Global Green Parties call for honest, scientifically sound climate agreement

Posted at On The Wilder Side:

As the Copenhagen COP enters its second week, the Global Greens today called for an honest climate agreement, based on science not tricky accounting. The Global Greens are concerned that rich nations are building loopholes into the agreement to give the appearance of strong targets without the reality.

Land-use and forestry in particular are being used as let-out clauses to avoid actual emission reductions, according to the Global Greens Coordination, which includes representatives from Asia Pacific, African, American and European Green parties.

Tackling climate change is crucial for a sustainable future for people and the environment. The Global Greens therefore call on the world’s leaders to agree on in the next five crucial days:

1. Targets to limit global warming to 2 degrees C or less.

2. Clear 2020 targets for developed countries of at least a 40% reduction in emissions below 1990 levels, with an interim assessment point in 2014.

3. Commitment of substantial new funding by developed countries for mitigation and adaptation by developing countries, including reducing deforestation and degradation. This is in part recognition of the historic responsibility of developed countries for past emissions.

4. Exclusion of carbon capture and storage from the Clean Development Mechanism, and rejection of nuclear power altogether.

5. Strong pro-active measures to protect biodiversity, water and nature, whilst respecting the rights of local communities.

The COP15 should commit to finalizing a legally binding agreement in 2010 covering these and other issues, building on the Kyoto Protocol.

See also:

Web page for the release: http://www.globalgreens.org/statements/copenhagen_cop15

Global Greens web site: http://www.globalgreens.org

6 thoughts on “Global Green Parties call for honest, scientifically sound climate agreement

  1. Catholic Trotskyist

    Global warming is a fraud, and I am glad these negotiations will go nowhere so the Obama administration can get down to the business of Catholic Trotskyism; universal healthcare for all, giving up America’s sovereignty to the UN, banning abortion, strengthening education, and slowing down military escalation.

    Read Isaiah 55.
    And the government shall be upon his shoulders, the wonderful councilor, amen.

  2. MN Indy

    So glad that this sort of rabid environmentalism doesn’t stand a chance any time soon. I would like to see them come to the American people and tell us we need to pay reparations to the third world for carbon emissions (oh no!) with our tax money. Our economy is already bleeding and most industry has been shipped off to the third world. These sort of proposed regulations would just finish us off.

    And if they are serious about deforestation, they ought to consider converting the lands put to biofuel production back to food production. I wonder how many starving people in the third world might have been saved if the world hadn’t latched onto the criminal climate hoax the last decade?

    And what’s up with rejection of all nuke power? It’s a surer way than anything else to rapidly break the dependence on oil. Even Iran has figured this out, and the international oil cartels are pissed. This is what the real hoopla over their nuclear technology is about. Makes you even wonder if the anti-nuke power activists are funded at the top by oil to maintain their monopoly. It would not surprise me at all.

  3. inDglass

    A little extra carbon is nothing the environment can’t naturally counterbalance with increased plant growth or with the cooling cycle the earth seems to be entering anyway.

    If we are going to get international leaders to meet and discuss environmental issues, I would like to start with the mercury pollution of the ocean. Worldwide, we can’t safely eat fish anymore. That is a major health problem.

    Carbon is a red herring, distracting the masses from real environmental problems that we are actually capable of solving without destroying our economy or putting our trust in unreliable and controversial scientific data. (There is no questioning the fact that we are polluting the ocean with mercury and it is a health catastrophe. There is a growing scientific movement challenging the assessment of man-made carbon and its affect on the climate.)

  4. inDglass

    The Greens got 1/5th of their wish. Patrick J. Michaels of the Cato Institute reports:

    Late Friday afternoon, the White house announced a “meaningful agreement” at the Copenhagen climate summit. Details are currently unavailable, but a White House official said that developed and developing countries have agreed to list their national actions and commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with a “target” of a two degree (Celsius) limit to any further global warming.

    In other words, there are no specific emissions reductions targets and timetables. A country may choose no national reductions, or maybe a national program and that would be their “list.” And just what carbon dioxide level will stop warming over two degrees?

    No one knows, at least until computer models stop forecasting warming that isn’t happening and/or drastically overstating the warming that is verifiable.

    It sounds like the Copenhagen agreement is just more hot air. But not to worry, it will be hailed as a “breakthrough” by all the participants.

    In reality, nothing much was accomplished and any significant agreement for emissions reductions has been punted to the next UN climate confab, beginning on November 8, 2010 in Mexico City, six days after our congressional election.

  5. Mik Robertson

    Wasn’t there also an agreement to establish a $100 billion fund by 2020 to deal with damages from climate change and development of clean technologies for emerging nations? Would that make it 2/5 of their wish?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.