Futility, Squared: Davos Attendees Will Discuss UN Climate Treaty Progress

[hatrack]

EDIT

The fact that the conference accomplished anything at all was seen by some as its biggest achievement; failure would have raised serious doubts about whether the U.N. is the right forum for the climate talks. But the ultimate goal of crafting a new global climate pact was put off till the next climate conference in Durban, South Africa, or beyond. The main issue that remains to be resolved is the legal status of such a treaty: Should the commitments inscribed in it be compulsory?

Ed. - emphasis :banghead: added.

China and India oppose legally binding emissions targets, saying that would hobble the economic growth they need to lift millions of citizens out of poverty. "For India and China I think our priority is development — at any cost. We can't let our people rot," Aditya Ghosh, senior co-ordinator for climate change at New Delhi's Centre for Science and Environment told AP Television News. "We can't compromise, sacrifice our development targets, development goals in a country when we have about 27 per cent people still under poverty line."

For its part, the U.S. says it would only consider binding commitments if China and India do the same. The U.S. and other Western nations are the biggest emitters, historically, but the growing power demands of developing countries mean they now account for more most of the world's current emissions.

After Cancun, U.S. climate envoy Todd Stern said Washington doesn't believe in a paradigm "where all obligations go to developed countries and none to even the major developing countries." "I mean, 55 per cent of global emissions are already coming from the developing world. In the next 20 years, that's going to go up to 65 per cent," Stern told the AP.

EDIT

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5gMFuL_PB01CkmGiudnhDNToc5peg?docId=5771197

[Newest Reality]

1. And Atlas Masturbated

While we stand on the brink it becomes more clear that we don't have real economy because we don't economize. Therefore we buy into the idea that a better, or decent, life is only capitalistic, (or insert your favorite, obsolete, "ism" here) and based on a consumptive, Western profit model.

It will occur to us, either as we wipe the sweat off our foreheads after averting the death rattle phase on this planet or as the survivors look back in horror at the outcome, that the amount of real and extreme change required of us is not optional. For me, there is a bifurcation point where we will either continue into what resembles chaos by attempting to preserve the failing, outdated paradigm of our corporate and political controllers, or we will transition into a new order that emerges for a different and more stable, sustainable and egalitarian planet at large. Our numbers and our technology deem this to be paramount for the survival of all concerned, from the single-celled organisms and across the genetic board to us, the hominid that appears to be in a collective, adolescent stage while possessed of too much manipulative power for its own good.

While I am not fond of, or too optimistic about a techno-fix, and I am just as wary of a techocracy as any other form of government, it seems that we are immersed in high-technology so much so that we depend totally on it and without it we face an apocalyptic outcome of misery and death for, potentially, billions. So, short of ecocide or a stochastic genocide based on the inherit factors of built-in debt and market-induced scarcity and lack of access, we might want to consider the window of opportunity we may yet have. That window is closing as we speak.

We did not hear about anything relating to that kind of vision and change in the SOTU and we will not hear it from the corporate bull-horns and proclamations of corporate media. Yet, the-state-of-the-art of various technologies could allow us, if we can find the will, to stay the ecocide and genocide, (poverty is the biggest killer of all) and transform the planet to the benefit of all involved. If that sounds like merely an option, then it might behoove you to do a little more research into the current effect the Western way of life.

There are visions and plans and great ideas. There is a plethora of new and converging technologies that could be put to service in the name of humanity and the Earth. What is lacking is the will and access to information that would be revolutionary and it is all actually anathema to the powers that be. That's foreboding and a definite challenge, but soon, the results we see might make alternatives seem far more compelling and worth a collective shot. If we keep this going and allow this way of life to continue, I am convinced that our species will either descend into a chilling darkness at the very best, or go extinct while it takes a large number of lifeforms with it. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results and that is how this game is being played.

You may say I'm dreamer, but I'm not the only one.