Uh oh. From the NYT, a harbinger of failure. But then again looking at Copenhagen and Cancun, why should this meeting in Durban be any different?
Nations Heading to Durban Climate Talks Remain Deeply Divided – NYTimes.com
U.N. climate chief Christiana Figueres lauded a climate change meeting in Panama as “good progress” this weekend, even as environmental activists warned that the world’s only structure for curbing greenhouse gas emissions appears about to crumble.
…
“South Africa is the tipping point in terms of the future of the climate regime,” said Tasneem Essop, international climate policy advocate for the World Wildlife Fund in South Africa.
…
Figueres on Friday lauded the European Union for helping to launch “constructive discussions” and said “governments are exploring those middle-ground solutions that would allow them to go forward with a second commitment period.”
Yet the United States, which is not a party to Kyoto but as the world’s largest historic carbon emitter is central to the future of the climate regime, appears to be putting the kibosh on such a compromise.
Speaking at a wrap-up press conference in Panama, U.S. Deputy Envoy Jonathan Pershing acknowledged that “the uncertainty over a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol is a source of anxiety for many parties.” But in describing the E.U. proposal, Pershing said, “We do not believe that conditions are ripe in Durban for a legally binding agreement.”
Maybe it has to do with trust?
From ClickGreen: Carbon markets still a “fraudster’s playground”, report claims
h/t to Tom Nelson
Wealthy countries must agree unilaterally to cut steeper emissions, and poorer ones would cut carbon voluntarily after financial assistance from the rich.
Since ‘Wealth’ equals Assets minus Liabilities, wonder who they are talking about.
http://usdebtclock.org/
At the bottom it shows total Assets at $78,352 Billion and Liabilities of $115,912 Billion
We are not wealthy anymore.
Aw, give ’em a break. Right now, they’re mulling over the decision to switch to a new Kyoto Treaty, and this one will require Carbon Emitting shares. You get credits for helping to stop Global Cooling by how much CO2 you belch out, and debits if your factory does not meet it’s quota.
You must act quicky, though, because as soon as the Climate shifts out of neutral, Carbon Belching shares are expected to surge through the roof.
Why the Debate Over Global Warming is Academic
Posted by Robert Rapier on Monday, October 10, 2011
http://www.consumerenergyreport.com/2011/10/10/why-the-debate-over-global-warming-is-academic/
“The U.S. and EU have reduced their global share of carbon emissions as well as their overall amount of carbon emissions over the past decade. There are several reasons for that, but the demand drop due to rising oil prices played a big role. However, the reductions have been totally swamped by increases in the Asia Pacific region. That same trend holds true for Africa, the Middle East, and Central and South America (and I have created a graphic that details the carbon dioxide emission growth for each region). The Western world can debate and discuss all we want, but carbon dioxide emissions are going to be dictated by the developing world. In fact, all carbon dioxide emissions from the U.S. and EU could go to zero, and it would only take us back to where emissions were in 1994 — and they would still be rapidly increasing.
“Carbon emissions are declining across the developed world, but most of the world’s population resides in the developing world. Overall carbon dioxide emissions in developing countries are already higher than in the developed world, but per capita energy usage is very low. Thus, it is extremely hard to imagine any scenario other than carbon dioxide emissions that continue to increase at least until fossil fuels simply become scarce/unaffordable. This will largely be driven by countries like China and India that have huge populations who crave better living standards. Try to convince India that they have to reduce their carbon emissions when the average Indian consumes a fraction of the energy of the average Westerner, and they will probably laugh at you.
Along with your suicide note prediction, those in the UK impoverished by energy costs are now cutting back on food to make ends meet: http://news.yahoo.com/stores-see-no-relief-britons-cut-back-food-132336184.html
“Sometimes you have to put aside just the pursuit of profit in the market in order to get back in tune with the nation,” Tesco chief executive Phil Clarke told the conference..
Not that I want people to starve, but if you owned Tesco stock how would that statement make you feel? Would bankrupting Tesco best serve the long-term welfare of their customers? And this does nothing to address the underlying cause of the problem. Why do I feel like I’m reading Ayn Rand?
They’re holding the next big climate conference in Durban, South Africa?
Does Durban have enough drugs and hookers to host a UN climate conference?
Don’t forget about possible STD’s. Will they have enough condoms? Are they carbon neutral? If made from natural latex obtained from rubber trees, is it Fair Trade?
Are there any recommendations for how many carbon offsets to purchase if you smoke pot (or other drugs) at the conference? I’m waiting for California to lead the way in requiring them for medical marijuana users, but being as the pot is for medical uses it’s only proper the state pays for them, with the California state government pocketing the fees for the credits they issued that they themselves bought for the users. They should expect some good profits which should help their struggling state finances. However, carbon credits for a region should only be good for that region, California paper would be no good in Durban. So which credits do the attendees purchase to show they’re not insensitive callous Gaia-rapers?
Christina Figueres…. isn’t she the daughter of a Central American president, or something like that?
Born and fed on UN privilege and hubris.
Isn’t she the lady that opened the Cancun shiver-fest with a prayer to the Mayan Earth goddess?
And speaking of that, what would have been the delegates and MSM reaction had she invoked a Christian prayer? She would have been deposed for sure!
Which tells me the attitude of all these elites: “native” is sooo cute! We use “native” to show how liberal and accepting we are of these little people, while guiding them with our superior intellect!
Maybe she should invoke the Gore Effect at Durban this year! Spring snow in SA.
RoHa says:
October 10, 2011 at 6:20 pm
Copenhagen, Cancun, Durban…
Why don’t they have these beanfeasts in places like Detroit, Sunderland, Oodnadatta, Dzerzhinsk, or Mogadishu? It’d give them a chance to find out what the world is really like.
___________________________________________
Why not the picturesque town of Tomsk in Siberia. It is one of the oldest towns in the area and a recommended “destination” in Russia. I would think January would be a nice time to visit with transportation by Troika instead of limousine. Politicians after all should set an example.
If the US has to pay reparations for past sins, how about billing China for future sins? Much more money involved, I’d warrant!
TomRude says:
The real battle is on 1) subversion through environmental action -Tides canada comes to mind
Funded by US money taking direct aim at Canadian economic interests. The same looney formula that has the US economy on the skids directed at Canada.
http://209.205.95.211/joomla/green/index.php/trends/260-podium-vivian-krause-canadian-charities-funding-anti-oilsands-campaigns-
Why not video conference? Share documents over the Internet?
From More Soylent Green! on October 12, 2011 at 6:33 am:
Because you can’t teleconference the drugs and hookers. These conferences are about the perks, and the show. Who in the MSM would care about “snapping shots” for publication that they grab off a video stream?
Gee, why do you think they’re even having these extravagant exotic shindigs anyway, to save the planet or something?
More Soylent Green! says:
October 10, 2011 at 1:59 pm
The problem isn’t whether our emissions are going up or down, or whether China’s and India’s are going up, it’s that we didn’t sign the agreement. Appearing to be doing something is more important than actually doing something. The symbolism is more important than the substance.
BTW: Did they blame Bush (again) for not signing Kyoto? How about Obama? He didn’t sign Kyoto, either.
I don’t think that either Bush or Obama could possibly sign the Kyoto Treaty, it was signed by the US government under Clinton’s authority. Clinton didn’t actually put pen to paper, someone else did, but the US is a signatory. The treaty was never ratified by Senate because Clinton didn’t send it to that body for consideration. So it sits there signed but not ratified. The Senate could have ratified it if they really wanted to any time in the past dozen years or so.
Your point is still stand regardless, appearances are more important than substance. The other signatory countries have done nothing with more style so they look better.