India 'won't sign binding emissions pact': minister

Dec 27, 2011
India said Tuesday it would reject any global pact legally binding it to cut greenhouse gas emissions as such a move could stifle economic growth needed to eradicate poverty.

India said Tuesday it would reject any global pact legally binding it to cut greenhouse gas emissions as such a move could stifle economic growth needed to eradicate poverty.

Environment Minister Jayanthi Natarajan's statement came after a UN conference in Durban earlier this month agreed for the first time to seek to negotiate a legally enforceable agreement to control all nations' emissions.

"There is no question of signing a legally binding agreement at this point of our development. We need to make sure that our development does not suffer," Natarajan told the upper house of parliament.

"Our emissions are bound to grow as we have to ensure our social and economic development and fulfil the imperative of poverty eradication," the minister added.

Some 42 percent of Indians, or 455 million people, live on less than $1.25 a day, according to the World Bank.

The marathon UN in Durban approved a roadmap towards an accord that for the first time would bring all major greenhouse-gas emitters blamed for climate change under a single legal roof.

If approved as scheduled in 2015, the pact will be operational from 2020 and become the prime weapon in the fight against .

But emerging Asian giants India and China, which have become huge emitters of carbon over the last half-dozen years, have long resisted calls to reduce emissions.

The fast-growing economies said the burden of cuts should be on developed countries and that they cannot commit to binding targets which might hurt their ability to improve living standards.

India and China do not fall under existing 1997 constraints aimed at fighting global warming as they are developing countries.

Explore further: Researchers provide guide to household water conservation

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 ...

Emerging powers press rich world on CO2 cuts

Aug 28, 2011

Brazil, South Africa, India and China called Friday on industrialized nations to step up their commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at a key UN climate summit later this year.

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

Climate: Meat turns up the heat

16 hours ago

Eating meat contributes to climate change, due to greenhouse gasses emitted by livestock. New research finds that livestock emissions are on the rise and that beef cattle are responsible for far more greenhouse gas emissions ...

User comments : 14

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

ThanderMAX
2 / 5 (4) Dec 27, 2011
US is still the TOP carbon emitters and they will not reduce it, so why can't India ?
antialias_physorg
3.3 / 5 (10) Dec 27, 2011
"There is no question of signing a legally binding agreement at this point of our development. We need to make sure that our development does not suffer,"

Oh that development will suffer once the storms, draughts and floods hit home. But then it's the people that pay (with lives and taxes)- not the corporations that benefit from the unhindered development.
ryggesogn2
3.1 / 5 (17) Dec 27, 2011
India and China do not fall under existing 1997 Kyoto Protocol constraints aimed at fighting global warming as they are developing countries.

Hamstringing the 'developed' countries won't help the developing countries develop faster.
brianweymes
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 27, 2011
Each nation cares more about its own self interest than it does the rest of the planet. But you can't escape climate change by outgrowing it economically. Our descendants are going to experience its most acute effects and wonder how we would be so stupid.
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (17) Dec 27, 2011
Each nation cares more about its own self interest than it does the rest of the planet.

Each person cares about his own self interest. Why is this wrong?
Such self interest has created the most free, prosperous and healthy societies that have ever existed in the world.
If I care about my health and the health and wealth of my family, those I am directly responsible for, and if everyone else does the same in an environment where no one can gang up and use violence on anyone else, (like govt does), we must all work together in our self-interests, to improve the health and wealth of ourselves and our families. This is bottom up synthesis.
Top down analysis and central planning fails because someone like 'brain..' thinks he knows what's best and wants to gang up and force people to live his way.
Pirouette
2.3 / 5 (15) Dec 27, 2011
Yes. . . .down with the greedy corporations. Abolish ALL corporations and their money-grubbing ties to banks and governments. Abolish the investments in corporations that money-grubbing common people and their dirty money, are totally corrupting the economy, which would be a GOOD economy if there were no such thing as investment portfolios for ANYONE.
Oh wait. . .Obama likes to invest taxpayer money in "green" companies with doubtful future didididididividends. . .(sorry, stuttering without my teleprompter) :)
Oh, and he invests in failing banks and corporations like GE, GM, pharmaceutical companies, failing immigration laws and the DNC. and will resurrect "cap and trade". Did I leave anything out? Oh yes, Obama should invest in pajamagram.com to pay for hoodiefooties for all the half frozen people who can no longer afford their electric bills when the coal companies are forbidden to dig out the coal for home heating. Corporations are all evil. Down with these blood suckers.
Pirouette
2.6 / 5 (16) Dec 27, 2011
Rygg2. . .the coming social revolution won't allow you any self-interest for you and your family. Self interest will be abolished and the COLLECTIVE will rule, with Obama and his appointees as head rulers. We have to prepare for it NOW. All the Liberals will be celebrating and invading private homes and looting stores. . . .Utopia is the future.
Pirouette
2.2 / 5 (13) Dec 27, 2011
LOL. . . .just kidding. . . .but I hear that Pakistan and India are having some issues. . .again. They both have nuclear weapons. . .that's the thing I'm worried about.
Noumenon
4.6 / 5 (54) Dec 27, 2011
No country is going to voluntarily tank it's own economy over speculation about the global climate. I've been saying this for years. The last group of people to understand this are naive tree-huggers.

Cutting across the grain of economies will never work. Technology is the only way to reduce dependance on oil/coal and this will take time, and will need to develop in accordance with existing markets. Welcome to reality.
omatumr
1.3 / 5 (13) Dec 27, 2011
World leaders still promote false AGW fears, but did not condemn manipulation of global temperature data documented in Climategate emails.

A new book for children has a genuine message of Hope to counter false AGW fears this Holiday Season:

"Love Your Monsters: Post-environmentalism and the Anthropocene" by M. Shellenberger and T. Nordhaus, The Breakthrough Institute (2011)

Here's Professor Curry's comments and a link to Amazon where you can preview the book:

http://judithcurr...onsters/

Other genuine messages of Hope are recorded in every atom, leaf and rock:

http://dl.dropbox...Fear.pdf

Today genuine messages of Hope are evaporating false messages of Climate(gate) Fears!

Today all is well,
Oliver K. Manuel
www.omatumr.com
ShotmanMaslo
2.3 / 5 (4) Dec 28, 2011
But you can't escape climate change by outgrowing it economically.


Its still a better alternative. Economic development outweights stable weather in utility, even more so for undeveloped countries.

ryggesogn2
2.1 / 5 (11) Dec 28, 2011
But you can't escape climate change by outgrowing it economically.

Humans have never escaped a changing climate. They adapted and it is easier to adapt,and prosper, with technology.
Shootist
1.5 / 5 (8) Dec 31, 2011
But you can't escape climate change by outgrowing it economically.

Humans have never escaped a changing climate. They adapted and it is easier to adapt,and prosper, with technology.


Besides, all indications are it is better warm than cold.

"The Polar Bears will be fine." - Freeman Dyson
bluehigh
1 / 5 (3) Jan 01, 2012
No country is going to voluntarily tank it's own economy over speculation about the global climate.
- Noumenon

Australia has legislated to destroy its economy and save the world with a tax on carbon emissions.

The polar bears might be fine but the less fortunate in Australia are just going to have to use much less electricity or gas. The wealthy of course can afford to pay more for power.