Climate conference approves landmark deal

Dec 11, 2011 By ARTHUR MAX , Associated Press
U.N. climate official Christiana Figueres, right, talks with delegates at the climate change summit as it nears it's end in the city of Durban, South Africa, Saturday, Dec. 10, 2011. Some ministers and top climate negotiators left Durban without an agreement Saturday, with time running out and the prospect of an inconclusive end jeopardizing new momentum in the fight against global warming. (AP Photo/Schalk van Zuydam)

(AP) -- A U.N. climate conference reached a hard-fought agreement Sunday on a far-reaching program meant to set a new course for the global fight against climate change.

The 194-party conference agreed to start negotiations on a new accord that would ensure that countries will be legally bound to carry out any pledges they make. It would take effect by 2020 at the latest.

The deal doesn't explicitly compel any nation to take on emissions targets, although most have volunteered to curb the growth of their emissions.

Currently, only industrial countries have legally binding emissions targets under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Those commitments expire next year, but they will be extended for at least another five years under the accord adopted Sunday - a key demand by seeking to preserve the only existing treaty regulating carbon emissions.

The proposed Durban Platform offered answers to problems that have bedeviled global warming negotiations for years about sharing the responsibility for controlling carbon emissions and helping the world's poorest and most climate-vulnerable nations cope with changing forces of nature.

The United States was a reluctant supporter, concerned about agreeing to join an international that likely would find much opposition in the U.S. Congress.

"This is a very significant package. None of us likes everything in it. Believe me, there is plenty the United States is not thrilled about," said U.S. climate envoy Todd Stern. But the package captured important advances that would be undone if it is rejected, he told the delegates.

Sunday's deal also set up the bodies that will collect, govern and distribute tens of billions of dollars a year for . Other documents in the package lay out rules for monitoring and verifying emissions reductions, protecting forests, transferring clean technologies to developing countries and scores of technical issues.

U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said the deal represents "an important advance in our work on ."

But the deal's language left some analysts warning that the wording left huge loopholes for countries to avoid tying their emissions to legal constraints, and noted that there was no mention of penalties. "They haven't reached a real deal," said Samantha Smith, of WWF International. "They watered things down so everyone could get on board."

Environmentalists criticized the package - as did many developing countries in the debate - for failing to address what they called the most urgent issue, to move faster and deeper in cutting carbon emissions.

"The good news is we avoided a train wreck," said Alden Meyer, recalling predictions a few days ago of a likely failure. "The bad news is that we did very little here to affect the emissions curve."

Scientists say that unless those emissions - chiefly carbon dioxide from power generation and industry - level out and reverse within a few years, the Earth will be set on a possibly irreversible path of rising temperatures that lead to ever greater climate catastrophes.

Sunday's breakthrough capped 13 days of hectic negotiations that ran a day and a half over schedule, including two round-the-clock days that left negotiators bleary-eyed and stumbling with words. Delegates were seen nodding off in the final plenary session, despite the high drama, barely constrained emotions and uncertainty whether the talks would end in triumph or total collapse.

The nearly fatal issue involved the legal nature of the accord that will govern carbon emissions by the turn of the next decade.

A plan put forward by the European Union sought strong language that would bind all countries equally to carry out their emissions commitments.

India led the objectors, saying it wanted a less rigorous option. Environment Minister Jayanthi Natarajan argued that the EU proposal undermined the 20-year-old principle that developing countries have less responsibility than industrial nations that caused the global warming problem through 200 years of pollution.

"The equity of burden-sharing cannot be shifted," she said in angry tones.

Chinese negotiator Xie Zhenhua gave heated support for the Indians, saying the industrial nations have not lived up to their promises while China and other developing countries had launched ambitious green programs.

"We are doing whatever we should do. We are doing things you are not doing. What qualifies you to say things like this," he said, raising his voice and waving his arm.

The debate ran past midnight and grew increasingly tense as speakers lined up almost evenly on one side or the other. Conference president Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, who is South Africa's foreign minister, called a recess and told the EU and Indian delegates to put their heads together and come up with a compromise formula.

Coming after weeks of unsuccessful effort to resolve the issue, Nkoana-Mashabane gave Natarajan and European Commissioner Connie Hedegaard 10 minutes to find a solution, with hundreds of delegates milling around them.

They needed 50 minutes.

The package gave new life to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, whose targets expire next year and apply only to . A separate document obliges major developing nations like China and India, excluded under Kyoto, to accept legally binding emissions targets in the future.

Together, the two documents overhaul a system designed 20 years ago that divide the world into a handful of wealthy countries facing legal obligations to reduce emissions, and the rest of the world which could undertake voluntary efforts to control carbon.

The European Union, the primary bloc falling under the Kyoto Protocol's reduction commitments, said an extension of its targets was conditional on major developing countries also accepting limits with the same legal accountability. The 20th century division of the globe into two unequal parts was invalid in today's world, the EU said.

The difficult clause in the documents called on countries to complete negotiations within three years on "a protocol, another legal instrument, or a legal outcome" that would succeed the . It would need about five years for ratification.

But the EU objected to the late addition of the phrase "legal outcome," which it said would allow countries to wriggle out of commitments. The final compromise, reached at 3:30 a.m., changed the final option to "an agreed outcome with legal force."

Explore further: US top court to review power plant emissions rules

4 /5 (6 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

UN climate talks on edge heading into final hours

Dec 09, 2011

(AP) -- The United States, China and India could scuttle attempts to save the only treaty governing global warming, Europe's top negotiator said Friday hours before a 194-nation U.N. climate conference was ...

Conference in overtime on future of climate talks

Dec 10, 2011

(AP) -- Deep into overtime, negotiators from 194 nations worked straight through a second night, parsing drafts and seeking compromises to map out the future pathway to fight global warming.

Back-room negotiations begin on climate intentions

Dec 05, 2011

(AP) -- Back-room negotiations began in earnest Monday on a deal to rescue the only treaty governing greenhouse gas reductions and to launch talks on a broader agreement to include the world's largest polluters: ...

UN chief doubts comprehensive climate deal likely

Dec 06, 2011

(AP) -- An all-encompassing climate deal "may be beyond our reach for now," the U.N. chief said Tuesday as China and India delivered a setback to European plans to negotiate a new treaty that would bind all ...

China to call for Kyoto extension at climate talks

Nov 22, 2011

China, the world's top greenhouse gas emitter, said Tuesday it will push at next week's climate talks for an extension of the Kyoto Protocol, which requires rich nations to reduce their emissions.

Recommended for you

Conservationists sue over federal coal program

2 hours ago

Conservation groups have sued the government to force federal officials to undertake the first broad environmental review of the government's coal-leasing program in decades.

Owner of ship that damaged reef to pay $840,000

4 hours ago

The federal government and the state of Hawaii have reached an agreement for damages from the owner of a cargo ship that harmed more than 100,000 coral colonies several years ago when it ran aground off Oahu.

User comments : 58

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Vendicar_Decarian
2.1 / 5 (11) Dec 11, 2011
The apes are making some progress. They will need to make more progress if they intend to avert disaster.

Republican Americans feel they can put a stop to the growing global momentum.

They are fools who's actions are pure unadulterated evil.
dogbert
3 / 5 (14) Dec 11, 2011
Sunday's deal also set up the bodies that will collect, govern and distribute tens of billions of dollars a year ...


The real purpose of these meetings -- redistribution of wealth.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.3 / 5 (12) Dec 11, 2011
The dogberts of the world are a dying breed.

The faster they die out the better it will be for every living thing on this planet.

Isaacsname
3 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2011
The only reason these meetings go on is to give the appearance that something's getting done. Seriously.

You know what's getting done ?

You, you're bending over to pick up the soap.

Again
Vendicar_Decarian
2.3 / 5 (12) Dec 11, 2011
Of course it's one huge delaying tactic. Nevertheless the plans are there, and those plans will be triggered sooner than later.

Within the next 5 to 8 years there will no longer be the capacity to deny the reality, and at that point there will be a paradigm shift and the world will scramble to make up for lost time.

It is inevitable.
Nanobanano
3.5 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2011
I don't know about the constitutional legality of this whole thing, but something does need to be done asap.

2020 at the latest? You can be sure our congress will find a way to screw that up. It'll take at least 6 to 9 years just to get rid of all the ultra-conservatard tea party people that just got elected.

You realize we need to cut global carbon emissions by 10 gigatons just to break back even, and that assumes there isn't some "CO2 bomb" or "methane bomb" event happening between now and the "break even" point.

Realistically, a total conversion from fossil fuels would take several decades, even if we had discovered a "magic wand" energy technology this very day.

Automobiles? 10 years to replace "most" of them.

Trains and Ships? 30 to 50 years for "most". 15 to 25 years for 50% of them.

The easiest thing to replace is Coal, because it's stationary, but with the existing paradigm, the only way to do that is nuclear, and nobody wants nuclear since Fukushima...
Nanobanano
3.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
We need several terawatts of power from wind and solar, but as much as 50% of the replacement of Coal is probably needed to come from nuclear.

Trains, planes, autos, and ships COMBINED do not make 2PPM/year worth of CO2, so even if you converted them ALL to a non-carbon, or carbon neutral energy source, you still wouldn't break back even on the Keeling Curve.

The Coal and Deforestation are easily the two biggest individual culprits.
ryggesogn2
2.4 / 5 (14) Dec 11, 2011
I don't know about the constitutional legality of this whole thing, but something does need to be done asap.

Then you don't really care about your rights.
What is being proposed is a complete take over of the world economy.
DPRK has 100% control of its economy. This is North Korea. This will be the end result as well if the UN and AGWites get their way.
If you dobt, please provide examples when govt control of any economy created liberty and prosperity for its people.
BTW, China's current success is because they loosened govt control of their economy.
omatumr
1.7 / 5 (12) Dec 11, 2011
I don't know about the constitutional legality of this whole thing, but something does need to be done asap.


Then you don't really care about your rights.

What is being proposed is a complete take over of the world economy.

DPRK has 100% control of its economy. This is North Korea. This will be the end result as well if the UN and AGWites get their way.

If you dobt, please provide examples when govt control of any economy created liberty and prosperity for its people.

BTW, China's current success is because they loosened govt control of their economy.


You are exactly right.

This is a stepping stone to George Orwell's 1984:

www.online-litera...ll/1984/

This new document on Global Climate Change is far more credible than the reports by the UNs IPCC.

http://cfact.org/...heck.pdf

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
http://myprofile....anuelo09

Nanobanano
5 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2011
please provide examples when govt control of any economy created liberty and prosperity for its people


Easy.

Monopoly laws and their enforcement.

Minimum wage laws.

Before this, mining companies practically owned their workers, and in some cases even killed them just for asking for a raise.

History shows that capitalism without government intervention leads to slavery at least as bad as communism.

you lose.

Government is good as long as the right people have access.
dogbert
2 / 5 (12) Dec 11, 2011
Minimum wage kills jobs.

Government industries are the biggest monopolies there are:
Electricity, gas and water are generally government owned and have no competition.
ryggesogn2
2.2 / 5 (10) Dec 11, 2011
History shows that capitalism without government intervention leads to slavery at least as bad as communism.

What version of history are you reading?
Govt in the USA is sanctioning slavery of illegal aliens by refusing to enforce immigration laws.
mining companies practically owned their workers,

With the approval of local govts.
deatopmg
2.1 / 5 (11) Dec 11, 2011
@nanobanano et al; "History shows that capitalism without government intervention leads to slavery at least as bad as communism."

At least as bad??? It's exactly the same!!

It matters not whether Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin, Schicklgruber, Chavez, Jones, Ahmadinejad, Trenberth, or other tyrants have total power over a country or industry the results are the same. Everyone, except the self appointed elite (nomenklatura), suffer horribly.

The way to eliminate these budding tyrants, like the very ones who came up w/ this COP17 agreement to transfer $thousand billions ($trillions) from the worlds poor to the poorer nations rich, is to keep your head and end all, ALL funding for this "repent the world is coming to an end" CAGW marxist movement.

Nothing good EVER comes from a few dictating to the masses.
ryggesogn2
2 / 5 (8) Dec 11, 2011
"A Zambian opposition leader has accused the government of colluding with Beijing in the abuse of the countrys workers after two Chinese mine managers were arrested for allegedly shooting 11 of their employees.

The incident occurred on Friday after workers protested about their pay and working conditions at the Chinese-owned Collum coal mine, 200 miles south of the capital, Lusaka."
http://www.ft.com...gFS0wbEY

'Progressives' are praising China.

"Price Fishback pointed out that a competitive labor market would limit monopolistic pricing policies on the part of firms that operated company towns and produce a single real wage for all miners participating in this market. Thus if miners were free to move among mines, and companies competed for employees then this would in turn have prevented mine owners from exploiting their employees."
http://eh.net/enc...any.town
Life_is_like_that
1.9 / 5 (9) Dec 11, 2011
Doomsday scenarios have always been the 'Achilles' heel of those with this particular political agenda.

'They will need to make more progress if they intend to avert disaster.'....is one

'Within the next 5 to 8 years there will no longer be the capacity to deny the reality, and at that point there will be a paradigm shift and the world will scramble to make up for lost time.'....is another

They have no idea how ridiculous they sound.....it's always 5, 10, 15 years down the line that it will be too late....

That has been said for over 40 years, and will continue for many years to come.

Keep up the good work people.....you are your own worst enemy.

So sooooooo amusing.

Let the ad hominem begin. I can almost see the spittle forming in the corners of your mouths.

HA!

omatumr
1.4 / 5 (10) Dec 11, 2011

You are exactly right.

This is a stepping stone to George Orwell's 1984:

www.online-litera...ll/1984/

This new document on Global Climate Change is far more credible than reports by the UNs IPCC.

http://cfact.org/...heck.pdf

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
http://myprofile....anuelo09



Two years ago, in 2009 Climategate emails

http://joannenova...imeline/

Exposed the totalitarian world government that 1st Century Science & Technology had reported in 2007 to be the basis of the AGW "Hoax":

www.21stcenturysc...Born.pdf
Vendicar_Decarian
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
"It'll take at least 6 to 9 years just to get rid of all the ultra-conservatard tea party people that just got elected." - Nano

The U.S. is growing increasingly irrelevant on the world stage, and the U.S. economy will continue it's rapid decline over the next several decades. Internal political fighting will continue to leave the U.S. government unfit to rule and the U.S. will probably break up into separate nations before the end of the decade.

What the TeaPublicans do is not relevant on the world stage other than to provide a negative example to the rest of the world.

Vendicar_Decarian
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
"You realize we need to cut global carbon emissions by 10 gigatons just to break back even, and that assumes there isn't some "CO2 bomb" or "methane bomb" event happening between now and the "break even" point." - Nano

Then bloody retribution will be the order of the day, won't it?

I will enjoy that very much.
Vendicar_Decarian
3 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2011
"Then you don't really care about your rights." - RyggTard

The Infrared Spectra of CO2 doesn't care about your claimed rights either.

Further, your claimed rights end where they impact on the existence and quality of life of others.

"What is being proposed is a complete take over of the world economy." - RyggTard

Since no proposals have been forwarded to take over the world economy I'll just accept your statement as a Lie told by a Coward because he has no legitimate basis for criticism.

Vendicar_Decarian
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
"DPRK has 100% control of its economy." - RyggTard

Not relevant. The DPRK is isolated by trade sanctions, and for that reason is unable to obtain fuel.

Hence it's nuclear program.

"If you dobt, please provide examples when govt control of any economy created liberty and prosperity for its people." - RyggTard

Europe, Japan, Canada, Australia, China, etc. etc. etc. All provide wonderful examples of how government regulation and oversight improve the general welfare of the people.

America on the other hand is a complete failure and at this point the origin of most of the worlds ills.

Vendicar_Decarian
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
"China's current success is because they loosened govt control of their economy." - RyggTard

Partly. But it is largely a result of freedom loving American companies being free to fire their countrymen close their Americn factories and set up shop in China where the people work for lower wages, have lower environmental and workplace standards, and are generally smarter than the average American worker who often can't read well enough to understand an operators manual.

The freedom to be stupid is a cherished American freedom isn't it RyggTard?

Can you clarify something for us? Why did your leader Ayn Rand decide to become a welfare queen?
Vendicar_Decarian
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
"Minimum wage kills jobs." - Dogbert

Lowering the income of Americans is job number 1 for Republicans.

They are doing a hell of a job of it too.

"Electricity, gas and water are generally government owned and have no competition." - Dogbert

Enron provides a fine example of what happens when utilities go unregulated.

Everywhere in America where electric generation has been privatized, costs to the consumer have gone up and reliability has gone down.

If Republicans were concerned about Jobs, they wouldn't have refused for the last three years to bring Obama's jobs bill to a vote.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
That is odd. I thought illegal aliens were willingly coming to America and are free to leave the country at any time.

So your claim that they are slaves must come from the same mental disorder that Rand Paul uses to claim that public health care is slavery.

Sorry to tell you Tard Boy, but your home planet of Libertaria only exists in your polluted mind.

"Govt in the USA is sanctioning slavery of illegal aliens by refusing to enforce immigration laws." - RyggTard
Vendicar_Decarian
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
Life Long Tards like to put words in other people's mouths.

I said nothing about being "too late". I did say that it would be undeniable within that time frame.

So... Why did you need to lie about what I said Tard Boy?

"They have no idea how ridiculous they sound.....it's always 5, 10, 15 years down the line that it will be too late...." - LifeLongTard

Delays mean increasing damage. And an increasing probability that Republicans will be culled in retribution for their crimes against country and nature.

Vendicar_Decarian
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
"'Progressives' are praising China." - RyggTard

And Regressives are quaking, bankrupt, in their old, warn out boots.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.9 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
Why didn't he predict the stock market crash and great depression?

Your cherry picking of economists just shows how vapid your Libertarian/Randit ideology is.

And you still haven't told us why your queen - Ayn Rand - was on government welfare.

"Price Fishback pointed out that a competitive labor market would limit monopolistic pricing policies on the part of firms that operated company towns and produce a single real wage for all miners participating in this market. " - RyggTard
Vendicar_Decarian
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2011
"A Zambian opposition leader has accused the government of colluding with Beijing in the abuse of the countrys workers after two Chinese mine managers were arrested for allegedly shooting 11 of their employees." - RyggTard

We agree with you RyggTard. Corruption like this occurs where there is too much freedom and too little government regulation.

We saw the same kind of behavior in America when there was inadequate government oversight of mines, railroads, and cattle farming etc.

That is what put the "wild", in the wild wild west. Right?

Fortunately for Americans, government asserted it's authority to regulate the behavior of those businesses and businessmen.



Life_is_like_that
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
Let me try it....Lifelongtard, Omatard, Ryggtard,Tardboy, tard of tards, tard'o'paloosa, nanotard, tard'o'rama.....there you go....I've proven my argument.

Not to worry folks....he's just getting back at the world for all those lunches he had stolen from him in grade school.....HA!

Let the ad hominems.....begin!
Nanobanano
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 11, 2011
the U.S. will probably break up into separate nations before the end of the decade.


I hope you're wrong man, but the truth is I've actually found myself genuinely concerned about that on several occasions over the past few years.

California has a state debt and deficit, as I recall, being so big that if they were counted as a seperate nation, they were in the top 5 or 6 "nations".

You can't even begin to touch the California Budget without a full ban on immigration AND deportation of all known illegals and anchor babies. The problem is that big. It's practically an invasion force at this point.

And regardless of what the retardigans say, you really can't touch the national deficit without substantial cuts to the military.

The longer they wait to fix this stuff, the worse the problem is going to be,a nd the more it's going to cost "us" to fix it. "us" being me and everyone younger than me that's expected to spend the rest of our lives paying off $15 trillion debts.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
You still haven't answered the question Tard Boy.

I will ask it again.

I said nothing about being "too late". I did say that it would be undeniable within that time frame.

So... Why did you need to lie about what I said Tard Boy?

"Let me try it....Lifelongtard, Omatard, Ryggtard,Tardboy, tard of tards, tard'o'paloosa, nanotard, tard'o'rama.....there you go....I've proven my argument." - LifeLongTard
Vendicar_Decarian
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
"I hope you're wrong man, but the truth is I've actually found myself genuinely concerned about that on several occasions over the past few years." - Nano

America has way too many problems to survive. It has had decades to put policies in place to navigate around and mitigate those problems, but Republicans have blocked every attempt to do so.

Game over.

""us" being me and everyone younger than me that's expected to spend the rest of our lives paying off $15 trillion debts." - Nano

The Republican plan to "Starve the beast" of big government has always been a plan of treason against America and America's future generations in particular.

There is still time to escape.
Life_is_like_that
3 / 5 (4) Dec 11, 2011
@Vendicar....I've got your nose.... : O
omatumr
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
Does Section 1031 of Senate Bill 1867 actually allow for the arrest and indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without right to a trial, a lawyer, any charges made against them, or any evidence presented or made for their arrest?

www.infowars.com/...itizens/

www.youtube.com/w...embedded

That seems to be far-fetched, unless world leaders have "painted themselves into a corner."

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
http://myprofile....anuelo09
Noumenon
4.5 / 5 (53) Dec 11, 2011
The UN and the far left social engineers are not going to solve anything, as they have no positive ideas like alternative energy technology required on the appropriate scale to make a difference,... they only have negative ideas like redistribution of wealth and social engineering of energy use.

http://www.infowa...-summit/

No rational nation will submit to such self destructive stupidity. In their desperation, the far left's hi-jacking of AGW will self destruct.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.6 / 5 (8) Dec 11, 2011
Wow.. Two references in a row to infowars.com

The air is thick with QuackTards tonight.

http://www.youtub...qZTONdPM
Nanobanano
4 / 5 (4) Dec 11, 2011
You realize that entire article you linked to is a lie?

It calls for an 8.5% reduction in EMISSIONS, of which about 8% of our emissions equals the current excess above what the oceans are taking up.

Bankrupt eh?

This will actually create jobs for the next couple decades, since you'll need millions of people to build, transport, and install the new systems: Wind, Solar, and other alternatives.

If people own their own systems, they'll get power for about 1/10th the cost over the long term.

What's the matter?

You own stock in a coal company or something?
Davecoolman
2.7 / 5 (9) Dec 11, 2011
Durban agreement = BS

The so called Durban agreement does nothing but create further meetings. No developed country has actually agreed to extend Kyoto. The tax and regulate tribunals proposed are pure fantasy and will never materialize. This agreement is just pure garbage. Much to do about nothing.

11 Dec: Reuters: UN climate conference extends Kyoto Protocol
A U.N. conference on climate change approved on Sunday a measure to extend the Kyoto Protocol, which binds some developed countries to legally binding cuts of greenhouse gas emissions.
The timeline of the next commitment period is expected to be decided next year. The first commitment period also expires next year.

http://uk.reuters...20111211
Vendicar_Decarian
2.1 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
Wile you are kicking and screaming and pointlessly scratching and clutching at the ground that is moving beneath you, step by step you are being dragged to the future.

Your minute minority are impotent.

Your whining is pointless.

You are incapable of preventing the inevitable, unstoppable progress toward a sustainable economy.

Your willingness to participate is not required.

Neither is your existence required.

"The so called Durban agreement does nothing but create further meetings." - CoolTard
bluehigh
3 / 5 (4) Dec 11, 2011
Everywhere in America where electric generation has been privatized, costs to the consumer have gone up ..
- Vendi

Here in Australia too and more price rises in the pipeline.

Oddly, much of the privatisation was initiated by 'left leaning socialist orientated' state government. I wonder what pressure was exerted to cause such a change of party political policy?

Vendicar_Decarian
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
And in the west the push to privatization was foisted on the public by the Conservatives.

The commonality between them both is that the push to privatization is actually coming from Libertarian/Randite propaganda organizations that exist to serve the interests of industry rather than the interests of the people.

Their ideology is pure poison.

ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (7) Dec 11, 2011
Where is there a free market in power generation in the USA?
Every state has a govt commission that regulates all utilities.
There is no 'privatization' in electric power generation in the USA, just bad or worse govt regulations.
ryggesogn2
2.4 / 5 (8) Dec 11, 2011
Signs of intelligence in Canada:
"Not only is the Kyoto Protocol technically flawed, the so-called science behind it is utter twaddle. Never mind complicated things like non-linear mathematics or, indeed, mathematics of any sort. The alarmists can't possibly know how to predict the future of Earth's climate because they can't explain its past."
http://www.toront...pretend-
Vendicar_Decarian
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2011
No signs of Intelligence from Ryggtard. His link....

PAGE NOT FOUND - ERROR 404

His source. The Toronto Sun. A right wing Rag that is 80% advertising, 15% sports, 4.9% whining and 0.11% real news reports purchased from CP and UP.

If it was printed on softer ply it would be used as toilet paper.

Vendicar_Decarian
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 11, 2011
"Every state has a govt commission that regulates all utilities." - RyggTard

And every commission that has entertained industry privatization has seen prices increase and reliability decrease.

Exactly counter to Libertarian\Randite predictions.

By the way RyggTard. You still haven't explained to us why your hero Ayn Rand decided to become a welfare queen.

Why was that?
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (5) Dec 11, 2011
"If you're going to take issue with Rand's ideas, it helps to have some inkling of what she actually said."
http://reason.com...-welfare
When was Rand arrested for failing to pay income taxes or FICA or Medicare payments?
Has VD stop exhaling or creating all that poisonous CO2 yet? No? Just the steady drip, drip, drip...Like a Venereal Disease.
_nigmatic10
3 / 5 (2) Dec 12, 2011
194 delegates. Big money talks going on there.
Howhot
3 / 5 (2) Dec 12, 2011
Wow, interesting. It sounds like the EU left the summit pissed off. I can't blame-em considering the US rolled over, China and India rolled too. While the issue of AGW was profoundly demonstrated fact, it looks like it will have to do damage to the human existence before action is taken.
Howhot
3 / 5 (2) Dec 12, 2011
Wow, interesting. It sounds like the EU left the summit pissed off. I can't blame-em considering the US rolled over, China and India rolled too. While the issue of AGW was profoundly demonstrated fact, it looks like it will have to do damage to the human existence before action is taken.

Regardless, I'm pleased that Kyoto protocol is still intact and in effect. China and India are bound conditionally so it's not bad.

Vendicar_Decarian
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 12, 2011
"When was Rand arrested for failing to pay income taxes or FICA or Medicare payments?" = RyggTard

Never as far as I know. Are you saying that Ayn Rand was Entitled to collect welfare and Medicaid?

Shouldn't she have died in the streets from her self inflicted lung cancer as she claimed others should do when they could not afford treatment?

And don't you think it was poetic justice that she spent her entire life denying that smoking caused cancer and claiming that the worlds doctors and scientists were involved in a global conspiracy to restrict her freedom to smoke, only for her to have developed lung cancer from smoking?

Odd, her denial that smoking causes cancer is almost identical in form to your denial that CO2 causes global warming. Right down to the claim that the worlds scientists are involved in a conspiracy to limit your freedom.

Is there no limit to Libertarian\Randite ideological failure?

GSwift7
1.5 / 5 (2) Dec 12, 2011
If anyone would like to have an intelligent discussion about the Durban talks and the 'agreement' document they produced, here's a link to the document as it currently stands:

http://unfccc.int...rp38.pdf

Note that in bullet 4 of the introduction, it explicitly states that this is still "an intermediate product presenting work in progress".

To me, it looks like it is still more of a wish list of things compiled from different sources, more than the kind of concrete thing anyone would be able to agree to. According the the Greenpeace spokesperson and President, Kumi Naidoo, the Durban conference did little more than set the stage for the next meeting. He didn't sound very pleased with the limited progress of COP17.

Considering the cost of the COP meetings, I would have to agree with Kumi. I read that this Durban meeting had something like 4000 attendees including press and such. I wonder who foots the bill for these anual events?
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 12, 2011
So the next meeting will be in a nice, WARM, resort too?
Howhot
2.6 / 5 (5) Dec 12, 2011
Yeah. By the next meeting, the global average temperature might be a full .5 degrees C warmer than it is now. By then, even R2 will be cursing at how-hot the weather is.
omatumr
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 13, 2011
The UN's IPCC, Al Gore, and Climategate scandal have seriously damaged the credibility of world leaders and scientists who refused to condemn manipulated temperature data.

See: "Deep Roots of the Global Climate Scandal (1971-2011)"
http://dl.dropbox...oots.pdf

Society is hurting today. World leaders know they are "sitting on a powder keg."

Can scientists and politicians once again become trusted servants of our society?

Is there a way to reduce arrogance [enhance humility; decrease pride] of politicians and scientists so they can once again serve society?

These are the main issues now:

http://judithcurr...t-149143

http://noconsensu...nt-62303

http://judithcurr...t-149436

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
http://www.omatumr.com/

Howhot
3.4 / 5 (5) Dec 13, 2011
Now the conservatives have skewed the pooch. It looks like our friends to the north have decided to drop their voluntary Kyoto agreements. Welcome VD to the greater US of A.
Vendicar_Decarian
2.6 / 5 (5) Dec 13, 2011
"So the next meeting will be in a nice, WARM, resort too?" - RyggTard

Why don't you invite them to your house for the next meeting?

You could play the banjo and strap cymbals to your knees so that you could be your own one man band of deceit and ignorance.

You might even try to explain why your ideological mentor Ayn Rand turned out to be a Welfare Queen.

Vendicar_Decarian
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 13, 2011
"Welcome VD to the greater US of A." - Howhot

Canada currently has a Conservative minority government that is beholden to western oil interests and which was nearly voted out of office in the last election.

Just watch how fast they are made gone.

To be fair however, the former Liberal Government that adopted Kyoto, did nothing to advance compliance, and as a result Canada can not meet it's Kyoto targets.

Meanwhile over the last decade global temperatures have risen .14'C.

GSwift7
1 / 5 (1) Dec 13, 2011
VD:

Meanwhile over the last decade global temperatures have risen .14'C.


To be accurate, global temp (lower troposphere only) has risen more than that. The UAH satellite record currently shows more like 0.2C since 2001, though 2001 was unusually cool.

http://www.drroys...rent.gif

It's been going up and down so much due to ENSO since 1998 that it's hard to draw a trend line with any confidence over the past decade.

The mid troposphere has risen even more than .2C over that same period, but that is to be expected, and that record shows the same wild up and down variations as the lower tropophere.

The North Atlantic Oscilation is showing signs of going negative again though, so if that happens, don't expect spectacularly high global temps for a while. That's a big if though.
GSwift7
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 13, 2011
That discussion about global temps is really far off topic though.

I posted a link to the official agreement above, in an attempt to get people to talk about it, since that's what this article is about, but I just got down ranked and ignored. Oh well.

I'll repeat my statement that the "agreement" isn't actually an agreement, and the headline here is absolutely bull. The current version of the agreement is only a working draft and hasn't been signed by anyone. China's representative made a statement last week saying that they wouldn't agree unless a list of demands were met first, and the list is so unattainable that it is clear China deliberately made it that way so that there's no way they will join a Kyoto 2 deal. It's hillarious to see China complain about Canada backing out, after what China said.

Meanwhile, the US continues to make progress without joining Kyoto 1.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.