Durban Climate Change Conference 2011

[captain morgan]

One can definitely speculate. Considering they have a much, much lower per capita rating of CO2 emissions compared to Canada and the U.S., it will have to shoot up quite high to be comparable.

That's exactly what will happen as their economy develops, in fact, one might suggest that their rise in emissions will grow exponentially as they get wealthier.

Going back to the wiki report, that data analyzes only 2 variables.... Consider all of the potential sources and I'll wager that China's numbers are way higher than 26%.

As for the auto industry, China is the leader in electric vehicle development. I'm sure they recognize they are one of the top emitters and the electric car is the inevitable future to counterbalance per capita emissions.

Great... The Ballard Cell was Canada's big leap towards green immortality.. Where are they today?

How about the CO2 emitted in the production of each electric car made in China or how will the globe create the electricity to power them?.. That's easy for China as they are constructing a new coal-fired energy plant each week, but what about Europe or North America?

I do agree though, that they seriously need to cut down on total annual emissions and stop this pissing contest with Americans over who's economy penis is bigger.

The USA are huge consumers, but they shouldn't be faulted for that. In fact, one could make the argument that the US is already subsidizing China through its trade with them. China and India, on the other hand, are large emitters based largely on their huge billion+ populations.

The UN/IPCC are too chicken-sh*t to announce that global warming is a direct expression of the total global population.. Clearly there is no palpable answer to that observation.

 

[mentalfloss]

The USA are huge consumers

Yes, yes they are.

 

[captain morgan]

.. And no recognition of the rest of the post...

Interesting

 

[EagleSmack]

The U.S. is the official proximate cause even if China is guilty as well.

Of COURSE the US is the cause of Climate Change! Of COURSE we are! Why would I think of anything but the United States being the cause of the earth's climate change. Climate change, world hunger, earthquakes, genocide, its our fault... all of it.

 

[mentalfloss]

Of COURSE the US is the cause of Climate Change! Of COURSE we are! Why would I think of anything but the United States being the cause of the earth's climate change. Climate change, world hunger, earthquakes, genocide, its our fault... all of it.

You must get that alot.

Sucks for you.

 

[EagleSmack]

One can definitely speculate. Considering they have a much, much lower per capita rating of CO2 emissions compared to Canada and the U.S., it will have to shoot up quite high to be comparable.

.

Does the climate adjust to per capita? Does the climate take per capita into consideration and adjusts its warming trend?

You must get that alot.

Sucks for you.

Honestly... I don't give a F***. We're numb to it all by now and pretty much laugh it off.

Yes, yes they are.

As is Canada. I am sure that carbon footprint of the average Canadian is higher than many in the world. The lifestyle of the average Canadian is probably not much different than ours. Canada was unable to reach its goals it set for itself in Kyoto. So perhaps it has its own house to get in order before it starts trying to fix someone elses.

I wish we could find the Kyoto Thread from way back to read and review.

 

[mentalfloss]

Does the climate adjust to per capita? Does the climate take per capita into consideration and adjusts its warming trend?

As an aside, I think that total emissions are a better depiction of the damage than per capita, but then it also depends on how densely populated an area is and exactly how much pollution is emitted per capita. For now, the important thing is for the biggest factories and similar polluters to gradually reduce emissions in a manner that balances the economy with the environment.

At some point the damage caused by driving a car will outweigh these factories, and that might be when the electric car takes off.

As is Canada. I am sure that carbon footprint of the average Canadian is higher than many in the world. The lifestyle of the average Canadian is probably not much different than ours.

We're not much worse, no.

Anyway, despite the cynicism on either side of this issue, I'm actually quite hopeful that we'll be able to make things work.

 

[EagleSmack]

As an aside, I think that total emissions are a better depiction of the damage than per capita, but then it also depends on how densely populated an area is and exactly how much pollution is emitted per capita. For now, the important thing is for the biggest factories and similar polluters to gradually reduce emissions in a manner that balances the economy with the environment.

When talking about climate change; damage done is irrelevant. Because the US (so I'm told) caused global warming, China can continue business as usual and cause further damage because they just started damaging the environment?

It doesn't make sense.

That's why we aren't going to agree with anything.

2015 is the next goal. lol

Business as usual and see you in 3 years!

In three years, China will still act in the best interest for China and we'll shrug our shoulders again.

We're not much worse, no.

Did you mean you're not much better?

Anyway, despite the cynicism on either side of this issue, I'm actually quite hopeful that we'll be able to make things work.

What would make it work?

 

[mentalfloss]

What would make it work?

A reasonable transition to renewable energy that doesn't come at the cost of lives.

 

[EagleSmack]

A reasonable transition to renewable energy that doesn't come at the cost of lives.

Oh I'm all for that in the sense of there being less polution and to get us off the dependency of foreign oil.

But taxing the West and only the West to distribute wealth that will be squandered... no way. Or taxing the West to stop the earth's climate from changing...foolish.

The climate will change regardless what we mere mortals do... count on it.

 

[mentalfloss]

Oh I'm all for that in the sense of there being less polution and to get us off the dependency of foreign oil.

But taxing the West and only the West to distribute wealth that will be squandered... no way. Or taxing the West to stop the earth's climate from changing...foolish.

The climate will change regardless what we mere mortals do... count on it.

Well funding can either go toward mitigation efforts or reparations. In essence, the countries primarily negligent for the adverse affects of warming would pay those nations that have suffered.

 

[captain morgan]

Of COURSE the US is the cause of Climate Change! Of COURSE we are! Why would I think of anything but the United States being the cause of the earth's climate change. Climate change, world hunger, earthquakes, genocide, its our fault... all of it.

.. And kittens stuck in trees.. Don't forget that the USA is to blame for that too.

 

[EagleSmack]

Well funding can either go toward mitigation efforts or reparations. In essence, the countries primarily negligent for the adverse affects of warming would pay those nations that have suffered.

What have they suffered? Where?

Once again we get to the root core of the Climate Change people's ultimate goals. Wealth Distribution. It's not about stopping climate change... it's about money.

If it was about climate change not one country should be exempt...not one.

 

[mentalfloss]

What have they suffered? Where?

Climate change blamed for dead trees... - Google News

http://theconversation.edu.au/planning-the-green-climate-fund-so-it-works-for-african-farmers-4731

If it was about climate change not one country should be exempt...not one.

I'm sure this would be the utopian scenario.

In a pragmatic world, we have to prioritize by putting the most negligent parties first in line.

Reuters has a good write up of the agreement of those attending Durban..


Poorer countries, particularly in parts of Africa, Asia and small island nations, are the most vulnerable to rising sea levels and more intense droughts and floods that could trigger crop failures, damage to infrastructure and disrupt water supplies.

They blame the major industrialized nations for pumping large amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) from burning fossil fuels into the atmosphere and say those nations should help pay for the cost of adapting to weather extremes. They also want cash and easier access to clean energy technologies.

According to a draft:
-- The fund will start operating from 2013. Nations have backed an intention to raise $100 billion per year in climate cash by 2020 and the fund is expected to manage part of this.

-- The fund would be run by a 24-member board, split evenly between developing and developed countries.

-- The World Bank would be the interim trustee subject to a review after 3 years and will be accountable to the board.

-- An independent secretariat will serve the board. A host country for the fund has to be chosen.

-- The fund will provide money and other assistance to help poorer nations shift toward low-emissions power generation and adapt to the impacts of climate change, with a focus on the urgent needs of nations highly vulnerable to climate change.

-- Private sector funds can also contribute toward programmers.

-- Poorer nations can access funds via multi-lateral lending agencies or specialist U.N. bodies or directly after an accreditation process. Countries can nominate domestic agencies to access funds but these need to be vetted.

-- Financing can be in the form of concessional lending, grants and other types as decided by the board.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/01/us-climate-fund-idUSTRE7B02DN20111201

 

[EagleSmack]

Climate change blamed for dead trees... - Google News

Dead link for the most part but all I needed to read in what was available was "... a study done by the Univ. of California Berkley" to already know the source is questionable.

Planning the Green Climate Fund so it works for African farmers

A drought in the arid and semi-arid regions of Africa! Say it isn't so!

Please... again... where are they suffering from CLIMATE CHANGE caused by humans?

I'm sure this would be the utopian scenario.

In a pragmatic world, we have to prioritize by putting the most negligent parties first in line.

Therein lies the main goal of the Climate Change Movement... Wealth Distribution.

That is why we aren't buying into it.

Reuters has a good write up of the agreement of those attending Durban..


Poorer countries, particularly in parts of Africa, Asia and small island nations, are the most vulnerable to rising sea levels and more intense droughts and floods that could trigger crop failures, damage to infrastructure and disrupt water supplies.

They blame the major industrialized nations for pumping large amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) from burning fossil fuels into the atmosphere and say those nations should help pay for the cost of adapting to weather extremes. They also want cash and easier access to clean energy technologies.

According to a draft:
-- The fund will start operating from 2013. Nations have backed an intention to raise $100 billion per year in climate cash by 2020 and the fund is expected to manage part of this.

-- The fund would be run by a 24-member board, split evenly between developing and developed countries.

-- The World Bank would be the interim trustee subject to a review after 3 years and will be accountable to the board.

-- An independent secretariat will serve the board. A host country for the fund has to be chosen.

-- The fund will provide money and other assistance to help poorer nations shift toward low-emissions power generation and adapt to the impacts of climate change, with a focus on the urgent needs of nations highly vulnerable to climate change.

-- Private sector funds can also contribute toward programmers.

-- Poorer nations can access funds via multi-lateral lending agencies or specialist U.N. bodies or directly after an accreditation process. Countries can nominate domestic agencies to access funds but these need to be vetted.

-- Financing can be in the form of concessional lending, grants and other types as decided by the board.

Factbox: The Green Climate Fund | Reuters

They're already wringing their hands aren't they!

Why tease them so?

 

[ironsides]

China's emissions aren't less dangerous.

The U.S. is the official proximate cause even if China is guilty as well.

Of course we are. :roll:

 

[EagleSmack]

In a pragmatic world, we have to prioritize by putting the most negligent parties first in line.

Look, the US rejected Kyoto under Bush... Obama told the people at Copenhagen that we aren't signing anything... Obama didn't even go to Durban this time. It is simply not happening.

No Climate Change body can mandate anything to the US Government. Even if Obama agreed to EVERYTHING they wanted his signature would mean BEANS. You need Congressional approval for something like that and GOOOOOOD LUCK trying to get a Climate Change Mandate through Congress!

It's not happening. Not now and not in 2015.

 

[Tonington]

all I needed to read in what was available was "... a study done by the Univ. of California Berkley" to already know the source is questionable.

I don`t even know what to say to this except, submitted for dumbest post of the year. I`m sure you have some reason for saying that, but it`s completely illogical.

Walter, take note. That was an actual ad hominem.

 

[EagleSmack]

I don`t even know what to say to this except, submitted for dumbest post of the year. I`m sure you have some reason for saying that, but it`s completely illogical.

Walter, take note. That was an actual ad hominem.

Why was it dumb? The main link was dead. He posted a link that was to redirect me to the China Daily and the China Daily link was gone.

Now go take the foot out of your mouth.

 

[Tonington]

Why was it dumb?

Because of the part I quoted...obviously.