{"id":395709,"date":"2025-08-17T20:37:29","date_gmt":"2025-08-17T18:37:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=395709"},"modified":"2025-08-17T20:37:31","modified_gmt":"2025-08-17T18:37:31","slug":"the-folly-of-climate-leadership-britains-net-zero-masochism-and-the-china-mirage","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=395709","title":{"rendered":"The Folly of Climate Leadership: Britain\u2019s Net Zero Masochism and the China Mirage"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"A<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Tilak\u2019s Substack<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is one of the enduring marvels of political hubris that a small, deindustrialising island nation contributing less than 0.8% of the world\u2019s greenhouse gas emissions believes it can \u201clead the world\u201d into abandoning fossil fuels. This belief \u2013 sincerely held by Westminster\u2019s political elites on both the Conservative and Labour benches \u2013 has birthed an energy policy that combines moral grandstanding with economic self-harm. The outcome is a textbook case study in how virtue-signalling masquerading as \u201cclimate leadership\u201d can hobble an economy while empowering the very geopolitical rivals it purports to outpace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The latest manifestation of this delusion comes courtesy of Ed Miliband\u2019s \u201cHead of Mission Control for Clean Power by 2030\u201d, Chris Stark. Writing in the Telegraph<\/em>, Stark urged<\/a> Britain to emulate China in becoming an \u201celectrostate\u201d \u2013 a nation powered entirely by abundant low-carbon electricity \u2013 claiming that \u201cwe ignore these changes at our peril\u201d. Stark\u2019s premise is as breathtaking in its naivety as it is in its selectivity. China, he tells us, is \u201claying vast networks of transmission lines, rolling out the world\u2019s biggest fleet of electric vehicles and deploying solar and wind at a scale that dwarfs the rest of the world.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

China\u2019s Net Zero Pledge: Smoke, Mirrors and 2060<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

It is an attractive picture \u2013 if one edits out the inconvenient facts<\/a> that China remains 60% powered by coal, is permitting two new coal plants a week and is adding annual coal capacity equivalent to the entire UK electricity grid. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA),<\/a> coal consumption hit another new record last year \u2013 8.77 billion metric tons \u2013 due to soaring coal use by China and India. In fact, the International Energy Agency reports that China\u2019s coal consumption has ballooned from 1.3 million tonnes in 2000 to an estimated 4.5 billion tonnes today. That is not a typographical error. It is the energy reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To the climate faithful, China\u2019s promise of carbon neutrality by 2060 is an audacious \u201cbid to lead the world\u201d. To seasoned China observers, it is an exercise in diplomatic theatre. Veteran China watcher Patricia Adams writing for the Global Warming Policy Foundation reminds<\/a> us that the Chinese Communist Party\u2019s highest priority is not the UN\u2019s Framework Convention on Climate Change agenda but its own political survival. That survival depends on sustained economic growth \u2013 which in turn requires ever-increasing fossil fuel use. Critical pollution issues such as urban smog and ambient air quality also need to be handled to head off domestic disaffection among China\u2019s vast cities. Global climate change \u201cleadership\u201d does not make the list in China\u2019s political priorities though this is not apparent for na\u00efve Sinophiles like Ed Miliband and Chris Stark.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

UNFCCC, Article 3 paragraph 1 [1992] states that \u201cThe Parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities<\/a> and respective capabilities. Accordingly, the developed country Parties should take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof.\u201d From the earliest climate negotiations, Beijing has positioned itself as champion of the \u201cdeveloping country\u201d bloc, thereby exempting itself from binding emission cuts while demanding vast flows of \u201cclimate finance\u201d from the West.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Paris Agreement of 2015, celebrated in Western capitals as a breakthrough, was in practice a grand bargain in which China promised to go emissions neutral by 2060 \u2013 a milestone decades into the future with no commitments on how much emissions will increase and at what rate they decline after a peak. In return, the Obama and Biden administrations imposed costly green mandates and subsidies on the US economy while launching an all-out regulatory onslaught<\/a> on US coal, oil and natural gas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2010, senior official in the UN\u2019s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Professor Dr Ottmar Edenhofer confessed<\/a> that climate policy has almost nothing to do any more with environmental protection, and that the then-upcoming world climate summit in Cancun was actually an economic conference in which the redistribution of the world\u2019s resources was the object to be negotiated over.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2015, Christiana Figueres, the-then Executive Secretary of UNFCCC,\u00a0asserted<\/a>\u00a0that the goal of environmental activists was to re-define capitalism itself. \u201cThis is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,\u201d she said. Of the Paris climate change conference, which was to be held that year, she added: \u201cThis is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since Paris, China\u2019s greenhouse gas emissions have grown, not fallen. Between 2018 and 2023, it approved more new coal capacity than the rest of the world combined. China\u2019s wind and solar installations, while headline-grabbing, produce a modest share of its power, plagued by curtailment rates that are the \u201cworst in the world\u201d. As Patricia Adams documents<\/a>, generous subsidies created vast unused capacity, with some curtailed wind output sufficient to power Beijing for a year \u2013 if only it could reach the grid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Britain\u2019s Self-Imposed Energy Straitjacket<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In contrast, Britain has gone all in. In 2008, under Labour\u2019s Gordon Brown, Parliament passed a legally binding commitment<\/a> to cut emissions 80% by 2050. In 2019, after an 88-minute Commons debate<\/a>, that target became 100% \u2013 Net Zero \u2013 on the advice of the Climate Change Committee, which based its cost projections<\/a> for offshore wind on a single high-wind year. Boris Johnson, in full booster mode, declared Britain the \u201cSaudi Arabia of wind\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What makes the Stark\u2013Miliband \u201clets emulate China\u201d line so astonishing is that it misreads China\u2019s renewables investments as a sign of ideological commitment, when in fact it is a form of state capitalism at work. Beijing\u2019s solar, wind and electric vehicle build-out is not a crusade against fossil fuels but a calculated strategy to dominate the supply chains of technologies that the West has chosen \u2013 politically, not economically \u2013 to depend on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By promoting solar panels, wind turbines and EV batteries to Western markets \u2013 and ensuring they are produced with cheap, coal-fired electricity at home \u2013 China captures the high-value manufacturing and export markets, while leaving its competitors to grapple with the higher costs of integrating intermittent renewables into their grids. Behind the manufacture of wind, solar and EV components and finished products lay entire globe-encompassing supply chains stretching from mining through to refining of minerals and rare earths, dominated singularly by China<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ed Miliband visited China in March where he pledged closer cooperation with China on green energy<\/a>. Yet, five months later, the Government has still not revealed the text of the memorandum he signed. According to the Guardian<\/a><\/em>, the UK Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero Ed Miliband \u201cis hoping to shape a new global axis in favour of climate action along with China and developing countries, to counter Donald Trump\u2019s abandonment of green policies in the US.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is what makes Miliband\u2019s starry-eyed talk of a \u201cnew global axis\u201d with China to lead on climate so laughable to seasoned observers. China is not joining Britain\u2019s green crusade; it is monetising it. It is perfectly content for the UK and EU to legislate themselves into energy poverty while buying Chinese kit to do it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The public in Britain is told that high bills are a Putin problem, that we are \u201chostages to volatile gas markets\u201d, and that more wind farms and solar panels will free us from this volatility. Natural gas prices in Europe have declined to almost where they were before the supply crisis brought on by the Ukraine-Russia war. However, estimated electricity bills for an average household in the UK have increased by 35.5%, from \u00a3652 in 2021 to \u00a3884 in 2024, according to Ofgem data. While increased gas prices (which include an additional carbon tax paid by power companies that generate electricity using natural gas) played a role in this increase, the work by David Turver<\/a> and Andrew Montford<\/a> show that the array of subsidies, systems balancing costs (due to intermittency of renewables) and expanding the grid to support increased reliance on solar and wind farms play a far more important role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Britain once had a thriving industrial base anchored in affordable, secure energy. Today, energy-intensive manufacturing \u2013 steel, chemicals, glass \u2013 is being priced out. Citing the Office for National Statistics, the Financial Times<\/em> reported<\/a> that output in 2025 in the UK\u2019s energy-intensive industries has fallen by a third since 2021 to reach a 35-year low, reflecting their exposure to the highest electricity prices of developed economies. The production of paper, petrochemicals, basic metals and inorganic products such as cement and ceramics was in 2024 at its lowest level in records stretching back to 1990. The figures underline the challenge facing ministers as they seek to shield British industry from high energy costs that put businesses at a severe disadvantage to competitors in the US and China.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The original Climate Change Act in 2008 included no sort of cost-benefit analysis at all. As Paul Homewood notes, \u201cit was passed almost unanimously through Parliament on the basis that when you are saving the planet, costs do not matter.\u201d It was the same story when Theresa May amended the 2008 Act to set the 2019 Net Zero target.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Meanwhile, the Government ploughs ahead with EV mandates, boiler bans and infrastructure upgrades for an all-electric future, at a cost to the UK economy that may run over \u00a31 trillion<\/a>. The Treasury\u2019s Net Zero Review blithely assumes that \u201ca successful and orderly transition\u201d will yield lower household costs and \u201cwider health co-benefits\u201d. Yet no serious scenario work appears to account for what happens if global fossil fuel demand remains robust \u2013 as every credible forecast says it will \u2013 and Britain\u2019s self-imposed constraints simply shift production, and emissions, overseas as it has done over the past two decades of economic decline.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Energy Realism Versus \u2018Climate Leadership\u2019: Trump Upends the Globalist Climate Agenda<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In the developing world, energy realism prevails not just in China. India\u2019s message<\/a> to the 2023 COP28 annual climate conference was blunt: \u201cIt is very clear that India\u2019s energy needs for development, which are substantial, cannot be deferred\u2026 India\u2019s reliance on coal is critical to its energy security in the background of the relative paucity of oil and natural gas of domestic origin.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

African leaders are increasingly vocal<\/a> about the hypocrisy of Western governments that developed on the back of fossil fuels now denying them the same fossil fuel-based energy ladder<\/a>. Even Germany, after years of climate posturing, reverted to burning lignite<\/a> when its energy security crumbled post-Ukraine war after having shut down its nuclear plants post-Fukushima at very short notice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But what was once a united \u201ccollective West\u201d climate worldview \u2013 represented in the UN via its specialised agencies such as the IPCC \u2013 has shattered. President Trump\u2019s energy team led by Energy Secretary Chris Wright, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, is charging full steam ahead, firing off policy and regulatory initiatives at a pace designed to overwhelm the capacity of opponents to respond. It is leaving the administration\u2019s zealous climate adversaries scrambling to oppose the Trumpian counter-revolution<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Under President Trump\u2019s watch, the US has exited the Paris Agreement<\/a> and ceased financial commitments to the UN climate agenda. Under its \u201cenergy dominance\u201d mantra, Trump\u2019s administration is set to continue playing to American strengths in exploiting American coal, oil and natural gas resources and to unleash a \u201cnuclear renaissance<\/a>\u201d. The Green agenda, championed under the Obama administration and turbocharged by the Biden one, which unleashed the massive Inflation Reduction Act boondoggle for the Democrat Party-favoured renewables sector, is now being dismantled piece by piece.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Britain, meanwhile, clings to \u201cclimate leadership\u201d, the idea that moral example will change the world\u2019s energy trajectory. This is the same delusion that informed Barack Obama\u2019s \u201cgrand bargain\u201d with Xi Jinping under the Paris Agreement, a deal that tied US hands with costly regulation while asking little of China beyond a vague 2030 peak. If this is leadership, it is leadership of the lead lemming charging over the cliff.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This article was published in The Daily Sceptic https:\/\/dailysceptic.org\/2025\/08\/14\/the-folly-of-climate-leadership-britains-net-zero-masochism-and-the-china-mirage\/<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It is one of the enduring marvels of political hubris that a small, deindustrialising island nation contributing less than 0.8% of the world\u2019s greenhouse gas emissions believes it can \u201clead the world\u201d into abandoning fossil fuels. This belief \u2013 sincerely held by Westminster\u2019s political elites on both the Conservative and Labour benches \u2013 has birthed an energy policy that combines moral grandstanding with economic self-harm. The outcome is a textbook case study in how virtue-signalling masquerading as \u201cclimate leadership\u201d can hobble an economy while empowering the very geopolitical rivals it purports to outpace.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":395711,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691818341,691818862,691818056,691829996,691819331,691831484,691837336,691818154,691831465],"class_list":{"0":"post-395709","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-china","9":"tag-chinese-communist-party","10":"tag-climate-change","11":"tag-climate-leadership","12":"tag-deindustrialization","13":"tag-energy-secretary-ed-miliband","14":"tag-globalist-climate-agenda","15":"tag-net-zero","16":"tag-unfccc-united-nations-framework-convention-on-climate-change-conferences","18":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/AQNDCiQA57RPyuRLBXAurpuYp88WHEFYdDzepIhC-TGGShDh6HGjNNIn_YQPdJRoC-5h-ez0NRLr2Ue617RUFUZf37n84H7HhmDNprfzwet80INc3N48GIW4vG_cXkPXkoSPQNHmQkbYFAuTaYSIjVfL_OPkPQ-1.jpeg?fit=1280%2C1280&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1EWp","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":241020,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=241020","url_meta":{"origin":395709,"position":0},"title":"Bob Ward v Nigel Farage","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"22\/01\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The climate scam is big business!","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/0Screenshot-2023-01-22-151717.png?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/0Screenshot-2023-01-22-151717.png?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/0Screenshot-2023-01-22-151717.png?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/0Screenshot-2023-01-22-151717.png?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/0Screenshot-2023-01-22-151717.png?fit=1200%2C676&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":249327,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=249327","url_meta":{"origin":395709,"position":1},"title":"Leadership?","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"24\/03\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"From Climate Scepticism By\u00a0ROBIN GUENIER A key element of my case for abandoning Net Zero is that globally CO2\u00a0emissions are increasing because over 70% are sourced from non-Western countries that don\u2019t regard emission reduction as a priority and are focused instead on economic and social development, poverty eradication and energy\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-994.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-994.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-994.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-994.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-994.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":421600,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=421600","url_meta":{"origin":395709,"position":2},"title":"Rejecting Climatism: Trump Withdraws from UNFCCC and 66 International Organizations","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"16\/01\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"The Trump administration has issued an\u00a0executive order\u00a0that withdraws the United States from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and other international bodies. The order pulls the US back from organizations pursuing climate policies and other efforts that the administration does not consider to be in the national\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0AQOWgtMCM3wlngsLE4QNXOXJ-XCJHicDhT4qU7F51ZKS-4q6wZuwjm8QJ_0c518N6wvycSL8nxAv3m19TN1aFNJGVbFbjAqtpvICa3zXBFf0u_ScldC2m2Qc-LkSRw-Y-1.jpeg?fit=1159%2C747&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0AQOWgtMCM3wlngsLE4QNXOXJ-XCJHicDhT4qU7F51ZKS-4q6wZuwjm8QJ_0c518N6wvycSL8nxAv3m19TN1aFNJGVbFbjAqtpvICa3zXBFf0u_ScldC2m2Qc-LkSRw-Y-1.jpeg?fit=1159%2C747&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0AQOWgtMCM3wlngsLE4QNXOXJ-XCJHicDhT4qU7F51ZKS-4q6wZuwjm8QJ_0c518N6wvycSL8nxAv3m19TN1aFNJGVbFbjAqtpvICa3zXBFf0u_ScldC2m2Qc-LkSRw-Y-1.jpeg?fit=1159%2C747&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0AQOWgtMCM3wlngsLE4QNXOXJ-XCJHicDhT4qU7F51ZKS-4q6wZuwjm8QJ_0c518N6wvycSL8nxAv3m19TN1aFNJGVbFbjAqtpvICa3zXBFf0u_ScldC2m2Qc-LkSRw-Y-1.jpeg?fit=1159%2C747&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/0AQOWgtMCM3wlngsLE4QNXOXJ-XCJHicDhT4qU7F51ZKS-4q6wZuwjm8QJ_0c518N6wvycSL8nxAv3m19TN1aFNJGVbFbjAqtpvICa3zXBFf0u_ScldC2m2Qc-LkSRw-Y-1.jpeg?fit=1159%2C747&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":211402,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=211402","url_meta":{"origin":395709,"position":3},"title":"WSJ: Why Pretend Green Pork Will Stop Climate Change?","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"01\/08\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Essay by Eric Worrall h\/t M; There have been some surprisingly climate skeptic Wall Street Journal articles lately, at least in terms of hilighting the obvious flaws of big government subsidised climate \u201csolutions\u201d. Why Pretend Green Pork Will Stop Climate Change?Because organized groups and politicians want the money, and the\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/image-19.png?fit=595%2C335&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/image-19.png?fit=595%2C335&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/image-19.png?fit=595%2C335&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":209014,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=209014","url_meta":{"origin":395709,"position":4},"title":"China Demands Preferential Treatment on Climate Change","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"18\/07\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"President of China, Xi Jinping arrives in London, 19 October 2015. By Foreign and Commonwealth Office (China State Visit) [CC BY 2.0\u00a0or\u00a0OGL],\u00a0via Wikimedia Commons Essay by Eric Worrall Even though the IEA Claims \u201cSolar is the Cheapest Energy in History\u201c, China has demanded a pass to continue to raise emissions\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/0chinas-strange-endorsement-of-net-zero.jpg?fit=909%2C527&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/0chinas-strange-endorsement-of-net-zero.jpg?fit=909%2C527&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/0chinas-strange-endorsement-of-net-zero.jpg?fit=909%2C527&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/0chinas-strange-endorsement-of-net-zero.jpg?fit=909%2C527&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":275276,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=275276","url_meta":{"origin":395709,"position":5},"title":"Bernie Sanders: Confronting Chinese Tyranny is Undermining Climate Cooperation","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"24\/08\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"China doesn\u2019t care about climate change \u2013 no nation which builds as many coal plants as China genuinely thinks anthropogenic global warming is a problem.","rel":"","context":"In \"China\"","block_context":{"text":"China","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=china"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/0the-green-new-deal-put-forth-by-sen-bernie-sanders-explains-schlosberg-explicitly-bans-fracking-prevents-all-new-pipelines.webp?fit=1200%2C598&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/0the-green-new-deal-put-forth-by-sen-bernie-sanders-explains-schlosberg-explicitly-bans-fracking-prevents-all-new-pipelines.webp?fit=1200%2C598&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/0the-green-new-deal-put-forth-by-sen-bernie-sanders-explains-schlosberg-explicitly-bans-fracking-prevents-all-new-pipelines.webp?fit=1200%2C598&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/0the-green-new-deal-put-forth-by-sen-bernie-sanders-explains-schlosberg-explicitly-bans-fracking-prevents-all-new-pipelines.webp?fit=1200%2C598&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/0the-green-new-deal-put-forth-by-sen-bernie-sanders-explains-schlosberg-explicitly-bans-fracking-prevents-all-new-pipelines.webp?fit=1200%2C598&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/395709","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=395709"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/395709\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":395713,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/395709\/revisions\/395713"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/395711"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=395709"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=395709"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=395709"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}