Kyoto I: Socialist Sucking Scheme

[August1991]

From the G & M:

The decisions came as the Prime Minister was battered for a second day in the House of Commons over a letter he wrote five years ago in which he called the Kyoto accord a "socialist scheme" aimed at sucking money from wealth-producing nations.

Battered? Why? That's what Kyoto I was.

We need to renegotiate and create Kyoto II. Keep the same overall global target but come up with a more realistic way of sharing the national targets. The definition of fairness has to be more practical and feasible (and include China and India).

It looks like we may get it too:

French President Jacques Chirac is expected to ask Mr. Baird for Canada's support for a new United Nations environment organization. Mr. Baird's spokesman, Mike Van Soelen, confirmed the Paris meeting, but would not say whether Canada would support the creation of the agency.

Also yesterday, the Prime Minister said he is willing to take part in a summit on global warming being called for by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

"I have not received an invitation from the United Nations Secretary-General," Mr. Harper told the Commons. "However, if we did, we would accept . . . we all realize this is a serious environmental problem that needs immediate action."

[jdobbin]

We need to renegotiate and create Kyoto II. Keep the same overall global target but come up with a more realistic way of sharing the national targets. The definition of fairness has to be more practical and feasible (and include China and India).

It's hard to believe at the moment that the Conservatives actually believe in the science of climate change. If the NDP force their hand, they might reject their own bill when it comes to a vote.

I'm starting to wonder if that is their strategy all along.

[hiti]

So after all the games, self-righteous rantings, insults and denials, Steve will implement the rest of Dion's Project Green and the Kyoto targets.

And the Tories try to say that Dion is not a leader. Heck, they are all out of breath trying to keep up to Dion's lead. LOL

[Ricki Bobbi]

So after all the games, self-righteous rantings, insults and denials, Steve will implement the rest of Dion's Project Green and the Kyoto targets.

And the Tories try to say that Dion is not a leader. Heck, they are all out of breath trying to keep up to Dion's lead. LOL

What was Stéphanie's legacy as Enmvironment Minister? He followed up years of inaction with solid plans and no action! Good work leader....

[Robert777]

So after all the games, self-righteous rantings, insults and denials, Steve will implement the rest of Dion's Project Green and the Kyoto targets.

And the Tories try to say that Dion is not a leader. Heck, they are all out of breath trying to keep up to Dion's lead. LOL

Every mainstream scientist says, that even if all greenhouse gas omissions were stopped today, the temperature of the earth will continue to rise for the next 1000 years. So what is the point of destroying the economy for something that can never be achieved. Kyoto is a dead end.

PROUD TO BE A REFORMER, BUY A GUN AND PO A LIBERAL! :angry:

[HistoryBuff44]

Any plan for action on the climate needs to include china, india and nations like brazil as well. Personally i think that emissions trading scheme is rediculous. How does it help us to lower our emissions if we give the money, that should be used to accomplish that task, to other nations?

Glenn Beck (CNN headline news at 7 MT) had a guy on his program that said right now between china and india there is a new coal power plant coming online every 3 days!!

[scribblet]

What was Stéphanie's legacy as Enmvironment Minister? He followed up years of inaction with solid plans and no action! Good work leader....

Zilch !!!

Earth has always cycled, and cycled before man was on earth, so what caused it then? No one want to discuss the real question that is: how much can we actually do, and how much are just trying to slow down the inevitable. No politician is willing to address the real problem - over population and the fact that we would need to back to a pre-industrialized age in order to slow climate change.

Its all political, we can't really do anything other than clean up our water and cut air pollutionl

[jdobbin]

Zilch !!!

Earth has always cycled, and cycled before man was on earth, so what caused it then? No one want to discuss the real question that is: how much can we actually do, and how much are just trying to slow down the inevitable. No politician is willing to address the real problem - over population and the fact that we would need to back to a pre-industrialized age in order to slow climate change.

Its all political, we can't really do anything other than clean up our water and cut air pollutionl

So the Conservatives now have the science wrong on global warming and are wasting money? Who will you vote for next time?

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/02/02/...ate-070202.html

[myata]

It was already pointed out before that this talk about making China and India to put any kind of involuntary restrictions on their still underdeveloped economies sounds like pure opportunism and hypocrisy coming from the West which has been (for couple of centuries) and still is the greatest polluter and emitter on the planet, in absolute terms and per capita.

You've got to come up with some more credible argument to discredit Kyoto, which in my understanding at least, was intended to be a tool to kick start global climate awareness internationally, more than to actually achieve real reductions on the global scale. All this talk about China and India to show the lead is no more than a stalling tactics and an obvious one at that.

Now with the latest conclusion of international panel on climate change, argument against greenhouse reductions becomes even less credible.

[August1991]

It was already pointed out before that this talk about making China and India to put any kind of involuntary restrictions on their still underdeveloped economies sounds like pure opportunism and hypocrisy coming from the West which has been (for couple of centuries) and still is the greatest polluter and emitter on the planet, in absolute terms and per capita.

At present, China is building one coal generating station every week. Five such stations emit the equivalent CO2 to what Canada has agreed to cut (but in fact hasn't) under Kyoto I.

Myata, talk about poor China and the rich West (ie. the US) is the reason Harper was right to describe Kyoto I as a socialist sucking scheme.

Kyoto I is deeply, deeply flawed. China, India, Indonesia and many other countries are absolutely exempt. The cuts for Germany, Russia and other European countries are negligible or non-existent.

In fact, Kyoto I had two objectives: cut global GHG emissions and transfer money from the US to the Third World/ex-Communist east.

Global warming is too serious an issue to be mixed up with world poverty. Anyway, Kyoto I was so badly done that it had no chance of working.

The world has to renegotiate Kyoto and create Kyoto II. The UN Sec-Gen realizes this and the process to do this is starting. Kyoto II must include the US and it must not combine the problem of GHG emissions with the problem of world poverty.

An obvious solution is to maintain Kyoto I's overall, global cuts but allocate these cuts differently on a national basis.

There's more however. Kyoto I included inaccurate calculations for carbon sinks (vegetation can absorb and bank CO2) and it depended on voluntary, national, unaudited inventories of GHG emissions. In Kyoto I, each country made up its own numbers and no one checked them.

It is very easy to get agreement around a restaurant table about what to order when everyone votes to send the tab to the big guy in the corner. The agreement is meaningless however when the big guy gets up and leaves the restaurant before anyone has ordered anything.

Kyoto I: Let's invent an imaginary person to pay for our imaginary feast.

The world is delusional if it thinks Kyoto I will work. It won't. Kyoto II is when the real bunfight will start. Fortunately, we've got time and we've got a way to solve the problem. Kyoto I laid out the main elements; we just have to go about it more practically.

So after all the games, self-righteous rantings, insults and denials, Steve will implement the rest of Dion's Project Green and the Kyoto targets.

And the Tories try to say that Dion is not a leader. Heck, they are all out of breath trying to keep up to Dion's lead. LOL

You entirely miss what is going on.

Without the participation of the US, Kyoto was a dead letter. The world cannot solve this problem unless the US participates in the solution.

It appears that the UN Sec-Gen is now going about trying to start a new and different version of Kyoto that will include the US.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear August1991,

The world has to renegotiate Kyoto and create Kyoto II. The UN Sec-Gen realizes this and the process to do this is starting. Kyoto II must include the US and it must not combine the problem of GHG emissions with the problem of world poverty.

I totally agree. In fact, it should not only include the US but every country, whether they like it or not. The big question is, how do you enforce it?

It is very easy to get agreement around a restaurant table about what to order when everyone votes to send the tab to the big guy in the corner. The agreement is meaningless however when the big guy gets up and leaves the restaurant before anyone has ordered anything.

Sadly, this analogy is a bit flawed. It is more akin to the big guy getting up and walking out on the tab after the dinner. Then what?

[Charles Anthony]

Then what?

Next time around, do not count your chickens before they are hatched.

[myata]

I'm sure that's what Harper may think. It's still defies very basic logic nonetheless. What we see around us now, is created by 200 years on uncontrolled virtually unlimited (other than in the last to or three decades) pollution by the West. One can argue that West's wealth can be in part traced to that history (along with its former ability to plunder resources of other less developed countries virtually at will). To make the clean up of the mess conditional on participation of the countries which had nothing to do with creating it, and only developing their economies, is the same thing what it looks - i.e., opportunism and hypocrisy. What if China turns up a coal plant a week, if it's total greenhouse emissions are still times less than those of US - both absolute and per capita? Can you see the fatal lack of logic in this argument? If you can, than millions of Chinese and Indians won't miss it either.

The way to go was to start some activity, possibly develop solutions to deal with the problem, then attempt to involve the second tier countries by sharing these solutions with them to the benefit of all. But of course, it'd have caused certain pain and it's oh so much easier to do nothing while pointing blaming finger at everybody else but one's own image. It's becoming a trademark of US foreign policy so much that I wonder if anyone would expect anything different now - real leadearship, perhaps, even by example?

[August1991]

What we see around us now, is created by 200 years on uncontrolled virtually unlimited (other than in the last to or three decades) pollution by the West.

Oh really? This problem was only 200 years in the making? And it's the fault of the West?

For starters, I suggest you take a look at statistics for the burning of forests in poor countries. You might also consider that humans cause this problem - and most people live in poor countries. Finally, the statistics on GHG emissions are seriously flawed. We know that CO2 emissions are rising but no one really knows clearly their source.

But all of this is neither here nor there. The problem before us is to limit global GHG emissions at lowest cost. Whether we limit emissions in China, America, Indonesia or Brazil is irrelevant. We should start where it is least costly to limit them - where we get the biggest reduction for the buck.

Moreover, there is no doubt that it will be Western thinking, methods and technology that will play a critical role in solving this problem. (The mullahs would be weighing evidence according to authorship: scientific research by two women is equivalent to the work of one man.)

IOW, this problem will not be solved unless America participates in the solution.

Dear August1991,

It is very easy to get agreement around a restaurant table about what to order when everyone votes to send the tab to the big guy in the corner. The agreement is meaningless however when the big guy gets up and leaves the restaurant before anyone has ordered anything.

Sadly, this analogy is a bit flawed. It is more akin to the big guy getting up and walking out on the tab after the dinner. Then what?

Thelonious, if we mix up the problem of world poverty with the problem of global warming, we will never solve either. If we try this mix, we would do as the Palestinians and we'll still be arguing about injustice in 2050.

Let bygones be bygones and let's think of the future, of children and grandchildren. Many divorcing couples wisely come to the same conclusion.

I sometimes fear that the Left has jumped on this environmental train merely because it means blaming the Dominant Capitalist West. God help us all if someone finds an obscure reference to global warming in Das Kapital.

[Canuck E Stan]

And the Tories try to say that Dion is not a leader. Heck, they are all out of breath trying to keep up to Dion's lead. LOL

Not out of breathe,holding it....and their noses too.

The bullshit from Dion smells......still.

Dion is a leader, typical Liberal leader that is.

Like Chretien,like Martin.

All talk, no action.

[jdobbin]

Dion is a leader, typical Liberal leader that is.

Like Chretien,like Martin.

All talk, no action.

Harper has his own credibility problems as a recent convert to global warming. We'll see how much farther past the Liberals he is willing to go.

[myata]

For starters, I suggest you take a look at statistics for the burning of forests in poor countries. You might also consider that humans cause this problem - and most people live in poor countries. Finally, the statistics on GHG emissions are seriously flawed. We know that CO2 emissions are rising but no one really knows clearly their source.

Surely West was and is the biggest contributor to the problem. As current statistics show. Yes we're all humans. And humans cause this problem. But humans living in industrialized oil burning economies just happen to cause it so much more, that they have to accept responsibility and show leadership in finding solution. Of course if we believe the statistics. But of course the statistics must be really flawed because they don't happen to support your argument. You must have betters ones and should share them with the world. FYI, the data on emissions per country is quite east to find on the net and it was posted in another thread.

I liked the forest part too. Please try to go to UK, France or Central US and find a forest. Where oh where have they all gone? I wonder.

But all of this is neither here nor there. The problem before us is to limit global GHG emissions at lowest cost. Whether we limit emissions in China, America, Indonesia or Brazil is irrelevant. We should start where it is least costly to limit them - where we get the biggest reduction for the buck.

Er.... why? Lowest cost to who? And how "we" can limit emissions in China or Brazil? Wouldn't it be more natural to start where most emissions originate?

Moreover, there is no doubt that it will be Western thinking, methods and technology that will play a critical role in solving this problem. (The mullahs would be weighing evidence according to authorship: scientific research by two women is equivalent to the work of one man.)

I don't happen to have a crystal ball so I'd just wait and see how it'll play out. There's little doubt though that the ball is squarely in the West' year on this, and while some (like EU) at least starting doing something, there hasn't been much action on this continent. In contrast to the amount of rhethorics against Kyoto.

IOW, this problem will not be solved unless America participates in the solution.

Absolutely. But is America's non participation in the solution the reason to do nothing ourselves?

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear August1991,

I sometimes fear that the Left has jumped on this environmental train merely because it means blaming the Dominant Capitalist West. God help us all if someone finds an obscure reference to global warming in Das Kapital.

The 'left' has been driving that train for a long time now. "Jumping on the train' indeed. For decades, the 'left' has been critical of the backseat that the environment has taken over the glory of 'corporatist' profit.

And it's the fault of the West?

For starters, I suggest you take a look at statistics for the burning of forests in poor countries. You might also consider that humans cause this problem - and most people live in poor countries.

Why are the 'poor countries' burning and razing the rainforest, etc? For the profits.

Here is McDonald's recent policy statement...

http://www.mcdonalds.ca/en/community/envir...rainforest.aspx

The preservation of tropical rain forest land is a top priority at McDonald's. Our global rainforest beef policy is simple: we do not purchase beef from rainforests or recently deforested land. This policy has been part of our beef supplier specifications since 1989.

'Rainforst beef' is cheaper, and they can keep domestic supply prices down. They simply mix it at the factories. You'll note, they don't buy beef from 'rainforests'. That is probably good, since cattle don't thrive in rainforests. Then they try to minimize culpability with the term 'recently deforested land'. Regardless, hectares upon hectares of the planet's lungs have been destroyed in the name of 'fast food beef' (McDonald's isn't the only guilty party).

from..

http://www.mcspotlight.org/people/witnesse...ins_ronald.html

Years of travel and investigation in Guatemala have shown me that the country has had the most unequal system of land distribution in Central America (2% of the landowners control over 70% of the land, including almost all of the fertile land, while 85% of its mainly indigenous and small farmer population are living in abject poverty) as well as one of the most serious problems of deforestation and rainforest destruction. These two problems are of course inter-related and made worse by the intervention of fast food giants such as McDonald's in the Guatemalan economy. In a nutshell here's how the multinational beef industry is harming Guatemala and its people. Since the rich ranchers and plantation owners monpolize all the good land (leaving most of it idle, or in many cases raising cattle more for status than actual profitability) the landless poor are forced to till unsuitable highland areas where they slash and burn the forest, plant a few crops of corn and beans, and then move on (since rainforest land is poor agricultural land) to cut down more forest

To say that concern for the environment is the latest fad by the 'left' simply to 'bash the West' is utterly ridiculous.

[scribblet]

So the Conservatives now have the science wrong on global warming and are wasting money? Who will you vote for next time?

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/02/02/...ate-070202.html

Scientists don't agree on all of it, and besides I'm not disputing climate change exists, I'm only saying that there's nothing man do to stop earth's cycling All this is nothing but a political football not for votes.

Exactly who was to blame for global cooling and warming before humans were on earth.

I would never vote NDP and the Liberals still need to be in the penalty box for a few years, I'll stick with the CPC for now.

[B. Max]

So after all the games, self-righteous rantings, insults and denials, Steve will implement the rest of Dion's Project Green and the Kyoto targets.

If he does he'll never see his majorty. In fact he can watch as Alberta high tails it outa here. He's already in trouble over the income trusts.

[jdobbin]

Scientists don't agree on all of it, and besides I'm not disputing climate change exists, I'm only saying that there's nothing man do to stop earth's cycling All this is nothing but a political football not for votes.

Exactly who was to blame for global cooling and warming before humans were on earth.

I would never vote NDP and the Liberals still need to be in the penalty box for a few years, I'll stick with the CPC for now.

This is one of the things I've been saying for a while. Tory support is solid enough that Harper can hit Alberta with an emissions cap and not lose those seats.

[myata]

Scientists don't agree on all of it, and besides I'm not disputing climate change exists, I'm only saying that there's nothing man do to stop earth's cycling All this is nothing but a political football not for votes.

Just wondering, are you guys reading the news, at all? Or staking it out in the alternative Universe?

[jefferiah]

Well I think the environment is a very important issue, and we need to start making a lot of changes in order to protect it. However, that said, I think rejecting Kyoto was right----at the time I thought it was crazy to reject it, but I am starting to see some good reasons for its being rejected. It would be stupid to bind ourselves to quotas while the biggest polluters are let off the hook and are given the opportunity to suck cash from the West. Yes the West is rich, but you can't solve all the worlds problems by redistribution. You can give China a jigabazillion dollars if you like-----they already have a nuke program, a space program. If their Gov.s don't spend it right there is no point in giving it to them.

[myata]

If you mean the US, you're right: emission stats from Wikipedia.

Here's another interesting emissions and climate change stats, from Env Canada.

[margrace]

Canadians love China, they must look how they support Walmart. Canadians don't care about lose of jobs, they must, look how they spend their money on goods made in other countries.

We are cutting our own throats and you know what, most of the people asked or commenting don't give a damn do they?