D. What are the Political Connections?
1. Direct Participation Between the IPCC and Governments. The IPCC submits its various assessment reports to governments for their review and comment before publishing. [Nomi Hicks and Bob Ward (2013) The IPCC report-writing process, Briefing Note, Center for Climate Change Economics and Policy, 5.] Most, if not all, scientific journals do not allow a government to receive, comment, or make changes on a non-military scientific work prior to its publication.
2. Money paid by Governments. The amount of money to be received and spent by governmental entities and their surrogates based on “climate change” is enormous. The Paris Agreement provided that the US must pay the most at 3 billion, Japan 1.5 billion, UK 1.2 billion, France 1 billion, Germany 1 billion. India did not have to do anything until it received aid and China did not have to reduce emissions until 2030. China releases the largest amount of CO2 at 9.8 trillion tones and India releases 2.5 billion tons. The US releases 5.3 billion tons. The relationship between who pays, the amount each pays, and who receives money has almost no relationship with CO2 It has more to do with redistribution of wealth from richer nations to poorer nations, which is a purely political issue.
3. Proposed Expeditures by the United States. The Green New Deal in the United States is estimated at $5.1 to $9.3 trillion dollars per year dwarfing all other expenditures. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal] In comparison, the military expenditure is about $600 billion per year. If all of the fossil fuel emissions stopped today, the IPCC estimated that it would take 40 years to see an effect. [https://theconversation.com/what-would-happen-to-the-climate-if-we-stopped-emitting-greenhouse-gases-today-35011] This means that the Green New Deal over 40 years would cost $204 to $372 trillion dollars before any effect would be seen. The total national spending for 2019 was $4.45 trillion. [https://www.usaspending.gov/#/]
4. Foreign Nations Will Benefit by a Degrading the Energy Independence of the United States. The United States has more than half of all fossil fuel reserves (oil, coal, oil shale, gas) in the world. [See: 1- https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/bk-2010-1032.ch001; 2- https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=fh8mXfH1FsX4-wTt-LGgCg&q=coal+reserves+in+
alaska&oq=coal+reserves+in+ala&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0i22i30l3.662.3868..6738…0.0..0.544.2734.11j7j2j5-1……0….1..gws-wiz…..0..35i39j0i67j0j0i131j0i20i263j0i10.27kmh2eYKSI ; 3- https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaellynch/2018/08/23/north-to-alaska-the-next-oil-boom/#11a5fb9366fd%5D
Inhibiting fossil fuel sales, transportation, and use depresses the economic, social and military defense of the United States.