Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

G8 leaders endorse a fifty percent emmisions reduction

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
environmentalist Donating Member (156 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 04:28 AM
Original message
G8 leaders endorse a fifty percent emmisions reduction
Source: The Environmentalist

The 2008 G8 Summit has ended with an agreement among the principals to endorse cutting greenhouse gas emissions fifty percent by 2050. Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda, host of the meeting, added a request that countries reduce their mid-term greenhouse gas emissions prior to standards being set.

Read more: http://politics.the-environmentalist.org/2008/07/g8-leaders-endorse-fifty-percent.html


The agreement does not set specific numeric targets, a concession to George Bush who insisted that any agreement must include China and India, two countries that are not part of the eight in the G8. The article includes data from NASA's James Hansen on the current state of emissions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 04:39 AM
Response to Original message
1. G8 agree to close barn door half-way in the hopes that horses and cattle lost may return,
and those few still in barn may or may not stay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
environmentalist Donating Member (156 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 05:48 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Well put (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 05:57 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Sounds big, but...
way too little, way too late.

The damage done.

As Starhawk said, "We can no longer afford the luxury of be realistic."

We have to make huge life changes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theliberalking Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 05:55 AM
Response to Original message
3. Drastic measures are needed
Ice in the North Pole might disappear by the end of the year. A 50% emission cut sounds about right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Maybe by 8:50pm tonight, not by the year 2050
Agreeing to cut emissions by 50% in 42 years is little more than masturbatory penmanship.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
environmentalist Donating Member (156 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Great response (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
6. The Littlest President will surely relish this moment!
After all, it was his big bold concept to propose that America begin to decrease its emissions in 2025 (no, this isn't a typo).

This is just the kind of courageous inaction and visionary inertia that President Chimp can applaud, with one notable omission - this statement needs to say "Technology technology technology technology!!!" a few times to really caption the essence of a Bush/GOP climate policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
8. since there is not numeric targets, what does the 50% mean? nothing.
is it supposed to be 50% of current levels? 1991 levels? 2020 levels or even 2050 levels?

it's all bullshit with a shine.

since there is not definable targets, in a phrase, we are fucked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
9. Nothing we can do will even dent climate change.
Before the Ice Age, the Earth was a balmy 85 degrees all over. That is why the reptiles owned the planet. Unless another huge comet collides with the Earth, it will return to that same temperature and conditions. Your local reptiles will be happy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freedomnorth Donating Member (237 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Dinosaurs died 65 MILLION years ago
Last Ice age happened during Age of men.



And Climate change will happen because of Age of men.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. Uh...
I'm talking about the only major Ice Age and not the little cyclic blips. By your logic, you could also say that last period or global warming was cured by an ice age.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. Gosh, there was only one Ice Age?
True, there was only one movie entitled "Ice Age" - the sequel had a number after it, as I remember . . .

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. I'm talking about Snowball Earth....
The earliest well documented Ice Age. The Earth's original condition was ice free. By you the citing the smaller cyclic ice age, then I guess we can attribute the current global warming period as part of that cycle as well :eyes:. Especially since there is no consensus on what has caused the smaller cyclic ice ages.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. "Snowball Earth" predated reptiles
It predated all vertebrates, for that matter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. 635 to 700 million years ago, by current estimates
http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=2799&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

In fact, you're all the way back in the Proterozoic, predating the Cambrian Explosion.

http://www.npr.org/programs/atc/features/2002/apr/mammals/timeline.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WriteDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. Sorry, I meant to type "a" snowball Earth
I also meant to to stay somewhere in the Cretaceous :). My only point was the original condition of the Earth was ice free and it always seems set on returning to that state. Its interesting to note that there is no consensus on what caused any of the ice ages.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amonester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
10. We're screwn.
Sometimes around 2044 (IF there is such a "2044" to come...), worse neo-con$ will scrap that and "promise" to cut GGEs by the year 2093.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. At this rate I seriously doubt that most of our kind will last another
thirty years. Certainly most other species on the planet will be wiped out before we go. While they concentrate on the world economy and food shortages, they are missing the fact that THIS issue will dwarf all others and exacerbate all others beyond anyone's imagination. Myopic thinking will kill us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-08 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
17. "The goal must be compatible with 'economic growth and energy security', the leaders said . . . "
Hmm . . . . three, count 'em three issues:

Economic Growth
Energy Security
Emissions Reduction

Gosh, I wonder which of these three issues will get the most attention, committment and resources?!?!?

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/07/08/g8.climate.change/?iref=hpmostpop
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 10:46 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC