Canada won't confirm Kyoto withdrawal

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,367
2,953
113
Toronto, ON
And for all its drawbacks, Kyoto is the best treaty that we have come up with for a solution to climate change. And the reason some countries are exempted is simply. We (the west) is in the privileged position that we are in, because of our use of coal and oil - how can you say to a poorer country that they aren't allowed to use the same tools to wealth as we did? We created the problem, and are living with the rewards of it, so we should be the ones cleaning it up.

China is a poorer country? They produce more and more CO2 as they are continuously adding coal power plants online almost weekly.

You make good points to a point. And I am not saying that we should go out and pollute willy nilly. But there is no need to throw ourselves into an [bigger] economic downturn in order to radically alter the amount of CO2 in the air. If there are cheap gains, take them. But that is as far as I am willing to support without more evidence.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
China decries Canada's 'bad example'

Beijing - Canada's failure to deny reports that it is about to ditch the Kyoto Protocol is "setting a bad example" to other developed nations as global climate change talks enter their third day, China's official news agency said on Wednesday.

Canadian Environment Minister Peter Kent said on Monday that Kyoto was "the past", but he would not confirm media reports that Ottawa was planning to formally withdraw from the treaty, one of the main topics of global climate talks now under way in Durban, South Africa.

Canada says it backs a new global deal to cut emissions of greenhouse gases, but insists it has to cover all nations, including China and India, which are not bound by Kyoto's current targets.

The commentary published by Xinhua news agency accused Canada of undermining global efforts against climate change and damaging its own reputation in pursuit of short-term interests.

"While delegations from every country attend the Durban climate conference to discuss a second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol, one can imagine the damage done by this 'rumour'," Xinhua said.

"Some are angry and some are depressed, but whatever the expression made by each delegation, they are united in their criticism of Canada."


The commentary said Canada's failure to meet its Kyoto Protocol targets had encouraged it to write off the protocol and thereby "smash a pot to pieces just because it is cracked".

The Kyoto Protocol obliged signatory countries from the developed world to make mandatory cuts in their total greenhouse gas emissions by 2012, when the first commitment period ends.


Breakthrough


Canada was obliged to slash CO2 by 6% compared to 1990, but by 2009, the total was still 17% higher.

Canada was also likely to be using the rumours to try to secure a favourable breakthrough during the Durban talks, Xinhua said, and "as soon as the negotiations do not meet its expectations, it will allow the rumours to become reality".

If Canada pulls out of Kyoto, it will join the United States on the sidelines of a treaty originally designed to force rich nations with far higher historical levels of greenhouse gas emissions to take on most of the burden when it comes to handling climate change.

Developing nations like China and India were not under any obligation to make binding CO2 cuts under the treaty, and also received funding for clean projects through Kyoto's Clean Development Mechanism.

Russia and Japan have refused to support an extension of Kyoto beyond 2012, saying that the treaty is meaningless if the biggest emitters - China and the United States - do not sign up for binding cuts.


China decries Canada's 'bad example' | News24
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83

No Bingo.

The countries that developed earlier have a greater onus to take responsibility.

So you can point the finger at the U.S., but not so much on China.

Either way, you lead by example.

Canada is failing miserably on the environment.
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,367
2,953
113
Toronto, ON
No Bingo.

The countries that developed earlier have a greater onus to take responsibility.

So you can point the finger at the U.S., but not so much on China.

Either way, you lead by example.

Canada is failing miserably on the environment.

I disagree with this statement entirely. Until 10-20 years ago, global warming was not really something people knew about or developed for. If you want to have an effective treaty, it must be everybody entirely. You can help poorer countries (China is not poor) by providing funding etc. But all countries must participate. You don't get a free pass because you got to the party late. The leading by example is a crock -- nobody would actually follow because you did something.

The US, as I understand, did not sign the treaty but actually did make some carbon reductions. China on the other hand has been putting out CO2 like there was no tommorow (and taking the free Kyoto money too I am sure). Doesn't matter who puts the CO2 in the air it would have whatever effect it will have (extent of those effects in dispute).

Canada is only failing based upon Creitien's photo op signing of the treaty which we had no ability to comply.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
I disagree with this statement entirely. Until 10-20 years ago, global warming was not really something people knew about or developed for. If you want to have an effective treaty, it must be everybody entirely.

Who said anything about having to sign a treaty?

Canada is only failing based upon Creitien's photo op signing of the treaty which we had no ability to comply.

No, we chose not to comply with that treaty.

The EU actually met and exceeded targets.

They're leading the way on the moral ground.
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
15,367
2,953
113
Toronto, ON
Who said anything about having to sign a treaty?



No, we chose not to comply with that treaty.

The EU actually met and exceeded targets.

They're leading the way on the moral ground.

This topic is about the Kyoto treaty is it not?

Creitien knew at the time of signing that Canada COULD NOT achieve those targets. But he also knew that his days as PM were numbered and the problem would wind up in Martin's hands not his. But it made a good photo op so he signed (in bad faith).

Good for the EU. Leading on the Moral Ground. Wonder if thats why their economy is in the toilet and ours isn't?

Of course.

That's why we're not supposed to exit before 2012.

Its 2011. What is the difference in waiting a month or 2? We are not going to achieve the targets so what difference does it make?
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
29,014
8,424
113
B.C.
mentalfloss;1511618 Okay said:
This is a nice map of Africa,it shows what will happen when the temperature goes up.
But what if you don't believe the predictions of the warmists.They are just hypothetical anyway.
With all the **** coming out of the IPCC and East Anglia and the past predictions of that Hansen guy from NASA
I think I will take all this with a grain of salt and support Canada's complete withdrall from Kyoto.
I do not feel sorry for the sins of my father,and do not want to saddle more debt onto our children.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
This is a nice map of Africa,it shows what will happen when the temperature goes up.
But what if you don't believe the predictions of the warmists.They are just hypothetical anyway.
With all the **** coming out of the IPCC and East Anglia and the past predictions of that Hansen guy from NASA
I think I will take all this with a grain of salt and support Canada's complete withdrall from Kyoto.
I do not feel sorry for the sins of my father,and do not want to saddle more debt onto our children.

AGW is real. The scope of change is what is in question.

Basically, it's scientifically agreed (97% of scientists and growing!) that carbon emissions are accelerating climate change, but the scope and degree of harm to the environment (at least in terms of timeframe) is difficult to predict.

There was an article not too long ago that said we're screwed by 2048 I think..
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
119,967
14,817
113
Low Earth Orbit
It's not a contract just an agreement with no penalties or oblgation to commit.

AGW is real. The scope of change is what is in question.

Basically, it's scientifically agreed (97% of scientists and growing!) that carbon emissions are accelerating climate change, but the scope and degree of harm to the environment (at least in terms of timeframe) is difficult to predict.

There was an article not too long ago that said we're screwed by 2048 I think..
How did we make it cool off post 1930's dust bowl?
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
It's not a contract just an agreement with no penalties or oblgation to commit.

Countries that fail to meet their emissions targets by the end of the first commitment period (2012) must make up the difference plus a penalty of 30 per cent in the second commitment period. Their ability to sell credits under emissions trading will also be suspended.

CBC News In Depth: Kyoto and beyond