Copenhagen FAIL

December 18, 2009

On the final day of UN climate talks Barack Obama tells world leaders: ‘I come not to talk but to act’ Link to this video

Barack Obama stepped into the chaotic final hours of the Copenhagen summit today saying he was convinced the world could act “boldly and decisively” on climate change.

But his speech offered no indication America was ready to embrace bold measures, after world leaders had been working desperately against the clock to try to paper over an agreement to prevent two years of wasted effort — and a 10-day meeting — from ending in total collapse.

Obama, who had been skittish about coming to Copenhagen at all unless it could be cast as a foreign policy success, looked visibly frustrated as he appeared before world leaders.

He offered no further commitments on reducing emissions or on finance to poor countries beyond Hillary Clinton’s announcement yesterday that America would support a $100bn global fund to help developing nations adapt to climate change.

He did not even press the Senate to move ahead on climate change legislation, which environmental organisations have been urging for months.

The president’s speech followed the publication of draft text, obtained by the Guardian this morning, that reveals the enormous progress needed from world leaders in the final hours of the Copenhagen climate change summit to achieve a strong deal. The draft says countries “ought” to limit global warming to 2C, but crucially does not bind them to do so. The text, drafted by a select group of 28 leaders – including UK prime minister, Gordon Brown – in the early hours of this morning, also proposes extending negotiations for another year until the next scheduled UN meeting on climate change in Mexico City in December 2010.

In his address, Obama did say America would follow through on his administration’s clean energy agenda, and that it would live up to its pledges to the international community.

“We have charted our course, we have made our commitments, and we will do what we say,” Obama said.

But in the absence of any evidence of that commitment the words rang hollow and there was a palpable sense of disappointment in the audience.

Instead, he warned African states and low island nations who have been resisting what they see as a weak agreement that the later alternative — no agreement — was far worse.

“We know the fault lines because we’ve been imprisoned by them for years. But here is the bottom line: we can embrace this accord, take a substantial step forward, and continue to refine it and build upon its foundation,” he said.

“Or we can again choose delay, falling back into the same divisions that have stood in the way of action for years. And we will be back having the same stale arguments month after month, year after year – all while the danger of climate change grows until it is irreversible.”

He also took a dig at China, drawing attention to its status as the world’s biggest emitter and reinforcing America’s hardline on the issue of accountability for greenhouse gas emissions.

The lacklustre speech proved a huge frustration to a summit that had been looking to Obama to use his stature on the world stage – and his special following among African leaders – to try to come to an ambitious deal.

The president was drawn into the chaos within minutes of his arrival at Copenhagen, ditching his schedule to take part in a meeting of major industrialised and rapidly emerging economies.

Responding to Obama’s speech, a British official said: “Gordon Brown is committed to doing all he can and will stay until the very last minute to secure a deal… but others also need to show the same level of commitment. The prospects of a deal are not great.”

Many reactions were strongly critical of Obama. Hugo Chávez, the president of Venezuela, described Obama’s speech as “ridiculous” and the US’s initial offer of a $10bn fund for poor countries in the draft text as “a joke”.

Tim Jones, a spokesman for the World Development Movement, said: “The president said he came to act, but showed little evidence of doing so. He showed no awareness of the inequality and injustice of climate change. If America has really made its choice, it is a choice that condemns hundreds of millions of people to climate change disaster.”

Friends of the Earth said in a statement, “Obama has deeply disappointed not only those listening to his speech at the UN talks, he has disappointed the whole world.”

The World Wildlife Fund said Obama had let down the international community by failing to commit to pushing for action in Congress: “The only way the world can be sure the US is standing behind its commitments is for the president to clearly state that climate change will be his next top legislative priority.”

The extent of crisis in the talks has taken leaders by surprise. The Brazilian leader, Lula da Silva, told the conference that the all-night negotiating sessions took him back to his days as a trade union leader negotiating with his bosses.

I think Barry Rubin said it best: http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2009/12/madness-and-lessons-of-copenhagen.html “isn’t this a new form of imperialism in which smug rich people congratulate themselves as wonderfully virtuous by telling poorer countries they cannot develop because it’s bad for the planet? To put it bluntly, after decades of failing to be moved by ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-schooled children, the West has been galvanized into action by concern over polar bears.” …”The main reason why poverty and oppression exists in so many parts of the world is not due to Western evil imperialism but to local political culture, lack of democracy, anti-pragmatic ideas, and dictatorships. Until this is thoroughly understood and beneficial change takes place within other societies, their situations won’t improve. What happened with all the massive financial aid provided over past decades? “

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon’s posterous


Senator Kirsten Gillibrand Don’t we have to drill for our own oil to break our dependence on foreign oil?

October 21, 2009

from Christopher Logan: Senator Kirsten Gillibrand’s Letter to me on Climate Change Legislation

how are we going to diversify when it takes petroleum to grow bioFuel efficiently? I’m supportive of the idea, and I think it wouldn’t bite into the food supply (though might cut into agricultural exports, but that is a small price to pay considering the foreign market is blackmailing us and profit is profit) the truth about petroleum is that it is used in everything. it is the foundation of what keeps the economy running. it was the true break of the dot com bubble bust. we need leadership that recognizes this. I’m all for using petroleum efficiently and BioFeul sounds like a great idea, but we need people who recognize that and aren’t living in a fantasy land of solar power that the NYTimes has reported for example pollutes water in present desert environments and technologies like wind that would take decades to be built before our country collapses arrogantly into an unsustainable green ghetto. how about factors such as a power grid that isn’t ready to sustain a population of Chevy Volts and other battery operated cars even if we have efficient Nuclear power that could be a security risk to terrorism. I love green energy and the best way to insure the best possible result is to have reasonable leadership that works a hybrid economy that utilizes petrol in an efficient way. America is not a theme park for Al Gore to showcase expensive unsustainable ideas before their time. I’m all for Yes We Can if the ‘Can’ is through looking at what we have.


Energy Efficiency

March 27, 2009
the paint color black is going to be illegal in the state of California because it has been proven to be bad for fuel efficiency. also Computer screens save energy by using less white. ( the drawing is by Greg Hergert )

related thread http://new.seesmic.com/videos/iMYvHlT2ob


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.