Children? Not if you love the planet
…At the recent climate jamboree in Bali, the Rev. Al Gore told the assembled faithful: "My own country, the United States, is principally responsible for obstructing progress here." Really? The American Thinker's Web site ran the numbers. In the seven years between the signing of Kyoto in 1997 and 2004, here's what happened:
•Emissions worldwide increased 18.0 percent;
•Emissions from countries that signed the treaty increased 21.1 percent;
•Emissions from nonsigners increased 10.0 percent; and
•Emissions from the United States increased 6.6 percent.
It's hard not to conclude a form of mental illness has gripped the world's elites….
(h/t Fausta for pointing this out.)
Steyn has gotten to the heart of the matter once again. For all the blather about how important the Kyoto accord was/is and how the US has become a stumbling block on the road to progress, not one of the signatory nations has come close to meeting the goals set down on that piece of paper. Not one has even come close to reducing emissions. And the US has the smallest increase (by percentage) than any one of them.
Yet, because the Senate rejected the idea of Kyoto I and President Clinton let it die a quiet death upon his desk, we—the US—are the bad guys. Mental illness indeed.
In other news we have this from the Bali talks:
Bali breakthrough launches talks
Nearly 200 nations agreed at U.N.-led talks in Bali on Saturday to launch negotiations on a new pact to fight global warming after a last-minute reversal by the United States allowed a breakthrough.
Washington said the agreement marked a new chapter in climate diplomacy after six years of disputes with major allies since President George W. Bush pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol, the main existing plan for combating warming.
But despite its dramatic turnaround in the meeting, which approved a "roadmap" for two years of negotiations to adopt a new treaty to succeed Kyoto beyond 2012, the White House said it still had "serious concerns" about the way forward.
(Forget for a moment that it was President Clinton who did not present the Koyoto Accord to the Senate for confirmation after the Senate voted down the idea of it unanimously.)
Let us hope that the “reversal” was done to help the other nations to save face and participate in the Hawaii meetings scheduled for early next year. (Actually they pulled the numerical goals out of the body of the pact—a US requirement—before the US delegate said, essentially, Okay, I’ll take this back to Washington and see if it will fly.)
Like the original Kyoto Accord, this Bali Pact could still die on the Hill or in the White House.
As for this little POS:
"The U.S. has been humbled by the overwhelming message by developing countries that they are ready to be engaged with the problem, and it's been humiliated by the world community. I've never seen such a flip-flop in an environmental treaty context ever," said Bill Hare of Greenpeace.Eat whale blubber, Mr. Hale.
The ink wasn’t dry before this report appeared:
Climate deal runs straight into trouble with US
A hard-fought deal fixing a 2009 deadline for a new treaty to tackle global warming ran straight into trouble Sunday with the United States voicing "serious concerns" over its provisions.
As negotiators headed home after two weeks of intense haggling, the White House complained that the agreement did not do enough to commit major emerging economies such as China and India to big cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.
It underlined lingering division over how to confront the perils of global warming, which scientists warn will put millions of people at risk of hunger, homelessness and disease by the end of the century if temperatures keep rising at current rates.
There’s a mighty big “if” in that last sentence. More an more voices are decrying the “science” behind the IPCC report and the guess work that it contains. Fudged numbers, cherry picked data sets, poorly designed computer models, and a host of other problems exist within that document.
Even so, it seems like far, far more talk will be needed to “settle” this deal. But then again, what was the two weeks in Bali all about? There is absolutely NOTHING here that is binding EXCEPT that they will meet again:(emphasis added)
With the deal, the summit of 190 nations launched a process to negotiate a new treaty for when the UN Kyoto Protocol's pledges on slashing greenhouse gas emissions expire in 2012….
European nations and environmentalists broadly welcomed the move, although it did not go as far as many had wished by failing to specify any targets for slashing emissions blamed for global warming.
An isolated US delegation had backed down during an unplanned 13th day of talks and said it would finally accept the deal, but hours later US President George W. Bush's administration counter-attacked.
The White House said any Kyoto successor treaty must acknowledge a nation's sovereign right to pursue economic growth and energy security.
No nation, but especially the US, should give up its sovereignty to an organization as inept and corrupt as the UN—or the EU.
While there were several positive aspects to the Bali deal, it added, the "United States does have serious concerns about other aspects of the decision as we begin the negotiations."
The United States is the only major industrialised nation to reject Kyoto, arguing it is unfair as it does not require fast-growing emerging economies to meet targeted emissions cuts.
China is the world's second largest greenhouse-gas emitter after the United States, and is also outside the Kyoto treaty.
The White House said future talks must acknowledge that developed nations could not tackle climate change on their own through targeted emissions cuts, and that emerging economies had to be drawn in.
"Empirical studies on emission trends in the major developing economies now conclusively establish that emissions reductions principally by the developed world will be insufficient to confront the global problem effectively."
“The United States is the only major industrialised nation to reject Kyoto….” True. And the US has the lowest increase in greenhouse gases. Nearly one-third the increase the signees have so far had. One has to wonder why the EU countries aren’t putting action to their words.
As I’ve said in previous posts, the best thing for the US—and the world—would be if these blowhards just kept on talking without coming to any agreement. That way, in five or six years when it becomes clear that the science behind the IPCC report was just so much junk, all we will have lost is the cost of a few conferences in exotic locales.
As for what happens in Washington, any Senator who votes to give up US sovereignty should be run out of town on a rail--forget recall or impeachment--and don't spare the tar and feathers.
No comments:
Post a Comment