Japan in 1997:
Japan today:
Cancún climate change summit: Japan refuses to extend Kyoto protocol
Talks threatened with breakdown after forthright Japanese refusal to extend Kyoto emissions commitments
* John Vidal guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 1 December 2010 18.16 GMT
Japan refuses to extend Kyoto protocol. ‘The forthrightness of the statement took people by surprise,’ said one British official
The delicately balanced global climate talks in Cancún suffered a serious setback last night when Japan categorically stated its opposition to extending the Kyoto protocol – the binding international treaty that commits most of the world’s richest countries to making emission cuts.
The Kyoto protocol was adopted in Japan in 1997 by major emitting countries, who committed themselves to cut emissions by an average 5% on 1990 figures by 2012.
However the US congress refused to ratify it and remains outside the protocol.
The brief statement, made by Jun Arima, an official in the government’s economics trade and industry department, in an open session, was the strongest yet made against the protocol by one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases.
He said: “Japan will not inscribe its target under the Kyoto protocol on any conditions or under any circumstances.”
The move came out of the blue for other delegations at the conference.
more at the Guardian
=========================================================
Reality bites, when Japan says something so blunt, you know they mean it – Anthony
h/t to WUWT reader Steve (Paris)
UPDATE: I’ve made this a “sticky” to stay at the top of WUWT awhile – Anthony
Several climate related documents released through wikileaks. This one about the Maldives shows its all about money and self-benefit to prop up the Maldives. Barely a mention of climate, just getting a deal and getting the money:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/251174
Sorry, perhaps I am not making myself clear. I visit this site every day and make the occasional comment, but I was not intending to provoke a debate here. What I am hopeful of is for a debate to be started among our politicians with this editorial as I am sure most Conservative politicians will receive a copy of the Spectator. If more articles like this start appearing in the press, the politicians are more likely to start thinking about it. They are a bit like sheep and if you can herd them in the right direction………
“biddyb says: December 3, 2010 at 6:55 am . “Some estimate that painting roofs a reflective white on Los Angeles properties would slow the rate of global warming in the city by 90 years.”
Some also estimate that planting Sweet Magic Alfalfa Grass on the roofs of Los Angeles properties will cause the flying Unicorns to slide down their rainbows and graze there.
Some even claim to have already seen this happening, although they also say it is much easier to see if you smoke the grass first.
harrywr2:
At December 3, 2010 at 3:36 pm you say:
“A 1,000 megawatt windfarm costs $1 billion. But since they only work a 3rd of the time we need 3 of them.”
No! Since they only work a 3rd of the time we need none of them.
They only work a 3rd of the time because they only work when the wind is strong enough and not too strong. So, having three times as many means three times as many not working for 2/3rds of the time.
But we need power all the time. The power stations needed for 2/3rds of the time have to keep working on spinning standby – using their fuel and producing their emissions – for the 1/3rd of the time the windfarms operate. Were it not for the windfarms then they would be supplying electricity during that 1/3rd of the time.
So, the only addition that the windfarms provide to power generation is cost.
And your cost calculations are nonsense. If renewables were cost competitive with fossil fuels then they would not need their enormous subsidies.
Richard
I was reading this storie on a Website for this Green movement here in Montreal and they were kind of shocked…..
Seem like that there is lots of infighting in there. From what i can read, the only one left this year are the Extremist. You have Shaman with follower dancing for the earth. You have Vegetarien that are telling you that Carrotes are our only way too save the earth. You have Vegan that are throwing vegetable at thoses who eat meat. You got Guru’s and there Gaia worshipper and they are all fighint against each other.
I’ve also read that even in the negociation room, president from south american country are even claiming that they are there for the Earth spirit and were starting too pray in the room.
In short, its a total Freak show this years and its going nowhere.
George Monbiot asks “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2010/dec/02/cancun-climate-change-summit-monbiot
Of course, God may not actually listen to George – but then again who knows – for sure high profile eco-activists all share the righteous conviction that they are on some kind of salvation mission.
[snip. Take the d-word elsewhere. ~dbs, mod.]
“BY 2030, climate change will indirectly cause nearly one million deaths a year and inflict $US157 billion ($161.21 billion) in damage in terms of today’s economy, according to estimates presented at UN talks. “
The current and past years semi-global freeze ups/white-outs have already caused that much cost (most probably) and thousands of deaths, not inderctly, but directly, not to mention the hindreds of thousands of farm animals that have died in Mongolia, China and other countries during the past three years, both hemispheres.
As a matter of fact, 40 people have already died, directly, not indirectly, of the cold in Europe only.
But the worst part of the big lie is that such warmist/alarmist statements are always predictions for the future and never actual real cases in the present or the past. They just remind me of the sandwich-board man walking up and down main street, telling us to repent, because the end is nigh. Such fools have been with us since the dawn of time. The only difference is that the are being given much importance by the MSM and politicians. In the good old times, they used to be laughed at and pilloried with rotten cabages in the public square.
But times are changing. Japan, US, France, Canada, Australia, Russia, they’re all in one way or another slipping away quitely from the AGW commitments.
Banzai Nihon!
Feet2theFire says:
December 3, 2010 at 10:47 pm
‘The tipping point has come and gone…
After Climategate, the warmers no longer have their soapbox to themselves, and with their mojo gone, they are being abandoned on all sides.
THEY DID IT TO THEMSELVES’
The Prince of Wales says – Climategate scientists were treated ‘appallingly’
The Prince said this during a speech at London’s Science Museum yesterday to open a £4.5 million Atmosphere gallery, the Prince said that climate science”has taken a battering of late”.
He pointed out that the University of East Anglia (CRU) is not a campaigning NGO, nor an industry lobby group. However he did fail to point out that they wielded (past tense hopefully) enormous political influence by supplying and ‘filtering’ most of the material used in IPCC reports. The summaries of which were further manipulated for the benefit of non-scientific politicians and Princes such as himself.
He also failed to point out that despite three enquiries, the events (ie leaked emails showing that the rsearchers manipulted and suppressed data to back up the theory of man-made global warming) are still not clear.
The final enquiry cleared the scientists of any dishonesty or exaggerating the extent of global warming.
But it said they had been “unhelpful” and not sufficiently open about research that supported the case for man-made global warming. To say that this is ‘apalling treatment’ is nothing short of apalling hyperbole.
The Prince has said that sceptics used “pseudoscience” and “intimidation” to stop the world from addressing global warming. He said more and more people were listening to the “siren voices” of sceptics who claimed the theory of man-made global warming was a “sinister attempt to undermine the capitalist system”.
Clearly the Prince will be OK on his large estates when the rest of us go back to a feudal existence of subsistence farming.
Anyway keep up the battering; and no-one asked Professor Jones to stand down he did it himself.
Here’s another analysis from thenewamerican.com – not sure it has been mentioned in this thread before.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/
Here’s another analysis from thenewamerican.com – not sure it has been mentioned in this thread before.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/tech-mainmenu-30/environment/5384-carbon-credits-market-could-collapse-absent-cancun-deal
Boy, this post really brought out the wingnuts in force. Japan says, in no uncertain terms, “we won’t continue to support a law that punishes us for doing the right thing, while the large-scale criminals get a free pass – but we WILL support a law that punishes all criminals equally” – and everyone whoops “See! Japan wants to legalize it too!”
“The biggest problem is that an agreement has not been reached on a framework in which all major emitters will participate,” Minamikawa told the Japanese news agency Kyodo.
The degree of scientific illiteracy demonstrated in these comments is so deep and so thorough, that I don’t think there’s any hope, ever, that reason or data will change these people’s minds.
I think science’s biggest mistake in the whole issue was not calling it “global weirding” before the media got to label it. The term would better explain its effect on local phenomena as well as its effect on human culture and belief. I expect the transition to understanding to be no more smooth than the transition towards the modern understanding that supernatural beings in religion are a crock of poo. That transition has taken some two hundred years, and STILL isn’t anywhere near over.
R Stevenson says:
December 4, 2010 at 9:23 am
“The Prince of Wales says…”
More from the UK’s best example of the negative impacts of genetic bottlenecks:
“Prince Charles yesterday urged the world to follow Islamic ‘spiritual principles’ in order to protect the environment.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285332/Follow-Islamic-way-save-world-Charles-urges-environmentalists.html#ixzz0qVedA7z5
Grey Lensman says: December 4, 2010 at 1:50 am
Thank you, so its [+2C] not catastrophic, just a problem. In other words pure drama.
There is plenty of ground between “pure drama” and “total catastrophe”. At +2C water security becomes a significant issue for many countries due to their dry season river flow being augmented by glacial melt. An arc of countries from Pakistan through South East Asia to China would be impacted for example. Would this mark the end of civilization? No. Could it entail social disruption, hardship, high cost etc? Yes.
Trevor posted this relevant link (December 4, 2010 at 1:55 pm) in Tips & Notes:
Feet2theFire says: December 3, 2010 at 10:47 pm
tokyoboy says: December 3, 2010 at 11:37 pm
R Stevenson says: December 4, 2010 at 9:23 am
Al Gored says: December 4, 2010 at 1:33 pm
Water ways, catchments and population are important. As is argy-bargy that is continuing with the fight over property and what research is done to contribute and/or shape that debate. Including the expenditure shaped by the research and policies.
http://www.wepa-db.net/policies/state/japan/japan.htm
Lough Neagh http://www.loughneagh.com/
though this map may be more suitable? http://wikimapia.org/4823067/Lough-Neagh-Loch-nEathach
Property concerns and rights : -http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1488909/Earls-death-casts-cloud-over-troubled-waters.html
Notes on Mercury in the Environment – Whats going on? (health inc IQ: nutrition: fish) Robert Ferguson http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/notes_on_mercury.pdf
Oh dear, Ammonite, now I am truly confused. If it gets warmer, more glacier melt and South East Asian rivers are saved. But if it gets colder, The glaciers stop melting and the rivers dry up.
But
The monsoon rains save the day because as it gets warmer, there is more evaporation, more river flow.
See drama, not catastrophe.
Grey Lensman says: December 4, 2010 at 9:54 pm
If it gets warmer, more glacier melt and South East Asian rivers are saved. But if it gets colder, The glaciers stop melting and the rivers dry up. But The monsoon rains save the day because as it gets warmer, there is more evaporation, more river flow.
More glacial melt is what we have now. The problem is that it is not sustainable. In the extreme, as is happening in some parts of the Andes, a glacier can vanish altogether (the equivalent of a dam running dry). There comes a point where dry season river flows are reduced.
Intensification of monsoon rains definitionally occurs in the wet season. One can imagine a shift to wetter wets and drier dries. I normally don’t describe building additional dams as “pure drama”. Such an adaptation approach would be in the “high costs” column mentioned upstream. As I mentioned above, I do not think +2C represents catastrophe. I don’t think it is trivial either.
Ammonite:
You say;
“As I mentioned above, I do not think +2C represents catastrophe. I don’t think it is trivial either.”
Perhaps you are right. If so then we will need to adapt.
One thing is certain, though. Effects of constraining the use of fossil fuels at their present levels would be horrific, and effects of reducing their use would be catastrophic.
Richard
Richard S Courtney says: December 5, 2010 at 7:34 am
One thing is certain, though. Effects of constraining the use of fossil fuels at their present levels would be horrific, and effects of reducing their use would be catastrophic.
Hi Richard. I’ve found David McKay’s analysis (http://www.withouthotair.com/) very useful in thinking about the engineering scale required to reduce fossil fuel usage. Uncomfortably for the environmental movement, it requires more than a few wind farms to accomplish any transition.