EU: Global warming reversal hinges on U.S., China
STRASBOURG, France — Global warming cannot be reversed unless the United States and China commit to meaningful cuts in their greenhouse gas emissions, the EU said Tuesday.
With two weeks to go before a global climate conference, the EU urged Washington and Beijing to come to the Copenhagen event with meaningful bids to slash carbon dioxide emissions.
“Without a bid from the USA and China, only half of the emissions are covered” by a global deal, Swedish Environment Minister Andreas Carlgren, whose country holds the EU presidency, told the European Parliament.
“An agreement in Copenhagen must cover all the emissions of the world,“ he added. “An agreement is totally dependent on sufficient bids from the USA and China.“
At least 65 world leaders will attend the Copenhagen climate summit in December as representatives of 191 nations seek agreement on a new global treaty on limiting emissions of greenhouse gases.
U.S. officials said this week the Obama administration will soon announce its targets. Washington has resisted doing so without the backing of Congress, which is not expected to pass climate legislation until next year at the earliest.
Legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives would slash heat-trapping pollution by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. A U.S. Senate bill seeks a 20 percent reduction over the next decade.
U.N. scientists have recommended that developed countries make cuts of up to 40 percent in C02 emissions by 2020 to avoid a catastrophic rise in sea levels, harsher storms and droughts, and climate disruptions.
The EU aims for deeper cuts than most other industrialized nations — from 20 percent below 1990 levels to 30 percent, if others follow suit. By 2050, it wants to eliminate most emissions.
While the EU sees itself as a trailblazer, it has delayed promising cash to poorer nations to help them tackle global warming.
EU leaders have pledged to pay their “fair share” into an annual global fund but have given no amount. They estimate $148 billion a year is needed and that half should come from governments.
The EU’s executive suggested that the bloc’s 27 governments should give up to $22 billion a year from 2013 to 2020.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
From Britan’s Telegraph.co.uk
Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’?
If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)
I thought it was common knowledge that global warming is a myth. Similar to what ProudAmerican said, it’s a front used to promote a political agenda(a one world government), not scientific fact. All you have to do is follow the money trail, and a LOT of it will lead back to Al Gore, who btw has a larger “carbon footprint” than 99% of the population. Just like a LOT of it goes to the government’s scientists who back global warming theory.
You liberals need to start thinking outside the box and stop believing everything you learned from your government issued text books. Did you not read any of the leaked emails from the U.K.? We just had one of the mildest summers I can remember. I am all for saving the environment, but there are plenty of ways to do that other than setting sanctions/limitations on every developed country in the world.
My question is, if global warming is as real and prevelent as the government says it is, why are there countless world-renowned scientists who say there is absolutely no evidence of human caused global warming? What reason do they have to be against global warming other than to tell the truth?
Posted by hahaha on November 24, 2009 at 8:04 am
We could have a brown cloud like the one that hangs over Asia and you dopes would be writing to the newspaper that it smells like money.
Posted by Anon on November 24, 2009 at 8:54 am
When the ocean level rises and even a small storm washes all the sand off Virginia Beach, I’m sure Dave will be the loudest voice advocating the government protect the “property rights” of the hotel owners.
Fearmongering at it’s finest, simply to advance a liberal agenda. You guys realize the biggest global warming alarmist is a politician. A POLITICIAN. Not a scientist, not a doctor, nothing. A stupid politician that thinks he invented the internet. No body credible concludes that global warming is man caused as fact. Al Gore found 600 scientists to support his stupid movie, and the a couple years later 32,000 scientists united against the global warming theory. The only thing we can conclude for certain is the word “inconclusive.“ The jury is still out folks, and they’re not coming back for a while.
I agree with squier13. Fossil fuels are finite. They won’t be there one day and we need to be prepared. Our reasons for supporting a “green” agenda should be because we don’t want to be beholden to oil rich middle east countries, and we want to have renewable energy sources that don’t rely on an ever diminishing fuel source. However, we shouldn’t be burdening the taxpayer with extra costs to support the liberal green agenda, and I refuse to be taxed on carbon emissions, and not be able to have a big screen tv like in California. That is liberal extremism.
Global warming is a hoax at worst, and a plausible theory with inconclusive evidence at best. Some things we should all be doing just because it’s the responsible thing to do:
1) Recycle items that can be recycled, instead of throwing them in a landfill. It doesn’t create that much extra work for you, and does not cost you anything extra, at least in Henrico. The pick-up service is free. You’re already throwing the stuff out anyway, put it in a separate box and recycle it.
2) If you don’t really need an incandescent bulb in any given fixture, put a compact flourescent in. It will save you money, save energy in the grid, and is not any more burdensome on your everyday life. Otherwise use incandescents where you like, no one should judge you for it.
3) Don’t litter. Period.
4) Follow the law when it comes to disposing of chemicals (oils, paints, gasoline, mercury, etc.)
To me, these are things we should all be doing as citizens because it is responsible, and independent of what side of the global warming debate you might be on.
‘there is no question that the earth is heating up’...Except that it has been cooling off for the last 10 years. Energy consumption has not declined in that time, so citing anthropogenic arguments for ‘warming’ are specious. I don’t like pollution, et. al. either, but I like intrusive, non-productive, Big Brother making a mess of something they don’t understand less. The planet is cooling, but policies to end ‘warming’ are causing famine and hardship to billions—billions. Plesse explain to me who is arrogant and unfeeling with such a state of affairs. Don’t feign to lecture others on morals and ethics unless you have a passing acquaintance with them.
“Hmm…what about innovation?“
*****
Exactly, and to that point American consumers regardless of their beliefs want to know what they CAN consume, not what they CAN’T. If you tell a flat earther they can buy a cheap house that happens to be super-insulated with geothermal heating and a PV array that allows them to sell electricity back to Dominion, well they may just get on board the green ship.
Amen to alternative fuels.
Flashlight, utility bill, employer? Fearmonger much?
There is no question that the earth is heating up and that pollution continues to be a very real problem. I believe we have the ability to change, but I certainly could be wrong. So could you. I would rather err on the side of caution, but its a simple choice.
Dave’s premise is that we cant be competitive if we take care of our planet and environment. Maybe we could make up the disadvantage with slavery, or maybe more war, we could completely strip our natural resources and sell them off to the highest bidder! Anything to be more competitive!
Hmm…what about innovation?
When the ocean level rises and even a small storm washes all the sand off Virginia Beach, I’m sure Dave will be the loudest voice advocating the government protect the “property rights” of the hotel owners.
Instead of focusing on reducing emissions, we should just focus on replacing fossil fuels altogether. The other half to this story that no one is talking about is peak oil, peak gas, and peak coal. These processes are happening now: CO2 emissions will be reduced by default in 2020 anyway, it is unavoidable. Global oil output peaked in 2005 so these CO2 models that don’t take into account the decline of oil aren’t accurately modeling 78% of the world’s CO2 contribution to the atmosphere. For example given the rate of decline of oil production, CO2 emissions from oil will be reduced by 50% in 50 years.
Instead of investing in “clean coal” tech like carbon scrubbers that only sequester 1.5% of carbon but use 30% of a plant’s power, we need to be producing wind, solar, hydro and geo power full bore.
We need 25% green fuel replacements in 25 years, 50% in 50 years, and off fossil fuels altogether at the turn of the next century. The inexorable decline of fossil fuel supply mandates that we switch to renewable energy.
hahaha: When you’re sitting in the dark with a flashlight looking at the latest utility bill you can’t afford because you’re on welfare since your employer could no longer afford to keep you and pay HIS utility bills, you might like the smell of money too. Lots of folks in the Third World face that now as well as food costs they can’t afford because people are so busy feeling good about themselves by cooling the planet off. Of course, they aren’t actually doing that but perish the thought we let facts get in the way of arrogance.
We could have a brown cloud like the one that hangs over Asia and you dopes would be writing to the newspaper that it smells like money.
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement