The world's future is being decided this weekend

[CHIMO]

Energy and environment ministers from the world's major economies are meeting in London today to try to accelerate crucial negotiations over an international treaty on climate change.

Strong progress has been made in the past few weeks, with Japan, for example, announcing that it will cut its emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases by 25% by 2020 relative to levels in 1990.

But there are still major obstacles and some doubt whether a strong global deal can be hammered out in time for the United Nations's conference on climate change in Copenhagen, now just seven weeks away.

Agreement can be reached if governments now focus on the key issue: the required overall reduction in emissions, with rich countries taking the lead through strong, binding targets and financial support for developing countries. Numbers are important to this, so let me explain why.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2009/oct/18/nicholas-stern-carbon-emission

[Meeker Morgan]

1. The world's future is NOT being decided this weekend

Energy and environment ministers from the world's major economies are in the grip of a delusion that they are in control of the situation.

[IrateCitizen]

2. +1

:thumbsup:

Not only are they in the grip of a delusion that they are in control, they are also gripped by the delusion that they can proceed on a timetable of their own choosing.

[pscot]

3. I tend to believe it when Japan says

they will cut emissions, but no other countries have a lot of credibility on this, least of all ours.

[Nederland]

5. You shouldn't

Like pretty much everybody else, Japan will likely fail to meet it's promised Kyoto targets.



http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSTRE4AB04L20081112

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4720978.stm

I seriously don't know why people place so much emphasis on climate change talks. If Kyoto is proof of anything, it's that the promises made by countries at this talks are absolutely worthless. One could actually say that by rejecting the treaty, the US was at least honest.

[wuvuj]

4. The REAL ISSUE?

http://www.alternet.org/story/143342/why_babies_must_be_stopped

Each $7 spent on basic family planning between now and 2050 would reduce emissions by more than a ton, the research says. To get the same reduction through alternative energy would cost at least $32 (or, as much as $83 to implement carbon capture and storage in coal plants, $92 to develop plug-in hybrids, or $131 for electric vehicles).

Providing such family planning over the next four decades would be the equivalent of reducing global CO2 by six times America's annual emissions.

...

Zee Poop and zee funnymentalists won't like it? :nopity: