The Green Climate Fund: Where Does The Money GO?

Wind turbine companies are shuttering – Colorado, South Dakota, Pennsylvania, and Arkansas closed this year – with one moving operations to Spain and another to Mexico.   Their reasoning?   A.   tax benefits are nonexistent,   and B.   orders dropped 38%.  Prior to these closures, 50% of wind turbines in the US came from China.   Why? Because they were cheap.   But you won’t see these reports on MSM because they undermine everything Biden and Kerry.

According to a report released by the Green Climate Fund – if we act NOW we can still reach the 1.5 degree threshold established six years ago.   Because nothing has really changed in six years.  All that is needed is more money!   To the tune of a mere $100 billion annually.   In light of this call for money, South Korea’s Deputy PM, Hong Ham-ki, declared that they ‘plan’ to invest 3.5% of their GDP in “Green New Deal projects, including green infrastructure, renewable energy, and green mobility,” by 2025.  Ah.   A PLAN.

Isn’t it interesting that pledges are always based on an indeterminent future time. The Green Fund is flush with a $6.8 billion cookie jar left untapped.   The last year audited financial statements were prepared was 2019 wherein contributions dropped 62% over 2018 and expenses increased 89%.   But not to worry, their micro-lending interest increased by 590% while outstanding micro loans increased by 78% to $460 million. The increase in expenditures was a result of admin expenses, a new facility, funding actual grants, and ‘fees’.   Amazing they spent more money on themselves.   Only 1/6 of committed funds were actually disbursed.   Pledged. In addition 28% of their contributions remain a ‘receivable’.   IN the true business world this would be viewed as abysmal!  And everybody would be fired!   

Not to worry, the average annual pay for their 229 staff is nearly $160,000.   In addition to staff, an additional $13 million was shelled out  to contract labor and consultants.

It Gets Worse:   Apparently, their grants are not actually paid directly to an entity, but are channeled through ‘accredited entities’.   One such entity is the Asian Development Bank based in the Philippines with shares held by: Japan and the United States each holds the largest proportion of shares at 15.571%. China holds 6.429%, India holds 6.317%, and Australia holds 5.773%. The bank has come under substantial criticism for it’s ‘lending tactics’.   That gives us a warm and fuzzy feeling!

Another accredited entity is the UN Development Program which is the recipient of the 2nd largest block of funds.   UNDP lists 16 different funding initiatives.   The top five include:   Security System Management, HIV/AIDS, Public Sector Policy and Admin Management, Decentralization and Support to Subnational Government, Reconstruction Relief and Rehabilitation.  

In fact, within all 16 initiatives, there is no mention of Green grants to nations.   They do claim to reduce poverty by ‘expanding access to resources’   which is code for micro-lending at usury rates.   But apparently this gives the poor a voice.    Whimper whimper!   In addition, the UN Development Program ‘works with 8 countries to reduce their carbon footprint’ including Uganda.   Uganda’s carbon footprint is less than Amazons which exceeds 51.17 million metric tons per year. Apparently, another country in desperation is Ethiopia whose carbon footprint is 10.5 million metric tons – or 1/5 of Amazons.     Other identified footprints of concern would be Algeria, Albania, Peru, and  Columbia… Dastardly!

By comparison, China, the largest carbon footprint in the world emits 10.04 billion metric tons per year.   Xi Jinping says not to worry because China will be carbon neutral by 2060 when Xi is 107 years old.  So let’s divert Climate Funds to those countries emitting the least carbon footprint!   That’s the rational logic here.

Acumen Organization is a US NGO that also serves as an accredited recipient of Green Climate Funds as well as $3 million from government grants.   Acumen likens itself to being a unique organization given their primary activity is to ‘buy companies’ – pay no taxes – and spend 43.3% of their revenue on salaries.   Overhead would amount to roughly $4.43 million – 14.7%, and the loverly $2.252 ‘other’ – 7.5%.   The remainder is fluff to spend or horde.

While sitting on assets worth $135 million – not taxed. Of their total investments noted as outside of the US region, FS Notes declare that all grants they make go to related entities.   Meaning, literally, they grant money to themselves.

Grants given within the US are to algorithm tech companies and universities, most notably 60 Decibels, Inc. which they loaned over $4.5 million in exchange for their former CIO to own 35% interest???

Acumen has actually done absolutely nothing for any body.   ALL their movement of money is simply a strategy of tax free cash buying investment property for Acumen to reap the reward.

But this is the Green Climate Fund that Kerry declares is in desperate need of $100 billion per year in order to repair our global climate by 2030 when earth will collapse!   At which point Affiliated NGO’s will have accumulated wealth to the tune of roughly $15.5 trillion with compounded interest at 8% annually over a 10 year time.  And the climate will continue to do what climate does – CHANGE>

Not a Bad Take!   The Heist of the Century to be sure!

2 thoughts on “The Green Climate Fund: Where Does The Money GO?

  1. 99% of these fake socialist boondoggles are never successful even with continually throwing money at them. That is the problem, they gobble up funds without producing any real benefits and thus it is believed that the lack of funds is the problem and not that the idea is totally faulty. But much of those funds end up in the pockets of the perps and we never hear the truth of that. Since government is totally unaccountable for its raucous, unbridled spending habits, it’s easy for the perps to become rich on the production of others and after the theft, claim they need more funds and the circle just goes round and round.

  2. Hi

    “Not a Bad Take! The Heist of the Century to be sure!” … It still hasn’t played out. But I wouldn’t bet against you. .

    When done I would gander that the political grifters cons are in the following order

    1: Climate Con
    2: Virus Con(s)
    3: nineeleven Con.

    Though, the first two will be a photo finish!

    regards

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.