Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      


Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 11:12 pm    Post subject: Copenhagen Results Reply with quote

I've not yet found any detailed analysis of the Accord that has been agreed to, but here at the major points AFAIK:

1) The Accord is non-binding on all parties. Countries will set their own targets and report on their actions, but that's about it.

2) No 'Dignity payments'. Again, a non-binding agreement to make 'abatement payments' in the case of floods and natural disasters. Now, this is obviously absurd, but it is non-binding and is pretty much just going to be a new label for the disaster aid that we would have given in the past. So, not actually any kind of financial obligation.

3) Agreement to meet again in 2010 and set more agressive targets in a binding treaty. Nothing shocking here. Even if a binding agreement had been made, and been personally endorsed by Pope Gore and Archbishops Suzuki and Hansen, there would been a new Ecomenical council to increase tithing to the Holy Church of Gaia and give more alms to Robert Mugabe.
Cool Blue

Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 11:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

l like how the developing countries were pushing for compensation for the future deaths of millions of people due to global warming.

Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Got my hands on the Accord that was agreed to. I'd attach it, but apparently we can't attach .pdf files ?

Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 206
Reputation: 99.4Reputation: 99.4

PostPosted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 1:28 pm    Post subject: Copenhagen accord Reply with quote

[edit] Text of the Accord
The Heads of State, Heads of Government, Ministers, and other heads of delegation present at the United Nations Climate Change Conference 2009 in Copenhagen,

In pursuit of the ultimate objective of the Convention as stated in its Article 2,
Being guided by the principles and provisions of the Convention,
Noting the results of work done by the two Ad hoc Working Groups,
Endorsing decision x/CP.15 on the Ad hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action
and decision x/CMP.5 that requests the Ad hoc Working Group on Further Commitments of Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol to continue its work,
Have agreed on this Copenhagen Accord which is operational immediately.

1. We underline that climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time. We emphasise our strong political will to urgently combat climate change in accordance with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. To achieve the ultimate objective of the Convention to stabilize greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system, we shall, recognizing the scientific view that the increase in global temperature should be below 2 degrees Celsius, on the basis of equity and in the context of sustainable development, enhance our long-term cooperative action to combat climate change. We recognize the critical impacts of climate change and the potential impacts of response measures on countries particularly vulnerable to its adverse effects and stress the need to establish a comprehensive adaptation programme including international support.

2. We agree that deep cuts in global emissions are required according to science, and as documented by the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report with a view to reduce global emissions so as to hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius, and take action to meet this objective consistent with science and on the basis of equity. We should cooperate in achieving the peaking of global and national emissions as soon as possible, recognizing that the time frame for peaking will be longer in developing countries and bearing in mind that social and economic development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities of developing countries and that a low-emission development strategy is indispensable to sustainable development.

3. Adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change and the potential impacts of response measures is a challenge faced by all countries. Enhanced action and international cooperation on adaptation is urgently required to ensure the implementation of the Convention by enabling and supporting the implementation of adaptation actions aimed at reducing vulnerability and building resilience in developing countries, especially in those that are particularly vulnerable, especially least developed countries, small island developing States and Africa. We agree that developed countries shall provide adequate, predictable and sustainable financial resources, technology and capacity-building to support the implementation of adaptation action in developing countries.

4. Annex I Parties commit to implement individually or jointly the quantified economywide emissions targets for 2020, to be submitted in the format given in Appendix I by Annex I Parties to the secretariat by 31 January 2010 for compilation in an INF document. Annex I Parties that are Party to the Kyoto Protocol will thereby further strengthen the emissions reductions initiated by the Kyoto Protocol. Delivery of reductions and financing by developed countries will be measured, reported and verified in accordance with existing and any further guidelines adopted by the Conference of the Parties, and will ensure that accounting of such targets and finance is rigorous, robust and transparent.

5. Non-Annex I Parties to the Convention will implement mitigation actions, including those to be submitted to the secretariat by non-Annex I Parties in the format given in Appendix II by 31 January 2010, for compilation in an INF document, consistent with Article 4.1 and Article 4.7 and in the context of sustainable development. Least developed countries and small island developing States may undertake actions voluntarily and on the basis of support. Mitigation actions subsequently taken and envisaged by Non-Annex I Parties, including national inventory reports, shall be communicated through national communications consistent with Article 12.1(b) every two years on the basis of guidelines to be adopted by the Conference of the Parties. Those mitigation actions in national communications or otherwise communicated to the Secretariat will be added to the list in appendix II. Mitigation actions taken by Non-Annex I Parties will be subject to their domestic measurement, reporting and verification the result of which will be reported through their national communications every two years. Non-Annex I Parties will communicate information on the implementation of their actions through National Communications, with provisions for international consultations and analysis under clearly defined guidelines that will ensure that national sovereignty is respected. Nationally appropriate mitigation actions seeking international support will be recorded in a registry along with relevant technology, finance and capacity building support. Those actions supported will be added to the list in appendix II. These supported nationally appropriate mitigation actions will be subject to international measurement, reporting and verification in accordance with guidelines adopted by the Conference of the Parties.

6. We recognize the crucial role of reducing emission from deforestation and forest degradation and the need to enhance removals of greenhouse gas emission by forests and agree on the need to provide positive incentives to such actions through the immediate establishment of a mechanism including REDD-plus, to enable the mobilization of financial resources from developed countries.

7. We decide to pursue various approaches, including opportunities to use markets, to enhance the cost-effectiveness of, and to promote mitigation actions. Developing countries, especially those with low emitting economies should be provided incentives to continue to develop on a low emission pathway.

8. Scaled up, new and additional, predictable and adequate funding as well as improved access shall be provided to developing countries, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention, to enable and support enhanced action on mitigation, including substantial finance to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD-plus), adaptation, technology development and transfer and capacity-building, for enhanced implementation of the Convention. The collective commitment by developed countries is to provide new and additional resources, including forestry and investments through international institutions, approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010 - 2012 with balanced allocation between adaptation and mitigation. Funding for adaptation will be prioritized for the most vulnerable developing countries, such as the least developed countries, small island developing States and Africa. In the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation, developed countries commit to a goal of mobilizing jointly USD 100 billion dollars a year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries. This funding will come from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources of finance. New multilateral funding for adaptation will be delivered through effective and efficient fund arrangements, with a governance structure providing for equal representation of developed and developing countries. A significant portion of such funding should flow through the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund.

9. To this end, a High Level Panel will be established under the guidance of and accountable to the Conference of the Parties to study the contribution of the potential sources of revenue, including alternative sources of finance, towards meeting this goal.

10. We decide that the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund shall be established as an operating entity of the financial mechanism of the Convention to support projects, programme, policies and other activities in developing countries related to mitigation including REDD-plus, adaptation, capacitybuilding, technology development and transfer.

11. In order to enhance action on development and transfer of technology we decide to establish a Technology Mechanism to accelerate technology development and transfer in support of action on adaptation and mitigation that will be guided by a country-driven approach and be based on national circumstances and priorities.

12. We call for an assessment of the implementation of this Accord to be completed by 2015, including in light of the Convention's ultimate objective. This would include consideration of strengthening the long-term goal referencing various matters presented by the science, including in relation to temperature rises of 1.5 degrees Celsius. [2]

Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 206
Reputation: 99.4Reputation: 99.4

PostPosted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 1:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Even though this is a non binding agreement I have problems with a lot of the agreement such as:

1. "climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time" I can think of alot of other things that are more challenging such as 3/4's of the population not having enough food or any electricity.

2. Any mention of the IPCC destroys this agreement.

3. deep cuts in carbon emissions? Before there is any proof that carbon emissions do anything?

4. mention of temperature such as "increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius" Do they promise it will not cool more than that? Next question is temperature according to who?

Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 9:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's certainly a lot of hogwash there, but as long as it's toothless, I can live with it.

Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 206
Reputation: 99.4Reputation: 99.4

PostPosted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lets look at some real problems:

Every year, at the moment, about 10 million children die of preventable and curable diseases, and yet we’re concerned that some time far in the future, a few hundred thousand people, maybe a few million people, at most, might suffer in some unknown way as a result of climate change.” – Julian Morris, Economist, Executive Director, International Policy Network in an interview with Larry King, January 31, 2007, CNN

Every day over 50,000 people on this planet die of the diseases of poverty.
One third of the planet doesn’t have electricity.
A billion people have no clean water.
Half a billion people go to bed hungry every night. 32,000 of them don’t wake up in the morning
An estimated 42 million people worldwide are now infected with HIV. More than 20 million have already died, and as many as 68 million more deaths are forecast by 2020.
In Africa, only 50,000 AIDS victims receive treatment, there are over 4,000,000 people there with HIV-AIDS. The cost of anti-retroviral drugs has dropped from $12,000 a year to under $300 a year. The U.N. has estimated that $7 billion to $10 billion a year will be required to fight AIDS in Africa. Support that effort.
Over 408,388,000 people suffer from Malaria world-wide. It kills 3,000 children every day and more than one million each year. It is estimated that $1.5 to $2.0 billion/year would be needed to cut infection and death by half. Malaria isn’t a warm places disease; it is a poor places disease. It should be remembered that one of the biggest outbreaks of malaria was in Archangel in Siberia, just below the Arctic Circle, where 30,000 people died from the disease. Ottawa had malaria in the 19th century; Holland was declared malaria free in the 1970’s.
4,000,000 children in developing countries die each year from complications brought about by smoke from indoor cooking fires. Conventional electrical generation using oil or natural gas would alleviate most if not all of these deaths. Solar power costs 3 times as much and is unaffordable in developing nations. Wind power is also too expensive and intermittent to be of use in poor countries. These people need a source of reliable energy, we can provide that easily with diesel generators and they can make their own fuel from non-food crops. See the June 2007 edition of Scientific American.

People like Al Gore and David Suzuki tell us that 300,000 people will die because of Global Warming in the next 20 years. Pretty small change compared to the millions that are already dying because they can’t get food, drugs, energy and pesticides.
We worry about extinction of plants and animals due to climate change while habitat is being destroyed so people can eat, be warm and hopefully live another day. We adopt bio-fuels like ethanol and bio-diesel, forcing food prices to rise and countless square kilometers of rain forest to be sacrificed to grow sugar cane and soy beans to meet our “needs” for these new designer fuels. Yet the “greens” don’t mention these activities or the species at risk because of our actions.
Copenhagen will cost the world an estimated $8,000,000,000,000 before 2100… just to reduce the predicted global temperature increase by a few hundredths of degrees Celsius. In that time, some 1,000,000,000 people will starve to death and 42 billion children will die needlessly from lung disease, not to mention the 100,000,000 who will succumb to malaria if we don’t help them get the pesticides and medical attention that they need now.
Do we care about any of this? It seems that we don’t. It seems that we would rather look a hundred years into the future with faulty glasses than pay attention to what’s going on now.
“To feed a starving child is to exacerbate the world population problem.” – Lamont Cole
Demand for fossil energy is growing, especially in developing countries. Limiting their access to fossil energy would doom millions to perpetual poverty. An energy diet for an energy starved world is a death sentence; it is not moral and is highly unethical!
The climate pundits claim that ‘The debate is over.’ and that ‘we need to act now.’
If these statements are true, we can divert the billions of dollars ($5,000,000,000 per annum in the US alone) spent on climate research to helping developing nations and their people to develop, become healthy, prosper, and take care of their environment. I expect that we would see just how settled the science is if funding was reduced.
I’m a skeptic that rejects the climate change disaster hype, but I do care about the problems of this planet and I believe that others do as well. All the current tub-thumping over climate change is not addressing today’s real and vital problems.
In the end, climate changes, it always has and always will; we are arrogant to think that we can control it. But we do have the means to alleviate suffering and protect the environment if we chose to do so. The challenge is in the hands of our politicians; do we follow the crowd spending countless billions to achieve what cannot be done or do we break from the pack to help developing countries really and truly develop so they can protect their ecosystems as we try to do here.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1


Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum

Copenhagen Results

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB