The Devil is, of course, in the details but the G8 leaders have reached an agreement to halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
The deal, while unexpected, is replete with "ifs," "ands" and "buts" conditions that leave the committments far from certain. At worst the deal may be merely window dressing. From The Guardian:
The Japanese prime minister, Yasuo Fukuda, praised the deal, but added: "Needless to say, we cannot achieve the long-term goal without contributions from other major emitters."
"At tomorrow's major economies' meeting, I would like to call for their cooperation," he said.
Fukuda's hedging suggests that Canada, the U.S. and Japan still see their obligations as dependent on equal levels of cuts by China and India which brings us right back to the same old deadlock.
It's also unclear whether any of the Reluctant Three are willing to adopt hard caps without which the targets may be meaningless.
The deal, while unexpected, is replete with "ifs," "ands" and "buts" conditions that leave the committments far from certain. At worst the deal may be merely window dressing. From The Guardian:
The Japanese prime minister, Yasuo Fukuda, praised the deal, but added: "Needless to say, we cannot achieve the long-term goal without contributions from other major emitters."
"At tomorrow's major economies' meeting, I would like to call for their cooperation," he said.
Fukuda's hedging suggests that Canada, the U.S. and Japan still see their obligations as dependent on equal levels of cuts by China and India which brings us right back to the same old deadlock.
It's also unclear whether any of the Reluctant Three are willing to adopt hard caps without which the targets may be meaningless.
Perhaps the developing nations could have a different baseline for their 50% cut than the developed nations'
ReplyDeleteNew technologies could be available to developing nations in the near future.
Kyoto did not work, because the targets were unrealistic with no alternate energy source on the horizon. Windmills and solar energy won't cut it.
If the enviro movement in the 90's had not been so anti-nuclear, we would not be in this mess.
We see it again with biofuels.
Greenies quick to jump on a bandwagon that later proves disasterous.
Time for politicians to tune out Lizzy May and Suzuki, and do this thing right, with technology.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletePreschool, I've told you before. You want to make "scientific" comments, show up with your sources. Your opinions are meaningless and letting you post them is like letting a stranger track dog shit across your carpet. No more.
ReplyDelete