The Consortium Concept: 

A Comparison to the Paris Climate Agreement

by Jeffrey Carey

Sep 6, 2021

I serve as the Chief Administrative Officer for The Alliance of Nations.  I am also an innovator of climate recovery technology.  I am often asked how The Consortium Concept fits into the landscape of global climate recovery and how we compare to the Paris Climate Agreement.  

This has led me through a difficult analysis with significant time and consideration being spent balancing what I could say about who and still be able to continue collaborative relationships.  I apologize for writing what may appear to be a scathing comparison between the Consortium Concept and the world’s nation’s best efforts as represented by the Paris Climate Agreement. However, because humanity must take swift and decisive actions now to fix major climate problems that threaten the continuity of our environment and our lives, we must talk about it.  

Assumption: The efforts led by the nations working within the Paris Climate Agreement must continue their effort. But with it, we must have a more primary and complementary set of fallback solutions which provide assurances for humanity. 

In order to solve big problems, we must first take a look at the history of how these problems started and the solutions we have already tried to date. 

Since the people, their governments, business, and industry must work together, we need to recognize that sometimes the best of planning can go wrong. In this comparison, we will not specifically name the players, but simply ask questions, characterize profiles, and talk about how we can get into trouble with unilateral opinions and positions.

Assumption: No reason is valid which allows our environment to fail humanity.

Traditionally, civilization has relied heavily upon business, industry, and governments to use the tools of capitalism to solve big problems. We are assured that “The markets can solve anything.”

Have the markets solved global warming to date?

The simple answer is NO.  

The reason is that markets depend on a simple fundamental rule of capitalism: 

Maximize Short-Term Profits

Market capitalism can only cope with opportunities where there is a high-profit potential with the shortest committed time period. This is why the Paris Climate Agreement goals are so diluted, at best, slowing global warming in 20-30 years.

So, can humanity assume that the basic fundamentals of capitalism could be completely discarded and rewritten to reverse global warming? 

The simple answer is NO. 

The reason is that business and industry would not decide to be unprofitable and go out of business.  That would be very bad.

Can we turn to our world’s governments to demand and mandate that business and industry provide market solutions (potentially destabilizing the fundamentals of critical infrastructure and leading to shutdowns) to solve this problem?  

The simple answer is NO. 

Further, could they execute any strategy with solutions unobstructed by national agendas and internal conflicts of interest?

The simple answer is NO. 

Now, imagine 194 nations and states from around the world, led by 26 of the world’s industrialized nations, suddenly agreeing to come together (after years of public outcry and a collapsing environment) and declare that they now have a plan with solutions to solve the climate crisis.  A plan with capitalism leading us all into great prosperity, not to reverse global warming, but to only slow the increase, or at best, stop the warming at a point well into the future.  Does this leave us all in a worse place than we are currently in? 

Should we wait and see if the nations can pull off this critical humanitarian mission in 10-30 years? 

The simple answer is NO. 

Further, should we fully trust a minimal effort led by nations based in unstable politics, special interests, and heavily invested in capitalism? 

The simple answer is NO. 

And this, in the face of a divided world of different states and nations. 

Assumption:  Climate stabilization/global cooling mission will take the cooperation of all the world’s states and nations agreeing to common objectives and tasks of a mission, not any specific nation’s agendas and special interests.  

Is there a better way to organize the strengths of civilization to clear a path to a greater good?  

The simple answer is YES.

It is called “The Consortium Concept ” which is a social implementation strategy between the world’s people directing the engagement and support of their governments to align business and industry to building climate recovery infrastructure to preserve the continuity of life.

The Climate Protection Consortium hosts a stable of specialized climate stabilization/global cooling reversing technologies supported by the people’s world’s governments, business, and industry to create new infrastructure opportunities.  

We ask the people to direct their governments to delegate Global technology implementation responsibility to the Consortium Institutions to conduct a recovery mission by an independent and autonomous set of institutions. These institutions allow civilization to insulate a single-purpose recovery strategy focused on long-term goals with many future benefits.  

It is through the people’s will and best interests that civilization can reprioritize our humanity and the environment.  These directives allow the world’s governments to engage and support the execution of a mission with sovereignty, influence, and legal authority. 

To financially support a recovery mission and develop critical climate reversing technologies with its infrastructure, will require full access to the world’s people’s resources and assets.  This is found in our governments.  The world’s nations provide “things” needed for the mission that is already owned and available to governments.  This circumvents cumbersome traditional financial processes which take a significant amount of time and cost to humanity. 

The people, through their governments, must ensure that this mission is separate from society and protected with impunity, immunity, indemnity, and the sovereignty to achieve mission objectives, often with controversial tasks. 

The best part is that the strengths of civilization can be applied in a simple way that protect markets and makes us all generally better.

We call this strategy The Consortium Concept. 

Our climate restoration strategy provides a better, faster, and cheaper approach with climate reversing technology implementations with assurances that we can engage and reverse global warming well before any anticipated mitigation efforts.  

In addition, a climate regulation mission will also be necessary after fixing CO2 concentration to an acceptable level.  This means that our mission will span many decades in a continual effort to regulate CO2 concentration levels.  

By taking direction from the world’s people’s best interests, we can guide governments, business, industry, and society to a balanced set of boundaries that protect and guide us all.