This is the draft of the Copenhagen Climate Change Treaty currently out of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change working group dated September 15th.
Thanks to Alan MacRae for providing it to me. To get an idea of the kinds of things being proposed, I provide it here with some excerpts below. Readers that wish to highlight some other excerpts should do so in comments.
Page 62:
33. Each Party’s national schedule shall include:
(a) A long-term national greenhouse gas emissions limitation or reduction pathway;
(b) A country-driven nationally appropriate mitigation strategy, differentiated in terms of the ambition, timing and scope of its mitigation commitments or actions, which could be, inter alia, project-based, sectoral or economy-wide.
(c) Each Party’s nationally appropriate mitigation strategy shall include:
(i) Except for the least developed countries and small island developing States,
quantified emissions limitation or reduction commitments for 2020, consistent
with its long-term national greenhouse gas emissions limitations or reduction
pathway, subject to regular review; and
(ii) Measurable, reportable and verifiable mitigation policies and measures to meet its quantified emissions limitation or reduction commitments for 2020, as appropriate, and to support its national greenhouse gas emissions limitations or reduction pathway, subject to regular review.
34. All countries prepare low emission development strategies. Note that further paragraphs would be required to describe in more detail their function and relationship to the national schedules described above and a potential facilitative/matching platform.
35. All Parties shall develop and regularly update and submit information relating to the implementation of their nationally appropriate mitigation strategies. Such information shall be reviewed and verified according to agreed rules and guidelines.
36. All Parties, except for the least developed countries and small island developing States, shall develop and regularly update and submit a national inventory of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol.
37. National inventories shall be:
(a) Undertaken in accordance with the latest agreed Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories; and
(b) Submitted, reviewed and verified according to agreed frequencies, rules and guidelines.
===
Page 122, Item 17 is quite troubling.
15. [Developed country Parties [shall][should] provide support to developing country Parties, particularly those specified in Articles 4.8 and 4.9 of the Convention, in order to allow developing country Parties to address issues related to social and environmental development, economic diversification, risk assessment, modelling and insurance to prevent the adverse effects of the spillover effects.] Alternative to paragraph 15:
[In the implementation of paragraphs 11 (c)11 and 11 (d)12 above (159.1 and 159.2 in FCCC/AWGLCA/2009/INF.1) , through the provision of financial resources, including for access, development and transfer of technology, at agreed full incremental costs in accordance with Article 4.3 of the Convention;
Recognizing that there are ways and means to reduce or avoid such impacts through careful and informed selection of policies and measures, to evaluate the effectiveness of existing tools, and to consider new ones, in order to assist developing country Parties in addressing these impacts.]
16. [Adverse economic and social consequences of response measures [shall][should] be addressed by proper economic, social and environmental actions, including promoting and supporting economic diversification and the development and dissemination of win-win technologies in the affected countries, paying particular attention to the needs and concerns of the poorest and most vulnerable developing country Parties.]
Alternative to paragraph 16:
[Adverse economic and social consequences of response measures shall be addressed by various means, including but not limited to promoting, supporting and enabling economic diversification, funding, insurance and the development, transfer and dissemination of win-win technologies in the affected countries, such as cleaner fossil fuel technologies, gas flaring reduction, and carbon capture and storage technologies.]
17. [[Developed [and developing] countries] [Developed and developing country Parties] [All Parties] [shall] [should]:]
(a) Compensate for damage to the LDCs’ economy and also compensate for lost opportunities, resources, lives, land and dignity, as many will become environmental refugees;
(b) Africa, in the context of environmental justice, should be equitably compensated for environmental, social and economic losses arising from the implementation of response measures.
Sponsored IT training links:
Actualtests offers complete 650-177 exam package with latest 70-648 dumps and 70-293 lab tutorials to provide guaranteed success.
The only reason Blair is being made president is to make Brits feel comfortable with EU rule. It’s like an American political party using an ethnic minority president to do the dirty work of elitists from the ethnic majority. It’s a public relations strategy.
If these people actually begin to succeed they may well be responsible for instigating WWIII.
Their ignorance is only exceeded by their arrogance.
Their is very little we can do about the former, but I sure as hell hope we can do something about the ladder.
It looks like it will be a brave new world we will live in.
In trying to find out why Preseident bush shocked every one by saying “NO”, a very strong “NO” to kyoto, I came up with things like this.
“The protocol is flawed for several reasons,” and Constance D Holmes goes on to explain her rather lengthy reasons to the House Committee on Science Feb 4th 1998. I will pick out just one or two phrases.
“First, the agreement reached at Kyoto on December 10-11, 1997 is not an effective or equitable climate policy and may never be regardless of U.S. efforts. Etc”
“Secondly, implementing the Kyoto protocol would result in serious harm to the U.S. economy, to U.S. families, workers and businesses. Here it is important to note that the Kyoto Protocol would require the U.S. to cede to a UN bureaucracy the powers we now use to set the pace of our economic growth, our production of goods and services, and the creation of new jobs. This form of unilateral economic disarmament makes no sense.”
“Third, as costly as the regulatory regime that would be created by the Kyoto Protocol in its present form might be, it would produce little or no discernible environmental benefit, as the Chairman Emeritus of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change, Bert Bolin, pointed out in an article in SCIENCE on January 16 1998. Etc.”
· It sets a U.S. emissions target, which cannot be met without causing severe economic and social dislocation.
· It transfers power to UN bureaucrats who could intrude into U.S. legislative and Constitutional processes by controlling U.S. economic growth, limiting the conduct of foreign policy by exempting only those greenhouse emissions that occur from UN sponsored “multilateral operations”.
· cost are a “stealth tax” on American consumers and businesses and it increases a UN bureaucracy that likely would be dominated by countries quite willing to use provisions in the Kyoto Protocol to impose economic and social change on U.S. families, workers and businesses–for little, if any, environmental gain.
On July 15th 1999 the Testimony of Jack Kemp before the House of Representatives “to speak on the alleged threat of man-made global warming; that treaty’s implications for both the world economy and the American system of government; and proposed legislation concerning so-called “early action credits” to reward hypothetical reductions in fossil fuel emissions. These credits are touted by some as offering a “market approach” enabling us to regulate the future climate of the Earth. As I hope to demonstrate, they are nothing of the kind: instead, they are truly market socialism, an artificial device attempting to mimic market activity that really conceals a concerted campaign by international bureaucrats to seize control of the world’s energy supply and indeed of every facet of our economic life.”
Very strong words–I continue–
“The Kyoto Protocol, the idea of trading credits to facilitate implementation of that agreement, and the very concept of regulating the word’s energy policies through an international treaty together constitute a huge battle over power–not just “power” in the sense of controlling the energy sources that drive the world economy, but political power in the sense of “who decides”; who decides how fast our economy should grow (or if it should grow at all), who decides etc, etc”
An article by Philip Stott, on 12th April 2001 holds one or two “facts”, although I cannot verify any of them. “European politicians, who like to focus on country-by country comparisons which are, in geographical terms, meaningless, have carefully nurtured the myth that the USA is the main producer of carbon dioxide (CO2). But how can you compare tiny counties, like the UK (only 94,227 square miles) or Sweden (173,723 square miles), with the USA (3,732,400 square miles)? Any meaningful geographical comparison has to be with Western Europe as a whole, or at least with the 15 Member States of the European Union (EU) and even the EU, at 1,249,000 square miles, has well under half the land area of the USA.”
“If we take the carbon dioxide emissions from consumption and flaring of fossil fuels for 1999 (1), we see that the countries of the EU emit around 925 million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCe) per year, while the USA emits 1519.89 MMTCe per year. Correcting these figures by area gives us 0.0007 MMTCe per square mile per year for the EU and 0.0004 MMTCe per square mile for the USA. So the per unit area production in the EU is 175 percent that of the USA. And this does not include emissions from EU applicant states, like Turkey (49.96 MMTCe in 1999)”
Oooooops!
Governments, world or national, only last until they push the people too far. That fact has been true throughout history, especially in the last millenium. It will continue to be true. They can pass whatever they want, but when they get to pushing to far, they will see the consequences.
I’m from NH. Live Free or Die is not just a hollow motto. It CAN happen again.
The more I think about the Pied Piper image of Climate Science, the more I like it.
But hey, let’s dance the Emperor’s New Clothes since this is Copenhagen, home of Hans Christian Andersen who understood all these tricky issues and used the language that children could not miss, to convey and remember deep truths.
This is all just the final vestiges of a 40 year fantasy/effort to create some type of international elite driven Nirvana here on earth. These crackpots know that nearly 20% of the annual world’s GDP is generated by the US. Without this wealth generation even China and India’s economies would sputter and eventually contract.
Just this morning there was a report that even the WMF is running out of cash. The 2008-2009 liquidity crisis never went away. The US debt ridden federal government had an oppurtunity earlier this year not only to stabilize the banks (which they did to some degree of success), but to also lay the foundations of turning away from depending on debt to subsidize our growth, and to put the dollar by a on firmer footing. Instead we got more of the same plus more.
The UN can dream up all of the crazy wealth distribution schemes it wants (which is what Cap and Trade is); but without wealth generation even the UN and all of its agencies will have to close up shop. The Alarmists have had a very nice subsidized ride these last 3-4 decades. The US and Europe for a period of time had the luxury to finance the “scientific research”, and subsidize the seemingly infinite NGOs that do nothing but scheme.
But no one told these people one little truth: The Gravy Train has left the station and it isn’t coming back any time soon.
“All Parties, … shall develop and regularly update and submit a national inventory of anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of all gases not controlled by the Montreal Protocol.”
Well that takes all the fun out of farting in public.
I mean, if you have to fill out a form, everyone will know who did it.
“Adverse economic and social consequences of response measures”
(you know – mass unemployment, riot, starvation/hypothermia … the usual five year plan fallout)
To be addressed by “promoting and supporting economic diversification”. Diversification into what exactly? Given that, in a developed, dynamic economy any economically viable niches that may appear are quickly filled, exactly what niches has the UN identified that everybody else on the planet missed for so long?
“the development and dissemination of win-win technologies in the affected countries”. Only a life long academic could come up with this one. So… in addition to having found huge unfilled holes in the economy, capable of creating millions of replacement jobs (that everyone else missed) the UN also brings you …… Technologies (win-win of course!) they see but the rest of the free market has missed.
So… We are asked to exchange real jobs and economically viable technologies for UN magical jobs and magical technologies. Of course they are not magical, they will appear… via taxation. Taxing success to fund mediocrity has always been one available option in the five year plan.
Anyone over a certain age will have first hand experience of just how well this all turns out. Round and round we go … this time it’s different .. it’s global.
What it amounts to is the poor people in rich countries giving money to the rich people in poor countries.
While I agree in principle to most of your post, I must take exception to “came from you colonists”. “No taxation without representation” was the centre piece of the civil wars fought in these tiny islands over a century earlier.
Back to your post .. the civil war never goes away. At some point it always becomes obvious that the only way to defend your life is to declare war on the parasites that would steal the wood you have collected to keep you through the winter.
I’m reminded of a discussion I once had with a Nicaraguan civic leader who
told me that foreigners who build factories in Nicaragua have an obligation
to “give back to the community.”
I tried to suggest that they were already giving a lot by
taking the astronomical risk of investing money to create jobs
in an unstable, extremely poor country with a corrupt
and malfunctioning legal system.
…then I realized that he really meant “they should give back to ME.”
Forced “Vow of poverty” based on the religion of AGW. What’s up with that?
I always thought that this was a political and economic programme, and that the science was framed with a metaphysic to make it look credible. Effectively however, it will make financially ambitious governments and carbon traders in the West wealthier, by creating taxes and credits out of fresh air.
Expect utility bills to skyrocket to pay for this racket/organised crime.
One wonders: Given that the metaphysic is that of increasing temperatures that GCM’s infer, now that it is cooling, perhaps we should be rebated/refunded according to the temperature?
I’m also given to understand that the USA is an enormous carbon sink
Expat in France (01:30:01) :
What I find really frightening is the way we’ve allowed it all to happen. Too late, now. Prepare for a return to the Dark Ages, to strife, warfare, desertification, to pestilence and disease, and the collapse of society as we knew it.
_________________________________
The beauty of the plan is, that when good things happen, the social engineers can crow about how much they have accomplished. When bad things happen (such as mentioned above) they will just say that we haven’t done enough, and the solution, of course is to relinquish more of our freedoms– to the elite rulers.
I for one, welcome our new Malthusian overlords. /snark
Mark Twain once said(when you find yourself on the side of the majority its time to pause and reflect), if we don,t ditch man made global warming theory now we never will.This is the time.
Has my Government signed up for this claptrap?
NOT IN MY NAME!
An excellent means for improving the lot of any undeveloped or developing country is simply to look at the US patent office.
There are presently just more than 7.5 million issued patents in their database. Of these, approximately 6 million are in the public domain through expiration, therefore free for anyone, anywhere, to use. No license required; merely read it, make it, and sell it.
http://patft.uspto.gov/
There are many more patents, also free for the user, in other patent offices around the world.
This situation is not new, but has existed for decades. One of the keys to economic growth is a legally enforceable patent system that rewards innovation.
3×2: My understanding of the phrase “No taxation without representation” came from the colonialists following the passing of the stamp act and prior to the war of independence.
Anybody watch “Our Man Flint” on Saturday? Really good/bad 1966 movie that spoofs the idea of climate control.
OUR MAN FLINT: This comic send-up of James Bond films features Derek Flint (James Coburn), a dapper secret agent who, like 007, uses wacky contraptions to get himself out of sticky situations. And, like Bond, he’s also habitually surrounded by beauteous babes. In OUR MAN FLINT, a deranged trio of scientists has devised a way to rule the world by manipulating the Earth’s climate: they can send icebergs crashing into the Mediterranean or create volcanic eruptions on cue. Flint is hired by Z.O.W.I.E. (The Zonal Organization for World Intelligence and Espionage) to use his powers of deduction, destruction, and, most of all, seduction to save the day. Decades later, the FLINT films would be referenced in yet another spy spoof series, AUSTIN POWERS.
Fantasy aside, now that’s an inconvenient truth. The UN group ought to be strapped to chairs and made to watch that silly movie as often as it takes before they finally admit to climatidity.
REPLY:Long a fan of that movie, I have the “Flint phone” as my cellphone ring tone, which I’ll provide here for anyone who wants it. -Anthony
Our Man Flint Telephone (MP3)
I’ve tried to read it, but my brain’s started to dribble out of my ears.
However, politicians will glady sign up for it, slap each others backs, toast the success of the meeting with champagne, get a few good dinners (All on our tab, of course!), put out press releases saying how they’re saving the world, then quietly ignore it, 2020s a long way away and we’ll have a few changes of government bewtween then & now anyway.
For those who are banking on the US Senate to block the Copenhagen Treaty’s punitive sanctions from becoming reality in the US, remember who leads various bureaucracies in Washington DC. 1-Carol Browner, Director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy. In addition to having [in my view] a radical “pro-green”/anti-capitalist regulatory history, she was, until 2008, a member of the Socialist International’s Commission for a Sustainable World Society. Obviously, she has socialist/internationalist leanings. 2-John Holdren, science czar, who has consistently predicted planetary doom because of overpopulation, industrialization, etc. Even the NYTs has noticed Dr. Holdren’s horrible record on prognostications [note his bet with economist Julian Simon]. Plus, he has written favorably, with ecologist Paul Ehrlich, concerning the legality and advisability of mandatory abortions, mass sterilization and inserting birth control chemicals in the water supply – all in the name of saving the planet. 3- Commerce Secretary Gary Locke who has already stated that U.S. consumers should pay for part of Chinese greenhouse-gas emissions. 4-Stephen Chu, US Energy Secretary, has stated that: “climate change is the greatest challenge facing science.”
All of the above, of course, ignores the recently “retired” “Green Jobs Czar”, Van Jones. In short, the Obama administration is, consciously and purposefullly, filled with those who sympathize very clearly with socialist/internationalist policies and who are very clearly in the AGW camp. Our freedoms and our national sovereignty are in peril – and I’m not at all sure I believe the US Senate can be trusted to protect them. What the Obama administration may not be able to accomplish through ratification of a Copenhagen treaty, it may be able to accomplish through the regulatory process, all without congressional oversight.
The US people voted for Obama – a socialist. Now it’s time to pay the bill for your mistake and get poorer. In Europe we have been suffering for many years. Socialism and communism => poor, capitalism and free markets => wealth. Even the Chinese understand this basic fact. UN is a hoax with its political non-scientific global warming agenda.