With the Kyoto Protocol ending in 2012, negotiators are gathering in Bali, Indonesia on Monday to begin coming up with a new, and hopefully better, climate change agreement. Europe's wish list is long and ambitious
If, in fact politicians, and party hacks have assimilated a blind hatred of America, or cynicism, (I guess from the fictional Vulcan Culture) then they WILL fail to envision a role for America on the world's stage after a top-to-bottom clean up!
Put people in Congress in 2008 who can think quickly, for a change!
Posts: 582 | Location: New York City | Registered: 13 February 2007
From the link: Few are expecting the one week conference to go much beyond identifying the broad directives the ultimate treaty will address and agreeing to draft a new treaty by 2009. ----------------------------------------------
Sounds like a meeting to figure out when the next meeting is. Can you imagine these guys working for a business that had to make a profit to stay in business? They've created job security for themselves anyway.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
I heard that the biggest problem they were in Bali right now was finding a place to park all the private jets in the airport. All the big shots that want to tell us how to save the planet don't like to fly commercial I guess.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
Posts: 8264 | Location: Fl | Registered: 05 July 2001
slab/sawdust- your current sense of self is no more sustainable than our current use of energy or technology. The ultimate alternative energy source is above our shoulders between our ears. In reference to your comments/perceptions/level of creativity, neither one of you two have harnessed this extraodinary altenative source of energy. IMO one of the "problems" lies in the belief and myth, that controlling and abusing the natural world is justifiable. How's that been working so far?
"The moon that I love clears a path through the pines And guides a stream right to the bamboo gate."Poems by Zen Master Hsu Yun: Series I
Posts: 795 | Location: western slope, northern sierra | Registered: 18 April 2003
Originally posted by bamboo: slab/sawdust- your current sense of self is no more sustainable than our current use of energy or technology. The ultimate alternative energy source is above our shoulders between our ears. In reference to your comments/perceptions/level of creativity, neither one of you two have harnessed this extraodinary altenative source of energy. IMO one of the "problems" lies in the belief and myth, that controlling and abusing the natural world is justifiable. How's that been working so far?
I heard there is this new stuff called "oil". I here it is a very reliable, safe and cheap source of energy. Maybe we should drill for some here. It's all the rage in the Middle East.
Posts: 27 | Location: USofA | Registered: 24 October 2007
Originally posted by bamboo: IMO one of the "problems" lies in the belief and myth, that controlling and abusing the natural world is justifiable. How's that been working so far?
Pretty good. How's it working for you?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
Sue, Canada is covering Bali. Read the first page of your article.
I won't print the whole thing since the title basically says it all. meljomur Conservative Environment Minister John Baird (who can open his mouth wider than a hamster yawning) is counting on you being right.
quote:
No climate deal without U.S. signing: Baird ...
Greenhouse gases are continually skyrocketing -- with the U.S., China, and India leading the way.
That's why Baird says the climate deal that replaces Kyoto in 2012 must hold those countries to binding targets, which Kyoto failed to do.
Canada's insistence on U.S. involvement is not the only sign of a stalemate in Bali. None of the big three polluters have offered any hint of accepting the targets that Baird calls a prerequisite for a deal.
Since none of those countries have shown any willingness to accept targets, Canada's opposition parties say it's pretty clear what the Tory gameplan is: sabotage.
They accuse the government of poisoning talks because it doesn't actually care about climate change. ...
"Canada coming here to lecture on climate change is like Iran lecturing on human rights," - NDP environment critic Nathan Cullen
quote:
Canada signing climate treaty without U.S. like 'unilateral disarmament': Baird
But opposition accuses Conservatives of intentionally sabotaging climate talks
Canada's environment minister has dismissed the notion of signing a climate-change treaty without the United States, saying it would handicap the Canadian economy without reversing greenhouse gas emissions. ...
As the world gathers in Bali, Indonesia, to work toward a successor treaty to the Kyoto Protocol, the Americans are already making it clear they will not submit to binding emissions targets.
In an interview with the Canadian Press, John Baird said Canada hopes to reach a deal within two years — but only if it applies targets for the first time to all major polluters.
He used a military analogy to suggest that Canada would be handicapping its economy by adopting environmental restrictions without being followed by its closest neighbour and trading partner.
"Our major economic competition is with the United States," Baird said in an interview before he arrived in Bali this weekend.
"You can have unilateral disarmament. Some might call it noble — but it's not very smart."
He derided the logic of, for example, closing a coal plant in Ontario, only to import more coal power from Michigan. The end result is lost Canadian jobs with no benefit to the atmosphere, he said. ...
“The NDP has pushed this Conservative government to stop the blame game and start to act in the fight against climate change,” said Layton. “Environment Minister John Baird has an opportunity in Bali to send a message to the world that Canada is dedicated to doing what it takes to stop harmful climate change. He can be portrayed as a leader like Australia’s Kevin Rudd, or as a Bush-style laggard. The choice is his.” - Jack Layton, Leader of the NDP
Gloss of the Bloc statement (link will be to the French original):
*Note that it has a weird way of saying that Canada is in a Minority Government position.
quote:
Mr. President,
The Québécois ones and the Inhabitants of Quebec are clearly favorable to the fight with the climatic changes within the framework of the Protocol of Kyoto. However, since its election, the Canadian preserving government makes very not to respect this protocol. Being unaware of its minority statute, it decided to make conceal the unmatched voices by not inviting the Leaders of the opposition to the international Conference on the climatic changes which will take place in Bali from the 3 to next 14 December. The tradition wanting that one invites the Leaders of the opposition to the important international meetings however is well established in Ottawa.
It appears completely irresponsible to us, with the Bloc Québécois, that this minority government wants to muzzle the parties of the opposition with a simple aim of not being made recall that it disavowed its engagements with regard to Kyoto. Not only the preserving government it firmly opposed the adoption of a plan of reduction of gas for purpose of greenhouse in conformity with the targets to reach, but it also did everything to put sticks in the wheels of the parties of opposition which sought to equip Canada of a lawful framework allowing the respect with this important international engagement.
This attitude is in conformity with the last declarations of Prime Minister Harper, who qualified the Protocol of Kyoto of "socialist plot", then the Leader of the official opposition, Mr. Harper had made of the failure of Kyoto its main goal.
This situation has constrained the opposition, which represents the will of the majority of the citizens, to force the adoption of a bill obliging the Canadian government to take measurements necessary to reach its targets of reduction. This obligation was ignored by the conservatives.
The divergences are also abyssal as for the continuations to give to the first phase Protocol of Kyoto. Whereas the parties of opposition got along on a comprising bill book of the minimal reductions, compared to the level of 1990, 20 % in 2020, of 35 % in 2035 and 60 % in 2050, the preserving government persists in wanting to impose a plan only based on the intensity of the emissions. A plan which will have only one negligible impact on the reduction of gases for purpose of greenhouse and which, even in the most optimistic scenarios, will not make it possible Canada to go down under the level from its emissions from 1990 before... 2024!
In Quebec, the population is massively in favour of the application of Kyoto, and the French National Assembly is unanimous. Quebec is ready to collaborate, in particular starting from an approach territorial similar to what was done in Europe and by the creation of a purse of carbon. But there still, the Canadian preserving government made there failure.
You will thus agree that the message which will be conveyed by the Canadian Minister for the Environment at the time of the conference of Bali will not be representative of the opinion of the whole of the members of Parliament and the Québécois population, that the minority government seeks to muzzle by all the means.
I hope all things considered that the reading of this letter will be able to inform you about the real situation of the fight to the climatic changes in Canada.
Please accept, Mr. President, the expression of my distinguished feelings.
Whilst some aspects of changes made to deal with global warming makes things more expensive, others do not. The country that uses energy more efficiently saves fuel and reduces running costs, and reduces its reliance on foreign oil, with all the risks that that entails as demand rises and supplies dwindle, becoming ever more expensive to extract.
As an oil producer, Canada would benefit by reducing its reliance on oil so that it can generate income by exporting more of the stuff - to the USA.
Yes, it is grossly unfair if the USA carries on polluting while everyone else cuts back, but that is no excuse for not signing a treaty. The situation is far too serious to do nothing, and why should George Bush dictate what the rest of the world does or doesn't do? Hopefully a new government will be elected in a year's time that will be willing to get on board. And if not, there are always boycotts and lawsuits.
Sue N.
Posts: 4624 | Location: UK | Registered: 16 November 2004
People that make a living accomplishing nothing have got to have meetings. It's what they do.
People that make a living by destroying, killing, and creating a societal sewer need to have meetings too, to plan legal strategies. The commercial banks have been meeting with the fed and euro equivalent, they learned from Lay and Dunlop, and other criminals. Some are still at work It's hard work
Blaise Pascal Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. Pensees
Posts: 2917 | Location: Sverige | Registered: 21 June 2005
As an oil producer, Canada would benefit by reducing its reliance on oil so that it can generate income by exporting more of the stuff - to the USA.
That isn't the problem - NAFTA guarantees that Canada cannot reduce how much we sell to the States without reducing how much we use ourselves. The problem is that the Alberta Oil sands may have lots of oil but it doesn't give up this oil without a certain amount of damage to the environment. It would be difficult for Canada to cut green house gases to those percentages without cutting back on oil production and using greener forms of energy. Harper basically owns Alberta right now and has no interest in pissing them off. Believe me, the Liberals have tried to find a way without touching oil - that is why they failed.
Ok, there are things that we can all do, but as far as (for example) Manitoba insisting that you can't buy a car unless it gets more miliage with less gas, we are not a big enough market for that. That is why our Premier is working with Arnold from California on him passing that kind of law because California is a big enough market to change the way car manufacturers do things.
quote:
Yes, it is grossly unfair if the USA carries on polluting while everyone else cuts back, but that is no excuse for not signing a treaty.
That is precisely what it is - an excuse for inaction. As long as the US doesn't sign on, Canada can keep on creating Green House Gases with Alberta Oil - which is what Harper wants to do any way.
It may not be a good excuse, it may not be a believable excuse, it may not even be a rational excuse, but it is an excuse just the same.
I think that someone should attach a cord to the guy and fly him.
There are some "shocking" new details coming up, be back in a bit when it is on Hansard.
BTW - how is Prime Minister Brown doing? Is he listening to your Liberal Democrats.
Posts: 771 | Location: Winnipeg | Registered: 06 September 2001
US resists setting target on cutting carbon pollution · Call to reduce emissions by 25-40% is key issue · Democrats would back limits, says Kerry
David Adam in Bali The Guardian, Tuesday December 11 2007 The environment secretary, Hilary Benn, will today begin attempts to persuade the US administration to agree firm targets on carbon pollution as part of a new deal on global warming. Benn arrived at UN climate talks in Bali last night, as the US said it was unwilling to approve a draft agreement which called on developed countries to reduce emissions by between 25% and 40% by 2020.
The US said the proposal, which is backed by Britain and the EU, was "totally unrealistic" and "unhelpful". Other countries, including Japan and Canada, are also believed to be against the idea.
The US said it was in Bali to be "constructive" and wanted the meeting to agree a roadmap to a new agreement on climate change which would be concluded by 2009. But it said it would not agree a firm target, presented either as an emissions reduction or as a maximum temperature rise. European negotiators argue that a target is needed to reflect the urgency of the problem and to encourage industry to invest in green technology. The high-level segment of the talks begins tomorrow, when senior ministers replace civil servants at the negotiating table.
In an unusual step, the UN published the text of the four-page draft agreement, based on the first week of informal discussions, on its website over the weekend. It is now being argued over by the 190 countries present. Observers said the draft would be repeatedly modified and updated through the week, until a final version is agreed on Friday.
The initial draft agreement calls for a response to the "unequivocal scientific evidence that preventing the worst effects of climate change will require [developed countries] to reduce emissions in a range of 25-40% below 1990 levels by 2020 and that global emissions of greenhouse gases need to peak in the next 10 to 15 years".
The senior climate negotiator for the US, Harlan Watson, said: "We have problems with defining the numbers up front. In our view, that pre-judges the outcome of the negotiations over the next two years." He said the US supported the concept of a "shared global goal" to address climate change, but did not want the Bali meeting to discuss exact numbers.
The 25-40% figure is based on the work of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which was formally awarded the Nobel peace prize jointly with Al Gore yesterday. Watson said the IPCC calculation was based on "many uncertainties". The head of the UN climate secretariat, Yvo de Boer, said the 25-40% figure would be a "critical issue" at the talks, an important signpost in the fight against global warming. British officials said they expected the US to object to the proposal, but that the Bush administration had engaged in the talks more than in previous years. However, leaked papers revealed that US opposition to the 25-40% figure may be having an effect, with the target removed from a separate document on the future commitments of countries that have ratified the Kyoto protocol.
John Kerry, the US senator and losing presidential candidate in 2004, told the Bali event that a Democratic successor to George Bush in 2009 would bring the US fully on board. "Every single Democratic candidate for president has embraced mandatory caps ... and expressed their willingness to immediately be part of the Kyoto discussions and try to find a successor agreement to Kyoto," he said.
China has already said it may wait for 2010 before signing up to a new deal, to see how the new US president responds. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Yes, they are going to have to wait until these "cowboys" are out of the White House.
Wow, one just becomes more and more proud to be an American!
"Yeehaw" is not a foreign policy!
Posts: 875 | Location: The Emerald City | Registered: 02 January 2007
I watched CNN doing a live broadcast from Oslo with Al Gore [my president], very good, and of course the crowd was behind him and the scientist representing the other half of the Nobel prize winner. They showed a clip of Charles Krauthammer exclaiming the Nobel is always, and only awarded to either an anti-American or anti-Bush, with the fox logo on the clip. The audience knew though, with Gore's appearance, the majority of Americans [of course those who voted for him also] are NOT assholes.
Blaise Pascal Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. Pensees
Posts: 2917 | Location: Sverige | Registered: 21 June 2005
Hon. Jack Layton (Toronto—Danforth, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of the Environment is refusing to sign an accord and is hiding behind the United States and China instead of trying to convince them.
We learned today that the Government of Canada is trying to sabotage the climate change negotiations in Bali. Documents suggest that the government wants to introduce a new clause on “national circumstances”. What is it? It is a clause that would allow Canada to pollute more. This is unacceptable. It is going in the wrong direction.
Why is the government trying to ruin the talks in Bali?
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, nothing could be farther from the truth. The government has proposed that there be an effective international agreement including all the world's largest emitters. The Minister of the Environment has proposed a model, a Canadian environmental success story, the Montreal protocol, as a basis for talks with a view to achieving positive results.
Hon. Jack Layton (Toronto—Danforth, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and the government are serving as the head waiter for George Bush and the big corporate polluters in Bali.
The Conservatives are super-sizing Canadian emissions. They are undermining the boreal forests with the tar sands. They are rewarding their big corporate friends with tax cuts. They are sabotaging the talks in Bali. This is wrecking the reputation of Canadians globally.
Not to be outdone by the Liberals, the government has already received eight fossil of the day awards from the experts at the climate talks.
Why is the government undermining and ruining these talks so it can pollute more? next intervention previous intervention [Table of Contents]
Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it has been many months since the leader of the NDP mentioned George W. Bush in a question, so that is an improvement.
We are concerned about the position of the United States. We believe the United States, China and all major emitters should be part of an international protocol to fight climate change.
The Minister of the Environment has proposed a successful Canadian model, built around fighting depletion of the ozone layer. That was the Montreal protocol.
Canada has made a positive proposal. We are interested in working with other countries to ensure we get a result that includes everyone. If the NDP does not think everyone should be included, it is wrong.
Mr. Pierre Paquette (Joliette, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of the Environment's strategy is becoming increasingly obvious. It consists in slavishly copying the approach adopted by George W. Bush, who does not accept the scientific evidence on global warming so that he can continue to pollute at will.
Recently, the Minister of the Environment declared that there will be no agreement in Bali if the United States refuses to make a commitment. Does this not confirm that Canada has definitely turned its back on Kyoto and is actively working with Bush to derail the Bali conference?
Mr. Mark Warawa (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely wrong. We are in Indonesia working internationally to see a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. The only way that can happen is if everybody participates, everybody gets their oars in the water, everybody, especially the major emitters. The minister of the environment from Quebec said, “We believe that mandatory targets must be imposed upon everyone, and that is, countries must participate in the fight against climate change, including the United States, China and India”.
Mr. Pierre Paquette (Joliette, BQ): Mr. Speaker, this shift is not surprising when we look at the composition of the Canadian delegation to Bali.
The minister has excluded members of the opposition and environmentalists and made room for some private companies, including his oil friends. Is that not indicative of this government's anti-Kyoto position?
Mr. Mark Warawa (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment, CPC): Mr. Speaker, we have a very strong delegation going to Indonesia. It includes three Canadian companies which are leading the way in green technology right here at home, strong leadership including gasification of garbage, carbon capture and storage, and cellulosic ethanol. We are leading the world in technology. We are sharing that, telling the world how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change.
But it said it would not agree a firm target, presented either as an emissions reduction or as a maximum temperature rise.
I guess that they would prefer firm targets based on emission intensities or nothing at all?
quote:
John Kerry, the US senator and losing presidential candidate in 2004, told the Bali event that a Democratic successor to George Bush in 2009 would bring the US fully on board. "Every single Democratic candidate for president has embraced mandatory caps ... and expressed their willingness to immediately be part of the Kyoto discussions and try to find a successor agreement to Kyoto," he said.
Is this true or is this just something to convince the American people to vote for the Democrats over the Republicans. Do all Democrat candidates for President agree on the same caps and are all the Democrat candidates more green than the greenest Republican? I am no way supporting the Repugs here, but it is a legitimate question.
quote:
Wow, one just becomes more and more proud to be an American!
I know how you feel, now that we have Harper as PM - quite embarrassed!
Posts: 771 | Location: Winnipeg | Registered: 06 September 2001
Pressure Warner Brothers to release "The 11th Hour". People will be believe this if they see it. All the talk is pointless unless we can muster a new concensus, a broad understanding of the certain doom unless things change fast.
Warner Brothers has decided to release The 11th Hour in April of 2008. That is way too late for the election cycle. The issues will be shaped in the primaries, and the environment is not the first issue.
Pressure Warner Brothers to release The 11th Hour immediately. Our future depends on it.
Posts: 2 | Location: Compton, AR | Registered: 29 March 2007
Read-Only Topic
