Lotsa Lies From Harlan Watson As Climate Conference Grinds On

MONTREAL - The United States ruled out making extra pledges to fight global warming beyond 2012 on Tuesday, angering environmentalists who accused Washington of blocking a 189-nation conference in Canada. Chief US climate negotiator Harlan Watson also strongly defended President George W. Bush's environmental record, saying emissions by the world's biggest polluter had fallen more in 2000-2003 than in the European Union.

Up to 10,000 delegates are meeting in Montreal, Canada, from Nov. 28-Dec. 9 to discuss new ways to fight a build-up of gases released mainly from burning fossil fuels in factories, power plants and cars. "The United States is opposed to any such discussions," Watson told a news conference of Canadian proposals to launch talks under the UN's climate convention about new actions to combat global warming beyond 2012.

EDIT

"Look at the data -- the United States has done better in the first three years of the Bush administration in addressing greenhouse gas emissions than the EU ... the UK, France, Germany. "I can go down the laundry list for you. I reject the premise that a Kyoto-like agreement is necessary to address the issue," he said of emissions between 2000-03. Washington is investing heavily in new technology like hydrogen.

Still, UN data show the United States is doing worse than all the nations named by Watson in the longer term. US emissions were 13.3 percent above 1990 levels in 2003 -- while the EU average in the same period was a fall of 1.4 percent. (emphasis added)

http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/33725/story.htm

these people don't need shrub.

Europe need to get rid of their misconception
that the reluctant are going to participate,
when the proponents won't.

You have to start somewhere.
There is strong support in Europe for
emission limits.

But we don't want to carry on without the world's biggest polluter joining in. We need the whole world's pollution reduced, not just one area.

>But we don't want to carry on without<

why not?

You have to start somewhere.

If a pre-condition is, 'the unwilling must join',
you will be waiting forever.

It's like saying "I'll ignore the fact that the rich man over there doesn't bother paying tax, and I will carry on paying my smaller tax, and pretend that is going to run my government". At some point, you have to pressure the rich man to pay his share - because it is physically impossible to keep the government running without the taxes of the rich. If the USA never agrees to cut its CO2, the world's CO2 won't get reduced - the USA just produces too much. CO2 drifts araound the world - it's not as if there will be an island of CO2 over the USA heating it up while the rest of the world fixes its climate. The USA is polluting the world.

As I said, we already have started somewhere. That's what Kyoto is. We are now trying to get the USA to behave like a good world citizen in the future, after its first temper tantrum. Unfortunately Bush's regime is worse than ever.

>rich man<
We are talking about several different countries here,
that will have different laws.

................
European voters, in general, support limits on grenhouse gas.
In the US, opinions are all over the place.
Yet, European policymakers do virtually nothing.

...........repeating, foe emphasis................
European policymakers have popular support to limit greenhouse gas,
there is no such support for limits, in the US.
........

by the way,
(except for the emissions trading market, that may or may not work}
Europeans have done virtually nothing,
any 'reductions', are just the effects of closing Soviet indusrty,
and converting to natural gas, things that would have happened
anyway. Of course, they are fast to take credit for any 'reduction'.

so they did something. They are now trying to persuade the USA, both populace and government, to stop being selfish fools and to restrict the CO2 they emit. That's doing something too. Since each American produces about twice as much CO2 as a European, we have to get the Americans to realise how they are polluting the world for the sake of their luxurious lifestyle.

An alternative analogy for you (though you haven't shown any reason for why the first was flawed - what have 'different laws' got to do with it?): A village pisses into its well regularly. They notice the water from it tastes awful, and people are starting to fall ill, and they recall that drinking piss is bad for you. Most households decide they will stop pissing in the well; but the largest says "who gives a shit? It's more convenient to piss in the well than walk to the woods to do it". So they carry on pissing in everyone's drinking water. When confronted, the head of the household says "it's not my fault, my children are lazy. I taught them to piss in the well, and I'm too lazy to tell them it's wrong and that they should walk to the woods instead. Anyway, I don't think it is wrong either - so screw the village".

Europeans were told,

Because the baseline year was chosen as 1990,
with the closing of Soviet era industry, and indusrty
in general, Europe is under the cap, and will be for along time,
but the morons in the United States will be punished.
Politicians had the additional protection of...
hey, its ten years into the future, 1998 to 2008.
Now, 2013 is not that far into the future, so
politicians are kinda nervous, as more of them will still be in office then.

I don't call, ratifying a treaty, then ignoring it,
'doing something', I call that going backwards.

...
false analogy, these two things are not the same,

rich person must pay taxes, like everone else.
v.
person 'a' writes rules, that do not affect person 'a',
but does affect person 'b'.
...

for the record, Europe is close to meeting their Kyoto target,
but not thru any effort of their own.

There are targets for each individual country. The fact that Warsaw Pact countries are likely to reach their targets easily because of the collapse of their industry does not affect the targets for Western Europe. We had proper discussions about global climate change in the media, largely free of the attempts of oil corporations to inject lies about the science. While the USA had tax breaks for SUVs, the UK had a 'fuel tax escalator', increasing the tax on road fuel above inflation each year to discourage use.

You sound a bit paranoid about this - it wasn't some plot to 'punish' Americans. It's an attempt to stop us all poisoning the atmosphere. The USA puts out more CO2 per person than other countries, and if it had signed up to Kyoto, it still would have been allowed to. It's unfortunate that too many Americans, but especially Bush and his supporters, seem to think they have a God-given right to pollute. It's only when they have ignored years of mounting scientific proof, choosing instead to listen to oil company propaganda, that the phrase 'moron' has sprung to mind.

of some countries, for doing nothing.

Whenever there is money changing hands between countries,
it always looks bad.

{just for the record, Americans are not stupid enough to believe
that a European country would allow money to leave their
country just to buy 'emission rights'. Everyone with two working
brain cells knows that for every 'up front' transaction,
there would be a reverse 99% kickback, and that the
only people to profit would be politicians.}

also, stop the exemption for international jet fuel.
The Canadian attempt tat voodoo carbon accounting,
is not helpful.
Saudi Arabia wants money for this,
yeah right.

The EU as a whole is likely to meet kyoto targets: But mainly because the new, ex-soviet states have dismantled the worst of their heavy industry. The "Old Europe" states have been pretty hit-and miss in meeting thier indivual targets.



Chart from The BBC. Kyoto's successor will be a much tougher nut to crack.

and the old EU-15 also have a joint target of an 8% reduction; the only part that was in the old Warsaw Pact countries is the old East Germany. All those other countries have no more relevance to the Kyoto targets of Western Europe than Japan does. The EU-25 has no target.