Countries agree on new roadmap for climate treaty

New global pact to be in place by 2015


The 194 countries at the global climate talk in Durban, South Africa agreed on Sunday to negotiate a new global climate treaty by 2015. The post-Kyoto arrangement, though, would not take effect until 2020, the Financial Times reports. The new set-up extends the key provisions of the Kyoto protocol, which expires at the end of 2012, for another five years and envisions a new, successor pact that will include the world’s top greenhouse gas emitters: China, the U.S. and India. However, rules for developing countries would continue to be laxer than for developed economies.

The Financial Times

Filed under:

Countries agree on new roadmap for climate treaty

  1. I hope this treaty dies from the same neglect Kyoto properly suffered. You don’t commit global trillion-dollar economic decisions on a hockey-stick graph that amounts to a single statistical run, on paleothermal CO2/warming correlation roller-coaster rides, and professor emeritus Al Gore’s apocalyptic rhetoric.

    One key speaker at Durban referred to “…saving the planet”. Inspired by the same sort of rocket-surgeons who want to rip corn from the mouths of the poor to dump ethanol into politically correct, cutesy green mini-cars.

    • You’re right. You don’t. And I expect they’re not.

      Rather, I expect they’re looking at the voluminous amounts of data, research, and expert advice put together over the last generation or so that you seem to be ignorant of.  Who knows, they may even be looking at things such as basic chemistry and physics.

      Incidentally, the corn for ethanol problem wouldn’t be near as bad if the US simply dropped it’s policies of paying farmers to *not grow* corn and grains so as to keep the prices inflated.

      • “…I expect…”

        As the apocryphal repairman said: “There’s your problem right there, lady.”

        It’s a failure of basic statistical logic. I’ve been following this junk-science for years. The very quote I offered shows the effrontery generated when political hacks take the sort of advocacy from ‘scientists’ that the U.N. itself rebuked. The quote I offered was quite real. I didn’t make it up. You’d think the asteroid or the beast of the apocalypse was at hand.

        You could take any number of paleothermal (proxy-determined) hockey sticks to derive a surface-temperature of the earth in the future equal to that of a young neutron star. Stats and trends cannot be taken beyond their purpose.

        Carbon is the bette noir for the yoga mat, bean-sprout smoothie crowd with investments in Apple and other sweatshop exploiters: an ersatz conscience-tweaker so they don’t have to deal with the real threats to the poor.

        • The failure or statistics logic is your own. Try looking at some real research, not the crap you find on junk-science, most of which (of their “debunking”) has been rebutted.

          The peer-reviewed science is all quite clear on this issue, and there is volumes of it.

          Basically you’re attempting to assert some global conspiracy of scientists has been attempting to fool us for nearly a generation. And while you may have stock in Alcan, I don’t.

          • Hmm, I didn’t get that from his post.

          • You call the IPCC eco-nazis.
            That you don’t get it is hardly surprising.. I’d suggest loosening the tinfoil around your own head.. at least until it uncovers your eyes.

          • Tin foil? What are you talking about? Have you forgotten your meds today Thwimmie? C’mon, be honest.

  2. People: educate yourselves. We have been conned big time. The fabricated stories, the missing data, the weather stations deleted from the records, the conspiracy to silence not just critics but editors, the secret computer programs, the embarassing predictions that don’t come true, the multi-billion$ in fraud. If you do nothing else, explore the tangled business dealings of one Rajendra Pachauri. If you still have any stomach read the history of the ice ages. The geologists generally are still honest.

    • I could not agree more.

      And if you really want to see what the eco-nazis are truly about, especially those running the IPCC, just Google some recent news stories about their secretive REDD plan.

      Its a plan which would sell the carbon stored in rainforests, effectively taking control of them away from Aboriginal people. All in the name of saving the planet. (sniff…)

      Canadians would actually have a clue if the media would only report it.

  3. Whether or not climate change is real and man-made, is largelly irrelevant. We need to drastically reduce our emissions quickly in order to accomplish three things:
    1. Have stable alt energy sources set up for when we run out of our current fuels and wars ensue
    2. Reduce pollution EVEN IF CLIMATE CHANGE IS M00T! Reducing pollution will still imrpove the quality of our air and freshwater and stop certain species-at-risk from vanishing.
    3. Just because climate change is highly contentious, doesn’t mean it’s NOT real. It just means we really don’t know. So we might as well do our best to repair what could be a very real situation, motivated by the two reasons above.

    • When we run out of our current fuels and wars ensue? Do you really beleive that, deep down inside really? You must be a peak oil alarmist.

      I have been hearing about peak oil since I was a kid in the 1970’s, about every 10 years it comes back and each time they say it is 5 years away. I hate to burst your bubble but there are now more establsihed oil reserves then ever before, there is now more natural gas than ever before, and there is still enough coal to last 200 years. Get a grip, fossil fuels are now so plentiful it will begin to get cheap again, even with the devalued US dollar. The UK has now enough natural gas that it might actually become a net exporter, Isreal even now has an enormous oil deposit. It might be true that peak oil is 5 years away, but peak fossil fuels is at least 100 years away.

  4. “agreed on Sunday to negotiate a new global climate treaty by 2015. The post-Kyoto arrangement, though, would not take effect until 2020,”

    I think from this we can safely say that Kyoto is dead and will be replaced by a new agreement by 2015, and then it will only take effect uintil 2020. And that agreement will be so watered down it will be meaningless. In other words, AGW is finished. The EUs corrupt carbon exhcnge has taken a hit and carbon is down to about $7 a ton, down from $30 a couple of years ago. I can’t wait until it folds like the Chicago Carbon Exchange last year.

    Oh my, it is good to be a climate denier in the 21st century. You alarmists should switch to the winning side. You can’t continue to lose like this, I’m starting to feel bad about it.

Sign in to comment.