Durban Climate Change Conference 2011

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
The official thread! Woohoooo!!!!!

Looks like the EU is our only hope right now.

Durban Climate Change Conference 2011 opens in disarray
The United Nations climate change summit opened in disarray after violent storms, the late arrival of the host president and a major rift emerging between some of the world’s biggest polluters.

As delegates arrived in the coastal South African city of Durban on Sunday, dark skies gave way to thunder and lightning storms and torrential rain which waterlogged parts of the city’s conference venue and swept away tin shacks in townships on the outskirts of the city, killing eight people.

On Monday, many of the estimated 15,000 delegates packed into the main hall for the opening session, only to be kept waiting for 40 minutes by South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma.

Aides to the president blamed the president of Chad, saying Mr Zuma arrived on time but was forced to wait for him.

The 17th Conference of the Parties summit represents the last chance for developed nations to sign up to a second term of the Kyoto Protocol, which specifies legal limits for their carbon dioxide emissions, before it expires at the end of next year.

Speaking at the opening session of the talks, Christiana Figueres, the UN’s chief climate change official urged all parties to be flexible, and quoted South Africa’s former president Nelson Mandela in telling them: “It always seems impossible until it’s done.”

Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, South Africa’s Minister of International Relations, who is chairing the 12-day, 194-nation meeting, said the world’s poorest countries – many of them in Africa – were dependent on swift action to stave off the catastrophic effects of global warming which affect them most.

“We are in Durban with one purpose: to find a common solution that will secure a future to generations to come,” she said.

But within hours of the summit’s start, most of the major players made clear their unwillingness to negotiate their positions.

The European Union led a positive charge to revive Kyoto, saying it would sign up for a second term. But it stipulated that the world’s two biggest polluters, the United States – the sole developed country to shun Kyoto – and China – still classed as a developing country – should also agree to legally-binding emissions cuts before 2015.


Artur Runge-Metzger, the EU’s negotiator at the summit, said both developing and developed countries had to make firm commitments to emissions caps this year or risk the public “losing confidence in this travelling circus”.

The US said that China signing up to a such a deal was a “basic requirement” for its own participation but even then, it offered no guarantees.


Meanwhile China and the G77 group of developing nations said that they would insist on developed nations signing a second Kyoto term before agreeing to any global deals themselves.


Canada has already said it will not commit to a second term and yesterday it emerged that it could withdraw before the original deal expires. The country’s national broadcaster said it would be announced next month that Canada will withdraw from the protocol – a move its Green Party warned would make it a “global pariah” at Durban.

Within the European Union grouping, which speaks at the summit with one voice, cracks were already beginning to emerge after the publication of a report suggesting the UK was backing a controversial plan by Canada to extract oil from swampland – something the EU has made clear it is against because of the levels of greenhouse gas emissions.


Those watching the talks begin said it was an inauspicious start. “It is headed towards a real impasse in Durban, frankly, there is no way to gloss over it,” one veteran participant said.

“There are very few options left open to wring much out of the meeting unless the position of these major countries softens considerably.”

Durban Climate Change Conference 2011 opens in disarray - Telegraph


Also - LIVE COVERAGE FROM THE EVENT (liek, oh my god):

http://www.justin.tv/oneclimate?utm...ck&utm_source=oneworldgroup.org#/w/2160820496
 
Last edited:

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
14,614
2,362
113
Toronto, ON
Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, South Africa’s Minister of International Relations, who is chairing the 12-day, 194-nation meeting, said the world’s poorest countries – many of them in Africa – were dependent on swift action to stave off the catastrophic effects of global warming which affect them most.

It effects them the most yet they are not required to sign on or do cuts?

I am sure there will be some sort of photo-op treaty at the end of this. Probably as ineffective as the original if not moreso.

And lets stop calling China a developing nation. Its developed.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
I am sure there will be some sort of photo-op treaty at the end of this. Probably as ineffective as the original if not moreso.

Well they have to find some way to replace Kyoto in order to get a legally binding contract unless we want rampant polluters to rule the world.

Which, if you have an ounce of morality in your bones, it would be in our best interests to get a deal.
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
14,614
2,362
113
Toronto, ON
Well they have to find some way to replace Kyoto in order to get a legally binding contract unless we want rampant polluters to rule the world.

Which, if you have an ounce of morality in your bones, it would be in our best interests to get a deal.

My bones are primarly made of cynicism. I don't see a meaningful deal happening. Of course, I also don't buy into the world is ending theory either. But if their is a deal, it has to be everybody or it is meaningless. I don't see Canada signing Kyoto II with the same exemptions as Kyoto I. Now if every other nation has signed on and Canada refuses, then this becomes a different topic entirely. But as long as the USA and China are exempt and the Russions and Japanese are not going to sign, Canada is right not to as well.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
My bones are primarly made of cynicism. I don't see a meaningful deal happening. Of course, I also don't buy into the world is ending theory either. But if their is a deal, it has to be everybody or it is meaningless. I don't see Canada signing Kyoto II with the same exemptions as Kyoto I. Now if every other nation has signed on and Canada refuses, then this becomes a different topic entirely. But as long as the USA and China are exempt and the Russions and Japanese are not going to sign, Canada is right not to as well.

You don't have to sign a treaty to make a commitment.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
26,651
6,989
113
B.C.
Well they have to find some way to replace Kyoto in order to get a legally binding contract unless we want rampant polluters to rule the world.

Which, if you have an ounce of morality in your bones, it would be in our best interests to get a deal.
WHY? Europe is broke and can no longer afford the green medicine.USA and Japan will not play.
China and India exempt.
Nothing for us here.
Besides my area of the world has much better air quality now than 25 years ago.
And you might remember the stench from pollutants at low tide in False Creek,that we cleaned up.
We as Canadians are doing much right in our enviromental policies and not supporting wealth distribution
will allow us to continue.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Semantics. Show me the commitment from China and the USA.

Who cares?

We should be making a commitment on our own moral grounds, not following in the footsteps of the worst offenders.

Climate change fight could cost Canadians big



OTTAWA - Helping poorer countries deal with the feared results of global warming could come straight out of Canadians' pockets.

The agenda for the Durban Climate Change Conference in South Africa includes figuring out how to raise $100 billion annually from developed economies for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) Canada and other countries agreed to create in 2009.

A draft agreement says the GCF will "receive financial inputs from a variety of other sources, public and private, including alternative sources."

While Environment Minister Peter Kent is reported to have expressed some concern about the GCF, his office refused to say what position he would take on the fund or how it should be financed.

http://www.torontosun.com/2011/11/29/climate-change-fight-could-cost-canadians-big


Banks 'lent 232 bn euros to coal industry'

DURBAN, South Africa — Leading banks around the world lent 232 billion euros ($308 billion) to the coal industry, one of the biggest sources of greenhouse gases, from 2005 to 2010, campaigners said here on Wednesday.

The figures, presented on the sidelines of November 28-December 9 UN climate talks in Durban, come from a trawl through the lending portfolios of 93 of the world's leading banks, they said.

The total value of financing for 31 major coal-mining companies and 40 producers of coal-fired electricity amounted to 232 billion over the five years.

"Our figures clearly show that coal financing is on the rise," said Tristen Taylor of Earthlife Africa Johannesburg, one of four groups that combined to compile the report, "Bankrolling Climate Change."

"Between 2005 and 2010, coal financing almost doubled. If we don't take banks to task now, coal financing will continue to grow."

Coal has emerged as the biggest single area of concern about greenhouse-gas sources.

Emissions from coal-fired plants have rocketed as emerging giants, led by China and India, turn to a fuel that is cheap, plentiful and free of geopolitical risk, but also a massive emitter of carbon dioxide (CO2).

The top three banks lending to the coal industry, according to the report, are JP Morgan Chase, which funded 16.5 billion euros; Citi (13.7 billion) and Bank of America (12.6 billion).

They were followed by Morgan Stanley (12.11 billion); Barclays (11.51 billion); Deutsche Bank (11.47 billion); Royal Bank of Scotland (10.94 billion); BNP Paribas (10.69 billion), Credit Suisse (9.49 billion) and UBS (8.21 billion).

Three Chinese banks -- Bank of China, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China and China Construction Bank -- were also listed in the top 20 lenders.

"Interestingly, almost all of the top 20 climate-killer banks in our ranking have made far-reaching statements regarding their commitment to combatting climate change," said Yann Louvel of BankTrack, an NGO that monitors the activities of banks.

"However, the numbers show that their money is not where their mouth is."


Levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) surged by 2.3 parts per million (ppm) between 2009 and 2010, according to the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO).

They have risen by around a third since pre-industrial times and are now at their highest in 650,000 years, say climate scientists.

A German environmental group, urgewald, and a South African campaign group, groundWork, also contributed to the report.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/af...docId=CNG.2831b7d994b8b5098de31416da46b2ef.81
 
Last edited:

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,373
11,435
113
Low Earth Orbit
Green crap is being integrated into the industrialization of western Canada. It is necessary to get our massive projects up and running ASAP.

You greens are going to need the benefits of gold, copper, iron, nickel, zinc, diamond, black gold, nat gas and especially PINK gold to feed the green things and grow more food for a planet with billions of mouths to feed.

Ever thought a refinery could be emissions free? It's in the works. How about giant nat gas cookers for potash and nat gas fertilizer plants that are emissions free? They are in the works.

The west's population in about to double in a heartbeat.

Shut up and let it happen otherwise Canada is going to remain industrially underdeveloped and socially crippled.

In the next few years three worlds are going to dominate politics.

Infrastructure, infrastructure and infrastructure.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
And lets stop calling China a developing nation. Its developed.

And they are also the world's leading producer of renewable energy, and every year they add more renewable as a percentage of their total energy consumption. They are on the correct side of the curve, even without mandatory targets. They have made massive investments in their infrastructure, $34.6 Billion in 2009. They even have laws which prioritize renewable energy development. While our manufacturing centres lose jobs to cheaper labour markets, leading edge technology and high value manufacturing could replace many and even create more jobs. Quebec, Alberta, and BC already have prices on carbon.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
And they are also the world's leading producer of renewable energy, and every year they add more renewable as a percentage of their total energy consumption. They are on the correct side of the curve, even without mandatory targets. They have made massive investments in their infrastructure, $34.6 Billion in 2009. They even have laws which prioritize renewable energy development. While our manufacturing centres lose jobs to cheaper labour markets, leading edge technology and high value manufacturing could replace many and even create more jobs. Quebec, Alberta, and BC already have prices on carbon.

Hmm... I never knew this.

Respect for China +1.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,373
11,435
113
Low Earth Orbit
Hmm... I never knew this.

Respect for China +1.

They are on the correct side of the curve, even without mandatory targets. They have made massive investments in their infrastructure, $34.6 Billion in 2009. They even have laws which prioritize renewable energy development. While our manufacturing centres lose jobs to cheaper labour markets, leading edge technology and high value manufacturing could replace many and even create more jobs. Quebec, Alberta, and BC already have prices on carbon.
Infrastructure, infrastructure and infrastructure.

It is foreign companies investing in the west and they follow the conduct of business and Kyoto reqs of their countries which are overwhelmingly signors.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
Infrastructure, infrastructure and infrastructure.

It is foreign companies investing in the west and they follow the conduct of business and Kyoto reqs of their countries which are overwhelmingly signors.

There are no Kyoto requirements in Canada. Paper tiger. That's partly why it's such a spectacular failure.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
An even better reason for not signing the new accord.

Well, if you look at it from an economic standpoint, of course it's difficult to submit.

If you look at it from a moral standpoint, we do have an obligation to pay for what we are causing.
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
14,614
2,362
113
Toronto, ON
Well, if you look at it from an economic standpoint, of course it's difficult to submit.

If you look at it from a moral standpoint, we do have an obligation to pay for what we are causing.

Which is why you would need to prove to me that we are actually causing anything significant. This has not been done to date. Obviously this is where our opinions differ.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,373
11,435
113
Low Earth Orbit
The end users of our resources are paying and are the ones who are investing in Canada. If they are in it happens without us needing to sign a damn thing.

Our job is providing the infrastructure to move the resources out. Bill Gates and Beijing (Strong) can't do it alone.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
Hmm... I never knew this.

Respect for China +1.

Renewable energy includes the massive hydro projects which destroy the environment, but don't worry about that.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The People's Republic of China is the largest consumer of coal in the world,[1] and is about to become the largest user of coal-derived electricity, generating 1.95 trillion kilowatt-hours per year, or 68.7% of its electricity from coal as of 2006 (compared to 1.99 trillion kilowatt-hours per year, or 49% for the US).[2][3] Hydroelectric power supplied another 20.7% of China's electricity needs in 2006.
With approximately 13 percent of the world's proven reserves, there is debate as to how many years these reserves will last at current levels of consumption.[4]
China's coal mining industry is the largest and also deadliest in the world in terms of human safety[5] where thousands of people die every year in the coal pits, compared to 30 per year for coal power in the United States.[6] Coal production rose 8.1% in 2006 over the previous year, reaching 2.38 billion tons, and the nation's largest coal enterprises saw their profits exceed 67 billion yuan, or $8.75 billion