America has stepped away from the UN climate discussions, yet it seems the rest of the world hasn’t quite caught up.
Next month, an estimated 100,000 politicians, bureaucrats, activists, and others will gather in Antalya, Turkey (though COP participants prefer Türkiye) for COP31, the annual UN climate Conference of the Parties. They’ll arrive via flights, engage in endless discussions, and enjoy the finest accommodations and hospitality that Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has to offer. Then, they’ll head back home, having strategized on how to extract trillions more from the wealthier nations still willing to contribute.
Even now, despite the pressures of scientific, energy, and economic realities undermining the UN’s questionable science and flawed climate models, discussions of a climate crisis continue to heavily influence news, policy, and financial decisions.
Turkey aims to act as a “bridge” between developed and developing nations, while co-host Australia is expected to promote a global “clean energy acceleration.” This is the very same approach that has caused energy reliability and living standards to plummet for its own citizens.
Similar to COP30, this conference is set to focus on “implementation,” with the goal of transforming current commitments into “investment-ready projects.” This involves pressuring once-wealthy nations to finance these initiatives with trillions more dollars. The agenda remains unchanged, centered on “clean” energy, electrification of everything currently powered by “evil” fossil fuels, cutting methane and carbon dioxide emissions, and introducing a new “Climate Implementation Bridge.” However, as acknowledged by the COP31 president, this will come without any additional funding for these projects.
Here’s what the COP officials likely understand but won’t openly admit.
Over 80% of the world’s energy is still derived from fossil fuels. Countries like China, India, Indonesia, and Vietnam are rapidly constructing coal and gas-fired power plants to industrialize and alleviate poverty. The most influential nation has distanced itself from the UN climate treaty and the ongoing discussions, actively fostering increased production and usage of oil, gas, and coal both domestically and globally.
Meanwhile, Canada, Britain, Germany, and other countries that have historically supported these initiatives have damaged their own economies due to net-zero policies.
In light of this, there’s a scramble for new crises, themes, and initiatives. Primarily, they want to protect their positions, budgets, and influence. Some of their focus areas include:
- Dynamic and resilient health systems (relying on expensive and unreliable wind and solar power)
- Recycling various materials (often referred to as “circularity”)
- Sustainable food policies (including limitations on meat consumption and certain agricultural practices)
- Youth education (which tends to involve fearmongering and fostering a sense of hopelessness among young people)
They’ll have support from nearly 100 “civil society” organizations, including groups like Climate Action Network, Greenpeace, and Amnesty International. While they align with the official “implementation” goals, their actual aim is to push for a “just, orderly and equitable” transition to “clean, green, renewable” energy—and, of course, funding directed at themselves and their affiliates. They call for accountability for corporate “greenwashing,” but conveniently overlook their own discrepancies.
Now, let’s look at the truths they prefer to ignore.
Turkey still counts on coal and natural gas for 46% of its electricity. Its overall electricity consumption is lower than the continuously declining European average, and it’s also a major customer of Russian natural gas.
Moreover, “green” energy isn’t always as clean or sustainable as it sounds. The infrastructure for wind and solar energy requires substantial amounts of metals and materials and produces significant pollution during various stages of mining and disposal. It simply can’t support modern industrialized economies or improve the conditions of impoverished communities.
Countries still facing poverty require consistent and affordable energy sources to uplift their populations. They should leverage their resources and rights to establish their own paths to development.
For years, American taxpayers have inadvertently financed these summits and the plans devised there. Taxpayers in Britain, Germany, Canada, Australia, and beyond still cover the costs associated with COP participants—airfare, lodging, meals—and deal with rising energy expenses tied to net-zero policies that are driving industries away to nations that still rely on fossil fuels.
This situation lacks justice or fairness. It resembles eco-imperialism and carbon colonialism.
The United Nations and its climate COPs have ceased to serve a meaningful purpose, and the United States has acknowledged this. Nations that truly prioritize their citizens and future should consider following suit: defund these programs and reject the net-zero agenda that these organizers hope to impose on everyone.
