Copenhagen-Meaningful Agreement reached-Obama Call to Action

by Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke | December 18, 2009 at 03:34 am

623 views | 82 Recommendations | 23 comments

Today is the last day of the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit. When world leaders arrived yesterday and early today, they were expecting to look at a draft document that they could finalize and sign.

It turns out a document was non-existent. China and the United States seem to be at odds. Although China has announced that it would reduce carbon emission, based on GDP, by 40% it has also stated that it will not permit inspection or verification. President Obama is expected to meet Hu Jintao later today. Can the two countries reconcile their differences?

Chines Premier Wen Jiabao, in a speech this morning, talked about its challenges, especially with energy production by coal. China talked about having the largest man made forests in the world, but that it was challenged with its 1.3 Billion population, 150 Million still living under the poverty line. China said it would do verification according to domestic laws but would not permit intrusion on its souvereignity.

Hillary Clinton yesterday stated that lack of verification of China's climate change efforts would be a deal breaker. All ears and eyes will be on President Obama's appearance this morning. Would Hillary and Obama be playing bad cop good cop?

President Zarkosi, France, has blamed China as the culprit, preventing a deal.

Canada's Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, who arrived in Copenhagen yesterday, hasn't been heard from, other than him attending a leaders dinner last night. Canada maintains that it will align itself with the U.S.

President Obama spoke at the conference, stating that America has taken bold action with legislation and is transforming to to green technology. He said that this would create green industry jobs. He outlined three points that are essential in an agreement.

1. America will reduce carbon emission by 17% by 2020 and 80% by 2050

2. Accountability - i.e. verification (I think this was directed at China)

3. Financing - America will make FAST track financing of $10 Billion available by 2012 to assist developing countries and will contribute $100 Billion fund for Developing countries.

President Obama's speech was a call to action, he said the time for talking was over.

Full TEXT of Obama's Speech

Update:

President Obama concluded a 55 minute meeting with Chines Premier Wen Jiaboa, deemed constructive. Apparently the talks have broken into two camps those dealing with China only and the rest dealing with everyone else.

Canada has been designated as the worst country in the world receiving the fossil award.

From Mark Knoller's tweets:

UN Secretary General has asked world leaders to stay one more night. White House says it will consider the request but that it highly unlikely that Obama would stay unless there was substantive progress.

wkg thru Bella ctr in #copenhagen. overhearing dozens of ppl changing flights to Monday. ldrs may go.. negotiators may stay. #cbccopen ^aa

After intense negotiations an agreement was reached that really satisfied no one and fell short of a binding agreement. The agreement is being called meaning full though. Read more here

Leaked first draft of Copenhagen Agreement

Climate change talks in Copenhagen are down to their last day, and there is uncertainty whether a deal will be reached.

Lars Lokke Rasmussen, the Danish prime minister, said this morning that talks went well last night, and that compromise and consensus is starting to emerge.

But not all attendees are as optimistic.

"A deal is still possible, but as of this morning, I think we have a climate change summit in crisis," said Achim Steiner, the head of the UN Environment Programme, adding that what the conference needs now some "inspiring leadership."

Leadership could come from U.S. President Barack Obama, who arrived in Copenhagen early Friday. Shortly after he arrived, Obama had an unscheduled meeting with almost 20 world leaders, including the heads of Britain, France, China, Russia, Brazil and a dozen other countries.

2 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend This comment thread is now closed

marianmo

at 03:58 on December 18th, 2009

ty acp

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 04:02 on December 18th, 2009

welcome

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 04:02 on December 18th, 2009

Hugh Askew

at 04:29 on December 18th, 2009

"...America has taken bold action..."

Certainly did! Why we flew dozens and dozens of officious types there, in dozens of jets. Some of them carrying almost a dozen people! Why that was bold. Usually those important people like large entourages.

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 04:41 on December 18th, 2009

Yes leading by example is not exactly demonstrated by the actions of those that advocate bold action. Canada has the same problem. I guess the difference is that at least the US is talking, our PM seems to be AWOL, although he is there. Maybe he is looking for regime change?

Uwe Paschen

at 04:47 on December 18th, 2009

China's proposal does make sense and even though the US may not like it, it is fair if we look at total pollution over all.

China's contribution to pollution over all is less then one ton per Capita where as the US leads the world with 20 tons per capita, Followed by Australia with 17 tons per capita and Canada with 16 tons per capita.

Germany does emit 10 tons per capita and Japan 9 tons per capita.

China's proposal would penalise the worth polluters and help third world countries to cash up wile implementing better infrastructures and building up an industry that is less polluting as well.

North America does not like the deal simply because it is the worth polluter along with Australia and Luxembourg.

Countries like Turkey, Germany, Finland, Japan, Denmark or South Korea can live well with this proposal from China.

But then again Countries like Germany have been heavily investing into better environmental technologies and research, wile the US has been promoting more SUV's and waste production rather then counter it.

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 05:01 on December 18th, 2009

Paschen thank you for your comments. I won't argue with your data. We all knew what the U.S. would agree too as far as carbon reduction goes. I think environmentalist in Copenhagen and around the world were hopeful that the US would go even further. I believe that would have been political suicide for President Obama.

It's interesting to note, that the Cap Trade Bill is still stuck in the US Congress. The Obama Administration has made Health Care its priority for now. There will, no doubt, be many attempts to stop Cap and Trade if it comes to the forefront again.

Uwe Paschen

at 05:45 on December 18th, 2009

The US should be grateful that no one has yet proposed to penalise and start counting from the beginning of the industrialisation 200 years ago or so. That would be more then fair, but it would hurt the US and the UK the most.

The argument every one is getting lost in, may that be on the political, economical or social level even as far as the science goes. It is the same debate and boils down to whether the glass is half full or half empty?

Well, does it really matter? Since we all know that it is killing us, slowly maybe, but for certain it will.

I suppose we are no smarter then the frog put into a boll of water and slowly we heat the water up, the frog would not notice until it is far to late for him and the water is exceeding the 90 degrees Celsius.

I though we where the most intelligent specie there is? Well, I think the frogs are just as smart then we are after all. Maybe even smarter since they would not start boiling the water on their own, we on the other hand are heating up our own boll of water so to speak.

Nietzsche, said it all to well, "We are capable of greatness, yet it is very unlikely we ever reach it, we most likely destroy our self long before..."

Babel-Fish

at 05:13 on December 18th, 2009

What does it matter the summit and the recession has kick started growth industry developed countries need jobs and the green and clean industries will now really take off. USA by saying that green house gas is bad for its citizens health due to the leaked scientist emails has really done the trick. Expect more than 40% less emissions by 2020. There is money to be made in this new growth industry and the elite will bite the bait.

I am sitting here pleased as all I want is clean air and a clean environment to live in, perhaps I am selfish but at a guess we all want that. Climate change well I don't believe we are making a noticeable difference, but if we carry on as we are who knows.

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 05:17 on December 18th, 2009

Only time will tell Babel. You may be correct, but then again Congress has to fund it and looking at the health care reform debate who knows. I am not as convinced as you are.

JustMyOpinion

at 07:44 on December 18th, 2009

The moment ignorant Americans grasp the fact that this global warming is nothing but a hoax that will make such alarmist leaders as Al Gore billionaires at the expense of the already struggling middle and lower class American citizens, then and ONLY then will the American people stop this authoritarian measure. This is nothing but a stepping stone to a one child policy by means of TAXING parents who have more than one child, making them pay for the childs so-called carbon footprint through its life time, which, if you are a conscious individual, has been the argument of Liberals for ever. Think about this for just 5 seconds, if your in control of carbon, then your in control of everything, including you and I, we do exhale CO2. Wake up people

a211423

at 08:31 on December 18th, 2009

1. America will reduce carbon emission by 17% by 2020 and 80% by 2050

These are percentages based on 2005, not 1990 the year most countries are using as a set date. I think the comparison factors to 4% by 2020.

Is this the best we can do?

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 09:19 on December 18th, 2009

What you're also not being told is that there is legislation exempting steel and other international trade related industries.industries. I mentioned it briefly in my story yesterday. It is the reason why Canada wants to exempt the oil sands and set lower targets for them. Canada wants to be in lockstep with the U.S. for economic reasons.

a211423

at 09:19 on December 18th, 2009

cowpoke

Do you have a link to the articles about the exemptions? I would like to read more about this.

t k kidwai

at 09:25 on December 18th, 2009

India and China walked out of Copenhegen summit as it was doomed to failure.Chinese stand on climate change and reduction in emissions was reasonable and needed endorsement by other countries' delegates.India promised voluntary reduction of emissions whatever may be outcome of Copenhagen talks.Indian PM wanted developed countries to deliver what they promised at Kyoto talks.

Obama,as usual,talked tough,wanted results without wasting time on talks.Tough talking doesn't yeild desired results,US president must be told in no uncertain terms.

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 10:00 on December 18th, 2009

Thank you for this information.

India and China walk out of Talks

This puts a different light on it. I just received a tweet that Obama was meeting with the Chinese Premier again. About 5 minuts ago.

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao and Brazilian President President Lula da Silva left the session to hold a parallel meeting, reportedly to confer about concerns over the "umbrella paragraph" in the draft of an agreement being worked on for signing later today.

The three reportedly later rejoined the conference.

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 11:37 on December 18th, 2009

This is where I got the reference yesterday. It was from a CBC newstory. It mentions the Waxman-Markey Legislation. I haven't looked at it.

The draft documents compare the Conservatives' 2007 green plan, called Turning the Corner, with U.S. legislation (Waxman-Markey legislation) passed by the House of Representatives and suggest the targets of Canada's plan are more stringent.

Speaking in Copenhagen, Prentice told reporters that the U.S. legislation includes a number of industries that are described as "trade-exposed industrial sectors."

"One of the decisions that will need to be made in terms of harmonization is the manner in which that matches with Canada," Prentice said.

Canada competes with the U.S in those sectors, which include steel, potash, cement and oil and gas. Under the U.S. legislation, those industries are getting lower emission targets than they do in Canada.

Asked about Canada's oilsands, Prentice replied: "I think any industry that is a trade-exposed industry in the same sense would be an industry that has to be considered in terms of its comparability to the U.S. framework."

He said that no decisions have been made.