Slashdot Mirror


US Opposes G8 Climate Proposals

elrond writes "The US appears to have summarily rejected draft proposals for G8 members that would have agreed to tougher measures for controlling greenhouse gas emissions. The BBC reports that leaked documents have indicated the positions of the various world powers, from the timetable-setting of Germany to the US's intractable stance. Red ink comments on the documents hint at the US's irritation: 'The US still has serious, fundamental concerns about this draft statement. The treatment of climate change runs counter to our overall position and crosses 'multiple red lines' in terms of what we simply cannot agree to ... We have tried to tread lightly but there is only so far we can go given our fundamental opposition to the German position.'"

4 of 845 comments (clear)

  1. Investigation at DOI by ushering05401 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's a related bit of news that may make you feel better.

    An investigation at the Department of the Interior (Manages US wildlands) has resulted in numerous resignations and may result in real domestic reform.

    Accusations from leading scientists include:
    Elimination of data regarding imperiled species in resource rich areas
    Rubber stamping of logging permits on public lands without due process
    Improper contact between dept administrators and corporate interests including the allowance of corporate influence on impact assessments

    All of the allegations center around administrators who were placed by the Bush administration. Several highly placed scientists have left for the private sector and there may be an expose published. The elimination of data was egregious. Apparently data was not only removed from official reports, but other data was *actually* changed and whistleblowers were railroaded out.

    Bet you five bucks this becomes a campaign issue if Gore decides to run.

  2. Re:sanctions are inevitable by Checkmait · · Score: 5, Informative

    I think that you yourself are being a little egotistical. While the EU is indeed a larger market, it has many of the same problems that the United States market has. I would like to point out that in the EU, you manufacture very little these days, as does the United States. On my visits to nations in the EU, I have found the label which says "Fabriqué en Chine" or "Hergestellt in China" or whatever language you choose on many many products.

    As for our currency, while its value is decreasing slowly, you exaggerate. It is not "worth so little" today, and I will also point out that if the United States stops investment in the world, the resultant situation would not be pleasant.

    --
    "All you need is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure." -- Mark Twain
  3. Re:sanctions are inevitable by drix · · Score: 5, Informative

    So, uhh, what was your point again? GP was saying that if the US fell off the face of the Earth tomorrow, the rest of the world would go chugging right along since the bulk of imports come from China and other developing nations. And (s)he is right. There wouldn't be as many Cisco routers, dot coms, investment banks, or bushels of corn to go around, but, well, bfd. We are mostly a service economy and services, while nice, aren't a deal breaker for most economies. I don't view trade sanctions as likely in the near future, but if we continue down our path while the rest of the world continues down another, it's certainly not out of the question.

    As to your point about currency, you need to read up on international finance, my friend. China has us completely by the balls in terms of foreign reserves, and if the constant rumors about the teetering dollar ever spook them into switching even a small portion of that into gold or euros, a major, painful readjustment in the exchange rate would result, and it would not be pleasant for the American economy.

    --

    I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
  4. Re:China, Brasil, India, Indonesia by mindriot · · Score: 5, Informative

    (data is from '96, couldn't find more recent data using a quick google search and I'm too lazy to keep on looking).

    For some other sources, check this graphic for per-capita emissions in 2002. For the US, we have about 19.8 tons, while for China it's about 2.2 tons. Using the CIA World Factbook for current population numbers, we get:

    • For the US, a population of 301,139,947, giving an annual CO2 output of 5,962,570,951 tons.
    • For China, a population of 1,321,851,888, giving an annual CO2 output of 2,908,074,154 tons.

    Of course, there is also Wikipedia:

    • For total CO2 emissions, we have 5,872,278,000 tons listed for the US, and 3,300,371,000 tons for China (numbers from 2002).
    • Per capita in 2003, we have the US listed with 19.8 metric tons of CO2 for 2003, and China with 3.2 tons. Leaders of the pack are the US Virgin Islands at 121.3 tons, followed by Qatar at 63.1.