Montreal Global Warming summit - agreement

[Karlin]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4515898.stm

...the conference had been in most respects a success, reaching agreements on how to quantify gas emissions and how to penalise nations for failing to meet Kyoto targets.

Well its not much is it?
America continues to be a Fossil Fool, but even they are agreeing to move ahead with non-binding targets. We can have some hopoe that the USA, and its corporations, will "just do it" without singing anything.

Bill Clinton was there yesterday, and he is getting on his nation's case to reduce gg emissions -

Mr Clinton attacked a central plank of the Bush administration's resistance to targets for cutting emissions - that it would harm the US economy.

If the US "had a serious, disciplined effort to apply on a large scale existing clean energy and energy conservation technologies... we could meet and surpass the Kyoto targets easily in a way that would strengthen, not weaken, our economies," he said.

Global warming and melting ice, he suggested, could lead to a future climate conference in Canada being held on "a raft somewhere".

Russia, China and India also gave some ground in their resistance to meeting emissions targets.

Formal talks can now begin over the precise targets which will be set when the first phase of the Kyoto agreement expires in 2012.
Our correspondent says that, crucially, it sets the scene for discussing how large developing countries like India and China could be brought into the system of limiting greenhouse gas emissions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last week delegates finalised a rule book for Kyoto, formally making it fully operational after years of negotiation and ratification.

The 1997 treaty commits industrialised countries to cut their combined carbon emissions to 5% below 1990 levels by 2008-12.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

it is a start. Having an agreement on the extension.

here is a wee tidbit from BBC......

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4511556.stm

 

[Reverend Blair]

Well its not much is it?

Political advancements tend to be incremental. Multilateral agreements even moreso than others.

It was a major deal though. The US was there to undermine the process, and didn't manage it. China and India are willing to talk. The fact that there is a scientific consensus was driven home once again. Climate change got some real press.

Slightly off topic from the summit itself...there has been talk of imposing trade sanctions on countries that won't sign onto Kyoto and/or future agreements because their refusal to participate acts as a subsidy.

It's a slow process, but it's getting there.

The best thing that Canada can do is go ahead and meeti its commitments so that we can profit from clean technologies instead of clinging to obsolete technologies.

 

[no1important]

RE: Montreal Global Warmi

U.N. Climate Talks End With Deal - Minus U.S. - to Negotiate 'Second Phase' of Emission Cuts

A teaser:

MONTREAL Dec 10, 2005 — A U.N. conference on global warming ended Saturday with a watershed agreement by more than 150 nations an unwilling United States not among them to open talks on mandatory post-2012 reductions in greenhouse gases.

The Bush administration, which rejects the emissions cutbacks of the current Kyoto Protocol, accepted a second, weaker conference decision, agreeing to join an exploratory global "dialogue" on future steps to combat climate change. However, that agreement specifically ruled out "negotiations leading to new commitments."

The divergent tracks did little to close the climate gap between Washington and the Kyoto supporters, which include Europe and Japan. But environmentalists welcomed the plan to negotiate "second-phase" emissions cuts.[/end of teaser]

Just another way of America to try and force its will on the rest of the world. At least the 150+ countries disagreed with "W".

 

[capebretoner]

RE: Montreal Global Warmi

Something is better than nothing when you are talking about enviroment. Also people have to STOP worrying about the USA. The current administration won't even admit there is such a thing as Global Warming so I doubt you are ever going to get them to sign something binding.

What needs to be done is to get the countries that are willing to sign on to something that will make a difference and have REAL penalties if they don't follow through with what they sign.

After this happens the World should start going after China, US and the other big polluters, but have a plan in place that they would have to conform to. Though like I just said I doubt that the US will sign anything until after 2008 at the earliest

 

[Colpy]

Re: RE: Montreal Global Warmi

Something is better than nothing when you are talking about enviroment. Also people have to STOP worrying about the USA. The current administration won't even admit there is such a thing as Global Warming so I doubt you are ever going to get them to sign something binding.

What needs to be done is to get the countries that are willing to sign on to something that will make a difference and have REAL penalties if they don't follow through with what they sign.

After this happens the World should start going after China, US and the other big polluters, but have a plan in place that they would have to conform to. Though like I just said I doubt that the US will sign anything until after 2008 at the earliest

You know, a month or two ago I thought I read a number of articles in our national papers about how much better a job the USA was doing than Canada in controling air pollutants.

From an editorial today in the National Post:

"The US may oppose the Kyoto process, yet it leads the world in funding for climate change science, has backed alternative energy initiatives and has actually had better success in controlling emmissions at the same time as its economy and population are growing. Despite its commitments under Kyoto and its various environmental measures, Canada has managed to produce little more than hot air"

Reminds me of the time I heard Canadian environmentalists screaming bout an American initiative to force Canada to change its rules for acceptable emmissions from diesel fuel. Turns out the Yanks wanted us to RAISE our standards to match theirs, the green whackos had only assumed that the Yankee Imperialist running dogs were trying to destroy our green nation. Talk about going off half-cocked.

What this looks like to me is that the USA refuses to sign on to some dumbass agreement that it will be impossible to fulfill, while doing what they can about global warming.

Canada, meanwhile, signs on whole-heartedly, with absolutely no intention of doing anything but scoring political points (and maybe sending money to Red China)

Personally I think I prefer the HIONEST US stance.

 

[capebretoner]

RE: Montreal Global Warmi

I never said that Canada was doing a good job, Kyoto was a bust from the moment it was signed. That is why my post didn't mention it being a good thing and I stressed that

What needs to be done is to get the countries that are willing to sign on to something that will make a difference and have REAL penalties if they don't follow through with what they sign.

Even though Canada's imissions rose in the past year we are still not even close to those of the USA and China. Also the USA puts more money than anyone else because they have the money. If you put it in percentage of GDP I am sure it would be a different matter entirely.

That is like saying that the millionare gives the most money to Cancer at $100, however the guy who has $1000 in his bank gives $10.....Who is truly giving more?

 

[Ocean Breeze]

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1211-01.htm

US makes a fool of itself............again.. :roll:

.......and whines about criticism. :roll: