From the Times of India – a “put up or shut up” moment – “we’ll go along if you pay us”.
Excerpts below:
BEIJING: In an unprecedented move, India on Saturday joined China and two other developing countries to prepare for a major offensive on rich nations at the Copenhagen conference on climate change next month.
The four countries, which include Brazil and South Africa, agreed to a strategy that involves jointly walking out of the conference if the developed nations try to force their own terms on the developing world, Jairam Ramesh, the Indian minister for environment and forests (independent charge), said.
“We will not exit in isolation. We will co-ordinate our exit if any of our non-negotiable terms is violated. Our entry and exit will be collective,” Ramesh told reporters in Beijing.
The move comes after reports suggested that rich nations led by Denmark are trying to set the agenda of the conference by presenting a draft containing a set of specific proposals.
…
The four nations issued a joint press release, which made it clear the developed nations should be ready to contribute funds and share green technology if they expected the developing and poor nations to take major actions on environmental protection.
…
The developing nations will also not accept any pressure from developed countries to establish legally binding emission targets at Copenhagen. Developing countries want to be allowed to reduce emissions voluntarily and take what they consider to be “nationally appropriate actions” he said.
Ramesh said India will under no circumstances accept the concept of a peaking year under which each country will have to indicate on what date they will reach the highest level of pollution before beginning to come down.
India will also not accept any unsupported mitigation actions without any effort by developed countries to provide funds and technology support to improve environment in developing nations.
Read the complete article at the Times of India
This entire conference has become a blatant exercise of the transfer of wealth from western nations. So – I really hope they do walk out.
Well good on them. Nor should they accept anything without bucketloads of cash.
Of course the big question is why the hell are the developed nations messing about with this in the first place?
It may not have been great political thinking but the change of Opposition leadership here in Australia – driven by a revolt against an Emissions Trading Scheme – has squashed (almost) any chance of an ETS being passed before Copenhagen.
If Australia, with a green-hued Labor government, can’t pass it, and the US, with uncle O in change can’t pass it, why should the poor countries pay any price at all?
While not quite a walkout we did have a major event in Australian politics today. The climate sceptics in the opposition Liberal party have won an election for control of the party. This will make the passage of Rudd’s ETS scheme though the senate more unlikely, leaving him with nothing to take to Copenhagen.
What a great day…..perhaps the rest of the world might take notice, we have a real head to head battle on climate change in the making.
If this doesn’t show the whole Copenhagen charade is about economics then what does? The whole thing is a farcical summit to throw our money and the developing world, so they can spend it on climate ‘solutions’ made by our businesses.
Meanwhile in the UK, the CRU’s media offensive continues as Richard Black of the BBC comes to the aid of his best mate Phil the Shred.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8387137.stm
For the Western nations it’s Other People’s Money (the taxpayers) anyway and it’s not like politicians don’t love to spend money, so I don’t see this as being a big deal holding them up. These countries are just asking to be bribed.
Isn’t this basically imperialism? The western powers are creating a false fear and telling the developing world they will have to slow down… by what right can they do that?
Sending money to developing countries is no solution. Even assuming any of the money actually gets past the UN’s Kofi-Annanesque blood-sucking bureaucracy, the third-world nations constitute a bottomless pit of greed, corruption, and governmental malfeasance. The money will be used to line the pockets of petty official and their relatives.
I’ve read the draft treaty, including the part where it sets up a government not elected by anyone, takes away US sovereignty, and mandates penalties for non-compliance. Even without Climategate, signature of the Copenhagen Treaty would be an act of treason.
So let me get this straight. Over 50% of the world’s population and the greatest polluters and carbon emitters must not be held responsible for their actions and 100% of the responsibility must be placed on the other less than 50% of the world’s population?
I have a suggestion. How about a global tax on carbon emissions that taxes tons of CO2 per unit of economic output? That way cleaner economies pay less, dirtier economies pay more. That gives incentives for everyone to clean up their act. Each year the “cleanest” economy is chosen (no handicapping!). Each nation pays a tax at a rate on a sliding scale according to their delta from the cleanest. The cleanest nation has a multiplier of 0.10 and the dirtiest a multiplier of 1.00 (pays the full tax rate per ton of CO2).
The tax is collected, turned into Zimbabwe dollars and burned in a power plant that produces the power for UN headquarters. /sarc
All that’s needed to cap this comedy is lots of snowfall, so the bunch of them have to get to the airport in a troika.
‘The developing nations will also not accept any pressure from developed countries to establish legally binding emission targets at Copenhagen. Developing countries want to be allowed to reduce emissions voluntarily and take what they consider to be “nationally appropriate actions” he said.’
Didn’t they read the treaty?
(a) Mitigation commitments by all developed countries are legally binding economy wide
and absolute quantified emission reduction commitments;
(b) Mitigation actions by developing countries are voluntary and nationally appropriate
actions, supported and enabled by technology, finance and capacity-building, which
reduce or avoid emissions relative to baseline. pg 58
It’s already in there.
PS Go Aussies!
Given the state of the UK economy at present, do we count as a ‘poor nation’ yet? Maybe this is Gordon Brown’s cunning plan. Sign Copenhagen, add our PFI debts to our balance sheets and then extend hand.
If on top of ClimateGate the BASIC countries DO end up walking out in Copenhagen, those 2 things together will indeed likely amount to a game-changing tipping point. Here’s to tipping. . . .
James (22:42:05) :
It may not have been great political thinking but the change of Opposition leadership here in Australia – driven by a revolt against an Emissions Trading Scheme – has squashed (almost) any chance of an ETS being passed before Copenhagen.
Actually, the Senate vote will be very interesting. The new leader, Abbott, won by one vote within his party. Labor will be united in the Senate and may get the support of the Greens, which leaves them two votes short of a majority; the Liberals will have to change their vote with near unanimity to block it. The double dissolution election which that would make possible would be disastrous for them, and many Senators would fear for their seats. For some, that would cut short a remaining four years of their term. We shall see.
So the greatest debtor nation in the world have to pay the the ones with the greatest cash surpluses. Its not coincidental that they are also the greatest polluters on the planet.
How stupid can the western left-green coalition get?
I know there is going to be a lot of bashing of developing nations over this. Let’s get one thing straight I don’t believe in AGW.
Here are a few points to consider IMHO.
1) Co2 alarmism originated in the West;
2) The main push today to reduce man-made C02 comes from the West;
3) The average Co2 footprint per person in developing countries is lower than the Wests.
I welcome any corrections from people regarding the above points. Those who want Copenhagen to fail should be thrilled that China, India, Brazil and South Africa are prepared to walk out if their terms are not met as it can only increase the chances of failure imho.
Many people in Mongolia alive in tents and burn coal to keep warm on winter nights that get down to -40. Mongolia is a poor country but has large coal reserves, and no other practical domestic energy sources. This proposal would kill many people.
Just a pre-announced bargaining ploy to demand more cash.
Wow, China would win twice on that one. Free tech AND more US debt to own.
Never mind, I’m sure the West will still agree to unilateral economic disarmament.
Without some background reading I’m unsure of how the “PFI debts” (public finance initiative) correlates with the debt of other countries. The USA has huge commitments for future payments via social security and health plus a few more. The US Govt. uses accounting practices that put corporate executives behind bars and their companies out of business. The truth is the US is deeply in debt but keeps writing IOUs and printing new money as needed. The “cash for clunkers” deal being just one example. Yes, the US and other countries can fashion more money out of thin air but that makes everyone poorer. And the money isn’t really printed so there is nothing to burn as ‘crosspatch’ suggested above.
Imagine my surprise. China “wakes up to global warming”, and the first thing they do is look for the money. Hands up who didn’t see that coming?
Gee guys have you got to go.Watch the door does not hit you on the way out.
As quoted above by Tony (22:47:06) The BBC’s Richard Black is again excelling in more alarmism about Antarctica http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8387137.stm
Basically the proposition from the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) is that the west Antarctica peninsula is smelting due to higher temperatures and whereas the east Antarctica is currently cooler that will not last as the ozone hole fills up with ozone and then gets warmer resulting in “Sea levels are likely to rise by about 1.4m (4ft 6in) globally by 2100 as polar ice melts, according to a major review of climate change in Antarctica.” as the headline proclaims. This is apparently mostly due to the Montreal protecol. Surely somebody with the knowledge ought to respond to this forecast apparently backed by a hundred or so scientists.
I invite everyone to listen to this podcast
http://asx.ljcentral.net/mp3/eir/tls/2009/tls091128_en_hi.mp3
It explain who created the Hadley Center CRU. The Malthusian background of those people explain their motive to push policies and science (bad) for depopulation.
They tried global cooling in the 70’s and now they push warming. The reason behind all this is explained beautifully.
Do they think they will really get the money?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8376874.stm
A relevant story to India’s position on climate change,
“Himalayan glaciers’ ‘mixed picture'”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8355837.stm