombia and Egypt. The most pronounced decouplings occurred in the UK, Norway and Switzerland".

The shift away from fossil fuels, the main contributors to carbon emissions, is becoming the norm.

Yes, this is getting quite a run in the usual left-leaning press. Remarkably the headline in the Guardian is precisely the same as WTF's header.... what are the chances?

What they somehow fail to note is that the people behind this are primarily funded by various pro-renewables groups. If a pro-oil report comes out, they trip over themselves to work out who was behind the funding, but not this occasion. Just an oversight I guess!!

As to the substance.... well they utterly miss the issue behind economic growth which they equate to GDP growth, apparently unaware that they aren't really the same thing.

They assert that economic growth was linked to CO2 emission growth. But that just ain't so. Economic growth is and always has been linked to the growth in energy utilisation. That the improvement in economic output accompanied by an increase in CO2 emissions isn't even close to showing that an increase in CO2 emissions caused the economic growth, which is their assertion.

The trick for economies the world over is finding the best way to create and/or utilise energy. In the past that was solely fossil fuels. Now there are other options although fossil fuels remain the primary source of energy. Whatismore, the efficient use of fossil fuels has improved over the past century such that each unit of GSP requires less energy input and therefore less emissions.

But these people put it all down to altruistic moves to renewables. In fact, in most cases, countries simply move to the most efficient energy system available to them, irrespective of emission considerations. And those countries that don't, such as Australia and western Europe are paying the price of putting emission levels ahead of energy efficiency

We are told lots of lies these days by politicians, “experts” and the media. Unfortunately, lots of those lies are spread as truth here by posters who have no particular qualifications themselves, but who latch on to any ‘references’ that suit their ideology. All they are doing is repeating the opinions of someone else, which might be the truth, or they might be utter tosh.

There are so many conflicting “expert” opinions from people, it is impossible for the average person to know who is right and who is wrong.

The ECIU, used here, is just another NGO/NFP outfit in the UK made up of a couple of MPs, a farmer, a woman from a women' s institute, a professor of ‘international energy and climate change policy’ (never heard of that discipline before), an emeritus professor of zoology, a member of the House of Lords, a professor of human health and performance, and a former rear admiral.

Only one of them with a very iffy-sounding connection to anything like climate.

Why would we take notice of that lot?

I will stick with the likes of Australia's IPA's Adam Creighton and his article of yesterday, ‘The net-zero zealots are fading into history’. The zealots remind him of Homer Simpson with their “embarrassing approach our nation’s policy and corporate elites have taken by enthusiastically backing net zero”.

Creighton describes AEMO's “fantasy prediction” about Australia becoming a “renewable energy superpower” as the latest example of a “rhetorical retreat before the fall”.

Rio Tinto has reduced its ‘decarbonisation’ program from $7.5 billion to less than $2 billion.

The Net Zero Banking Alliance has collapsed.

Cop 30 was a “fizzer”.

The US is now regarded as “insufficient” on the climate madness, joining Russia, Saudi Arabia, Argentina and “six others”; Canada, China, India and “three others” are “highly insufficient”.

Creighton is expecting more Homer Simpsons to fade away in coming months. The wheels are coming off.

The SA media is adding to the lies by describing normal summer temperatures as a "heatwave". This 82 year old still finished his daily walk in 40 degrees yesterday, and the forecast for today is down to 28 degrees.

That's a another thing about climate zealots who yap about facts. There are years of climate/temperature facts on record, but they ignore them to scare a public that doesn't seem to remember what happened a year before, let alone what they have experienced their entire lives.

NFI,

You're beginning to give me an inkling of why disasters like Venezuela happen. So your cult leader tells you that power prices will go down and they go up. Now the GDP is "decoupled" from carbon? Would you jump off a cliff if cult leader Albo told you that the updraft would make you fly?

Cheap energy has a strong correlation with development and prosperity. Socialism and other cults do not. If you, Toto and Johnny Bullsheet were interested in ideas and argument, I would suggest listening to this energy economist instead of the grifters and your cultist propaganda.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHJVeIbZZJE

WTF,

Good news on the home front, with the take up of home solar batteries exceeding all expectations. The Federal government is releasing an extra $5 billion in subsidies over 4 years, on top of the $2.3 billion that has been taken up in the first 6 months of the scheme.

"This 82 year old still finished his daily walk in 40 degrees yesterday"
Only mad dogs, and Englishmen go out in the noon day sun.