Although it’s not clear whether the $860 million pledge is annual or a 5-year aggregate, it’s nowhere near the US’s share the $100 billion that 20 countries are collectively promising. Although the US is “only” the second largest polluter in the world, behind China and in front of India, its population is so much smaller than China’s and India’s that its per capita pollution rate is plainly the highest in the world. Plus, it’s far wealthier and has been polluting a lot longer. $860 million is a fraction of the US’s obligation.

And that’s if the US even pays. Not only does congress have to approve the expenditure (not a sure thing) but there are plenty of accounting tricks the US can use to get around paying. (See the AP article from which this article draws.)

But suppose the US and all the other countries pay. What are they paying for? According to the article, “The U.S. money will go toward funding domestic weather services, tracking systems to help poorer nations forecast weather and the handling of storms and other severe weather events.”

Gee, so the US is going to pay for the weathermen. How exactly is this going to halt global warming?

But wait, somewhat inconsistently the article says that some of the money is going to be spent on clean energy research.

Well, that’s a good idea, but how much clean energy research (minus the weathermen) is $860 million going to fund? If it’s an annual commitment, it might fund half a dozen researchers in one lab fiddling around with solar panels after overhead costs. If it’s a 5-year commitment, figure one guy and an assistant in a garage with a few test tubes and a bunsen burner.

IS THIS THE EXTENT OF THE US COMMITMENT TO COMBATING CLIMATE CHANGE?

Alas, I think we now see the deeper problem: This climate change conference is awash in wishful thinking. The mentality seems to be that if the rich countries just throw a little bit of money at the problem, a technological fix for it will be found.

This is to live in denial. The only possible fix is a serious lifestyle change on the part of the major polluters, starting with the US, and that includes not flying some 7000 delegates to Paris (with all the jet and motor vehicle emissions that involves) to jawbone about global warming.

Of course, global warming may not even be happening, and let’s pray that it isn’t. Throwing maybe $860 million at some weathermen and a guy with a bunsen burner in the hopes of a technological fix that requires no lifestyle changes surely isn’t going to solve the problem, if it is a problem.