DEAUVILLE, France: Russia, Japan and Canada told the G8 they would not join a second round of carbon cuts under the Kyoto Protocol at United Nations talks this year and the US reiterated it would remain outside the treaty, European diplomats have said.
The future of the Kyoto Protocol has become central to efforts to negotiate reductions of carbon emissions under the UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, whose annual meeting will take place in Durban, South Africa, from November 28 to December 9.
Developed countries signed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. They agreed to legally binding commitments on curbing greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.
Those pledges expire at the end of next year. Developing countries say a second round is essential to secure global agreements.
But the leaders of Russian, Japan and Canada confirmed they would not join a new Kyoto agreement, the diplomats said.
They argued that the Kyoto format did not require developing countries, including China, the world’s No. 1 carbon emitter, to make targeted emission cuts.
At last Thursday’s G8 dinner the US President, Barack Obama, confirmed Washington would not join an updated Kyoto Protocol, the diplomats said.
The US, the second-largest carbon emitter, signed the protocol in 1997 but in 2001 the then president, George W. Bush, said he would not put it to the Senate for ratification.
Agence France-Press, 29 May 2011
h/t to Dr. Benny Peiser
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Latitude says:
May 29, 2011 at 10:31 am
Well, that just hung the UK, New Zealand, and Australia out to dry………..
——-
But see this: http://www.theage.com.au/national/emissions-surge-to-record-level-20110530-1fctm.html
“The alarming report came as the Gillard government prepared to embrace an ambitious new target to cut Australia’s emissions by as much as 80 per cent by 2050 as part of a deal on carbon pricing with the Greens and independent MPs.”
Just as potty as the UK politicians.
“… Could be that China’s for example, far exceeds that of the US in a few years. At the rate things are going at present, that of the US might be even lower than, say Brazil’s. Enjoy.” – Douglas
Douglas, Don’t believe the hype. Econmic growth does not translate directly into increased standard of living for the populace. I’ve lived and worked in both China and Brazil. In the field of contract labor they’re both known as low cost labor centers. It would take generations for the standards of living in China or Brazil to begin to compare to that of the USA especially Brazil.
Theo Goodwin says:
May 29, 2011 at 5:22 pm
Frank K. says:
May 29, 2011 at 4:44 pm
“* When someone you know starts blabbering about “the planet,” please ask them to be more specific and tell you which “planet” they are referring to… “the planet” is such an idiotic way to refer to “the Earth”!”
Everybody writing in English seems to have a nervous tic when it comes to naming Earth. The most prominent version of the nervous tic removes the capitalization. People write “the earth.” No one writes “the mars” or the “the jupiter.” Another form of the tic keeps the capitalization but adds a gratuituous ‘the’, as in “That planet is the Earth.” No one writes “That planet is the Uranus.”
My guess is that the nervous tic exists because we can refer to “the earth” beneath our feet, which means the ground we stand on. Blokes working with electrical wiring face another temptation because they are often tempted to “earth it,” meaning “ground it.”
=========================================================
Theo, it’s no tic. The English language is what it is.
“Synonyms
3. Earth, globe, world are terms applied to the planet on which we dwell. Earth is used especially in speaking of a condition of existence contrasted with that in heaven or hell: those who are yet on earth. Globe formerly emphasized merely the roundness of the earth: to circumnavigate the globe. It is now used more like world, with especial application to the inhabitants of the earth and their activities, interests, and concerns. In this sense, both globe and world are more inclusive than earth and are used more abstractly: the politics of the globe; the future of the world; One World.”
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/earth
“The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don’t just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.”
–James D. Nicoll
Is it any wonder that Russia is out?
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2011/05/16/the-ipcc-the-uk-and-climate-censorship/
re: “The US, the second-largest carbon emitter, signed the protocol in 1997 but in 2001 the then president, George W. Bush, said he would not put it to the Senate for ratification.” — from the article.
Awww… LET them “blame Bush.”
I’ve got a strong feeling that if they insist on hanging our lack of Kyoto ratification on Bush, then in time Bush will come down as the hero who stopped this BS in the US. Let them skip over Clinton in their fury to “get” Bush. It will come back to bite them big time.
David, the German announcement is meaningless. Eleven years from now is an eternity in politics, and that’s all this is, politics. It was made solely to keep the Green slime off the government’s back and to avoid as many costly losses in state elections as possible. It’s no more a statement of German future energy policy than claiming that a match factory is the new great home heating source.
“The US, the second-largest carbon emitter, signed the protocol in 1997 but…”
No, the U.S. did not sign the protocol…VP Al Gore did. Prior to a ratification by the Senate, under the U.S. Constitution the President has no authority to obligate the U.S. to such a document (even though he went around the world telling other governments that he did), and such a pre-signature is just an acceptance for review by the Senate. The Senate, on the other hand, has no authority to negotiate the terms…simply the sole power to accept or deny.
The attempt was made at least since 2003…but it was illegal for the Executive Branch to intercede in the independence of these organizations. To change this required the consent of Congress, and in particular Senator Christopher Dodd.
clype says: May 30, 2011 at 3:03 pm
“The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don’t just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.”
–James D. Nicoll
Great! And a cribhouse whore I shall be determined to remain, so as to broaden and sharpen my observations and contribute to the debate.
If the governments of the world ever manage to lower the carbon content in our atmosphere all life forms on the planet will become extinct with out a doubt, planet earth will become a dead moon.
Regards Dave.
Germany just announced that they will phase out all of their nuclear power by 2022. Germany will either announce that they will not join the second round of Kyoto, or they will sign it and completely ignore it. By eliminating their nuclear plants there is no way their CO2 production will not go up markedly over the next decade.
Fode Greenpeace. Darn typos, where do they come from!
—-
I blame George Bush.
I would love everyone’s standard of living to be brought up to USA. Do you think the world can sustain this level?
—
Easily. It could sustain twice the population at twice the level of prosperity without breaking a sweat.
Dear all,
First, there is no scoop in this G8 announcement ; Canada, Japan, Russia and the US against any renewal of Kyoto, this is what was said by same @ur momisugly Cancum in December 2010
Second, Europe remains the only significant region in the world volunteering for CO2 emission control : again no scoop
Third, Germany’s withdrawal from nuclear power will delay any CO2 reduction in Europe, as coal, lignit and natural gas will relay the atom for base power, and any further development of wind and PV in Germany (which by the way will quickly face federal budget limitations, see current plans for reducing again PV feed in tarifs) will most probably fail reducing the CO2 bill. This may trigger a rift in the European front…
davidmhoffer says: May 29, 2011 at 10:15 pm
“All they need do is the same thing the western world did to get rich. Become free market democracies. It isn’t my fault that the 3rd world is rife ”
You and others totally miss my point. If the whole world had the same standard of living as the USA then resources would last a couple of decades even if magically vast reserves are discovered.
The western world can exist at this level only because others work for peanuts producing our goods and can never be alowed to consume as the west does.
The figures quoted way above are correct (within reason).
walt man;
The western world can exist at this level only because others work for peanuts producing our goods and can never be alowed to consume as the west does.>>>
Oh poppycock. Your position is predicated upon the notion that the amount of wealth in the world is finite. If that were true we’d all still be living in caves with no hope of anything better, ever. As for the notion that our standard of living is dependant upon slave labour, again, poppycock. The portion of western income that goes to 3rd world countries to make shoes and shirts is tiny in comparison to the portion that goes into goods and services within the 1st world itself. What the 3rd world doesn’t spend on weapons to kill each other with gets pocketed by corruption and tyrannical leaders. Put an end to that and suddenly the 3rd world peasant isn’t a peasant anymore. Over time they build their own wealth by investing in their own homes, starting small businesses which grow into big businesses. A few decades later you’ll get protests in the 1st world about these upstart foreigners who are buying up all “our” companies. Remember when Japan was poor? South Korea? Singapore? Now we whine when “their” multi-nationals buy “our” multi-nationals. Did North America become poorer because they became richer? Did western Europe grow poorer because dirt poor eastern Europe joined the free world? NO! Economies shifted, trading patterns changed, but over all – everyone got wealthier.
What we lose in cheap shoes we gain back tenfold in trade.
It’s funny how rather than taking advantage of video conferencing technology, these [hundreds of] leaders on global warming and reducing gas emissions choose to fly around the world several times a year to hold meetings to discuss how they can help the environment. I hope there’s good sightseeing in Durban, South Africa, so at least they’ll get something done.
Also, if Kyoto 1 wasn’t successful, what more drastic action will be necessary?