by K.T. Weaver, SkyVision Solutions
At a time when negotiators from around the world gather in Paris to finalize an international “climate change” agreement, activists and political ideologues are using every possible opportunity to scare people into believing that the very existence of life on our planet is at stake.
Whether one views man-made climate change as real or not, and if so, whether mankind can do much about it, the fact is that the climate change talks in Paris have little to do with providing real solutions to environmental issues.
As stated in a POLITICO article  from November 29th:
“Somehow, the international process for addressing climate change has become one where addressing climate change is optional and apparently beside the point. Rich countries are bidding against themselves to purchase the developing world’s signature on an agreement so they can declare victory — even though the agreement itself will be the only progress achieved.”
[The “sticking point” hinges on negotiations regarding] “climate finance.” “Climate finance is the term for wealth transferred from developed to developing nations based on a vague and shifting set of rationales including repayment of the ‘ecological debt’ created by past emissions, ‘reparations’ for natural disasters, and funding of renewable energy initiatives.”
“But opposing such a transfer of wealth to developing countries would seem a rather uncontroversial position. One can imagine how the polling might look on: ‘Should the United States fight climate change by giving billions of dollars per year to countries that make no binding commitments to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions?’ Certainly, President Obama has made no effort to even inform his constituents that such an arrangement is central to his climate agenda, let alone argue forcefully in favor of it.”
Thus, many climate activists and political ideologues are, in actuality, more interested in “wealth transfer” rather than working out a real solution to the issue of climate change to the extent that it exits. They continue along with like-minded media “reporters,” to further propagate an apocalyptic narrative which is nothing more than a canard. Take, for example, the recent Washington Post article , “Another danger of climate change: Giant flying boulders?,” where the reporter describes a “theory” formulated by the “father of global warming” that a mysterious boulder in the Bahamas was caused by a period of global warming in the past (when, by the way, there was no chance that mankind could have caused it).
Although this “theory” is not widely accepted by scientists, it was presented as the main theme for the article as evidence that “if this is true, the effort kicking off in Paris this week to hold the world’s nations to strict climate targets may be even more urgent than most people realize.”
If that were not enough, some politicians, including the President of the United States, have inferred that climate change causes terrorism  and that “next week’s climate change summit in Paris will be a ‘powerful rebuke’ to terrorists ,” as if the terrorists care about the issue of climate change.
With that backdrop and the series of nearly delusional pronouncements mentioned above, the climate change narrative also continues into the realm of utility smart meters. Recent news coverage and social media have included reports such as the following:
“Replace your old gas and electricity meters with natty new digital ones and you could be helping to tackle ‘the biggest single challenge that humankind has ever faced’ – global warming.” 
“A strong deal at COP21 gives business certainty to develop smart, efficient products from electric cars to smart meters.” 
“The Paris climate change summit will conclude at the end of next week. It aims to reach an international agreement on limiting emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that are contributing to global warming. The main source of these emissions is the burning of fossil fuels – oil, coal and natural gas – that power industry, and heat and light our homes. … The first change is that we are going to have to become a lot more energy-efficient at home and at work. The less energy we use overall, the easier it will be to reduce our carbon emissions. Consumers need better-insulated homes and smart meters to monitor their energy use.” 
“Six years ago smart meters were pretty rare. Today 60 million consumers have access to detailed information about how much energy we use, how we use it, when we use it. So we can use that information to change our habits. Use energy more efficiently. Save more money without a whole lot of sacrifice.”
Of course, we have previously dealt with the issue of the President proposing that we “save money” using smart meters; this is unlikely, since under the President’s plan, “electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”
In my previous article  from December 1, 2015, I mentioned that utility smart meters are effectively “guilt meters” where governments and colluding organizations are trying to coax consumers into cutting back on using “too much” energy. They promote policies and investments that blame the consumer for wasting energy and at the same time prolong continued wasteful investments in low-tech solutions such as smart meters, weatherization programs, and subsidies for existing energy sources (that will never have a significant impact on the reduction of carbon emissions).
We have demonstrated over and over again that there are no net consumer benefits from smart meter deployments. Once this is realized by the public, the last fallback position of technocrats and climate activists who support smart meters is to appeal to your sense of moral values and political inclinations to “save the planet.” This strategy negates their need to justify the forced installation of smart meters based upon any rational or business case analysis.
It is my hope that the American people (and those from other countries as well) will not fall for the false narrative of somehow relating the climate change issue (or the Paris talks) to such things as smart meters and giant flying boulders.
References and Source Material for this Article
 “Why the Paris climate deal is meaningless,” POLITICO, November 29, 2015, at http://www.politico.eu/article/paris-climate-deal-is-meaningless-cop21-emissions-china-obama/
 “Another danger of climate change: Giant flying boulders?,” The Washington Post, November 28, 2015, at https://www.washingtonpost.com/classic-apps/another-danger-of-climate-change-giant-flying-boulders/2015/11/27/81bdf026-9384-11e5-b5e4-279b4501e8a6_story.html
 “U.S. Politicians Debate Whether Climate Change Fuels Terrorism, Scientific American, November 17, 2015, at http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/u-s-politicians-debate-whether-climate-change-fuels-terrorism/
 “Obama: “What A Powerful Rebuke To The Terrorists” Paris Climate Summit Will Be!,” Real Clear Politics, November 24, 2015, at http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/11/24/obama_what_a_powerful_rebuke_to_the_terrorists_paris_climate_summit_will_be.html
 “What’s so smart about smart meters?,” BBC News, November 17, 2015, at http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34831046
 UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Tweet mentioning smart meters, December 3, 2015, at https://twitter.com/FCOClimate/status/672420015145136128
 “Climate change is the challenge of our generation – here’s how we tackle it,” The Telegraph, December 4, 2015, at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/12034038/Climate-change-is-the-challenge-of-our-generation-heres-how-we-tackle-it.html
 “President Obama Touts ‘Smart Meters’ at Clean Energy Summit,” August 25, 2015, at https://smartgridawareness.org/2015/08/25/president-obama-touts-smart-meters/
 ‘Smart’ Meters are ‘Guilt Meters’ and an Example of a ‘Fraudulent, Bogus Innovation’, December 1, 2015, at https://smartgridawareness.org/2015/12/01/smart-meters-are-guilt-meters-and-bogus-innovation/