Slashdot Mirror
UN Summit Strikes Climate Deal Promising "Damage Aid" To Poor Nations
Hugh Pickens writes writes "BBC reports that UN climate talks in Doha have closed, with a historic shift in principle agreed to by nearly 200 nations, extending the Kyoto Protocol through 2020 and establishing for the first time that rich nations should move towards compensating poor nations for losses due to climate change. Until now rich nations have agreed to help developing countries to get clean energy and adapt to climate change, but they have stopped short of accepting responsibility for damage caused by climate change elsewhere. 'It is a breakthrough,' says Martin Khor of the South Center — an association of 52 developing nations. 'The term Loss and Damage is in the text — this is a huge step in principle. Next comes the fight for cash.' U.S. negotiators made certain that neither the word 'compensation,' nor any other term connoting legal liability, was used, to avoid opening the floodgates to litigation – instead, the money will be judged as aid. Ronny Jumea, from the Seychelles, told rich nations earlier that discussion of compensation would not have been needed if they had cut emissions earlier. 'We're past the mitigation [emissions cuts] and adaptation eras. We're now right into the era of loss and damage. What's next after that? Destruction?' While the United States has not adopted a comprehensive approach to climate change, the Obama administration has put in place a significant auto emissions reduction program and a plan to regulate carbon dioxide from new power plants. 'What this meeting reinforced is that while this is an important forum, it is not the only one in which progress can and must be made,' says Jennifer Haverkamp, director of the international climate programs at the Environmental Defense Fund. The disconnect between the level of ambition the parties are showing here and what needs to happen to avoid dangerous climate change is profound.'"
With this, we see their real purpose.
Climate change.... Well, it's always changing, so the money will always have to flow. Another unending stream.
What a shock.
They profit extremely well from trashing the Earth; make them pay.
These countries need to be dissolved and integrated with another. Things are just going to get worse. What's better, preserving a nations identity or preventing the inevitable extinction of it?
And now we see the real reason behind this entire charade. Take from the rich give to the poor. More class warfare.
Dear Seychelles,
We are sincerely sorry that your small island nation has been covered over by the Indian Ocean.
Attached is a coupon for 10% off any Boeing or Raytheon product. Simply print the coupon and present it at your local dealership to redeem.
Best wishes,
The United States of America
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
I want to know where all of this "compensation" is going to come from. Our debt to gdp ratio is approaching 100 percent and rising, and the Europeans aren't exactly in good shape either. I don't know how Europeans feel, but I think when there is a choice between maintaining social security, medicare, and the military or giving money to brown people in a foreign country, Americans will choose the former.
This better be voluntary.
One, I believe global warming is happening. However, I am skeptical that a majority (50% or greater) of it is human-caused. However, in any situation, we should be reducing pollution for the sake of pollution. We should be investing in alternative energies in order to have clean air, water, and hopefully cheaper electricity. I'd hope cheap electricity would correlate with people not having to work so much in order to pay their electric bills. (It bugs me so much when people use wood-burning fireplaces when it's not their primary source of heat, save for special occasions.)
I believe it is dangerous for something like that to be proposed. It may be called voluntary, but we know it's not. What it does is it strips national sovereignty away from nations. That isn't to say we (Americans) shouldn't be doing good for other nations. However, I don't want an outside group telling us we should even if it's "voluntary".
Let's assume the premise that these rich nations are at fault for global warming to an extent exceeding 50%. Let's say that global warming is having a substantial effect on poor nations' economies. So what? We should be helping those poor nations regardless, but by our own volition. And how many of those poor nations are struggling because of past atrocities involving forms of slavery and they being forced to grow cash crops (thus eliminating their own cultural food supply)?
WikiLeaks reveals US bribes help stop climate action
clear cutting the rainforest was a net co2 producer. Who will collect that fine?
....and then forget the climate change.
What ! you want me to give money to you for some unproven scientific THEORY that plots current temperature variations that are still well within the MARGIN OF ERROR !
Go to hell all you greedy bureaucrats that are hellbent on destroying my economic future. Even if you convince my bent Westminster politicians to scam me and take money, and it somehow turns out that this climate change does have exponential runaway feature, i know there is a fat chance in Hades that you would use the money to do anything constructive about it. You will just sit in your armored fortresses that you built with the money you collected, doing blow and hookers and playing blackjack with your carbon derivative futures market wall street friends.
You people make me sick.
Best off, just like I recall my grandfather to say... ,even if it is a round about way. Charity starts at home.
"Get the U.S. out of the U.N. and the U.N. out of the U.S."
Because we know the only real agenda of the Mickey Mouse Club is for U.S. hating countries to manipulate and bleed the U.S.(although it's been handy to screw with Israel too)
Gosh, if so many countries get together and decide what other countries should do, well that just makes it official,yup,yup,yup.
That beautiful building could be used to house homeless, then it wouldn't be a total waste of time.
Let the poor and foolish countries be cared for by the rich and socialist countries China,Russia, S.A., Dubai, etc. That is their gig after all.
Pretty sure they are big offenders anyway
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
are coming to the trough.
Sorry, I gave at the office.
I pledge by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
~John Galt
And if you live on a coral atoll, move onto solid land before you start whining about sea level. You actually have a land level problem.
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
There are two different stories here. One says that wealthier nations will offer humanitarian aid to disaster struck areas, the other claims that general compensation is due for damages. Two completely different things, and the actual facts of the matter seem to be more towards humanitarian aid.
This is why people think climate change is just a huge scam masquerading as an environmental cause.
It's a by product of the UN requiring consensus from every nation to pass anything. The smaller nations know we're not going to stop increasing global carbon emissions (and maybe believe they can continue on mostly as usual) so hope they can get some money out of the process. And it's pretty convenient for the US as they can justify doing nothing on the basis of the UN being ineffectual. Meanwhile China says it doesn't apply to them (despite being the biggest global emitter) because they didn't get to poison the planet in the first place so they deserve their turn (In UN terms that's referred to as "equity"). I recommend http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RInrvSjW90U/ for the current numbers. Basically if we want a planet that looks remotely like the comfortable one we occupy now we'd need to peak carbon emissions soon (before 2020) and start reducing at unheard of rates. Instead most of the planet has no intention of stopping, some of the nations just want to get some money out of it, and a small group (15% of global emissions) are trying to cut their emissions by numbers that are a small fraction of what would be needed globally. We're pretty much guaranteed to blow through any manageable carbon trajectory in the next decade. Probably sooner because most of the news out of the climate scientists is bad and that they may have badly underestimated how sensitive the system is. Be thankful though, we'll basically get to watch mankind fumble their first highly probable global crisis (barring miracle discoveries or climate science being wrong in a good way) which should be entertaining. Given the current prediction is 4c by by 2050 (twice the "acceptably dangerous" level of 2c, 6c by 2100) we'll even get to see many of the effects start to kick in.
From www.qsl.net/w5www/roybean.html
But with the nearest courtroom a week's ride away, and County Commissioners eager to establish some sort of local law enforcement. They appointed Roy Bean Justice of the Peace for Precinct No. 6, Pecos County, Texas. Roy was just crazy, or drunk enough to accept. He packed up and moved north from Vinegaroon to a small tent city on a bluff above the Rio Grande named Langtry in honor of a railroad boss who had run the Southern Pacific's tracks through it.
- - - - -
I am coming to belive that the Smith and Wesson, or its modern equivalents, will soon be the ONLY true law, as justice no longer exists outside any individual's willingness to die or become a slave to either corporate or bureaucrat power mongering.
what does this mean for the poor countries ravaging rainforests all over the world? Am I going to start seeing "rainforest money" in my mailbox!?
This is an obvious and thinly veiled talk about redistribution on a global scale that uses environmental issues as the backdrop.
Israel will die within 100 years. An average increase of 4 degrees C translates into a much greater increase over land because the earth is 70% covered by water and the temperature won't change as much over water. In the Mediterranean, that average 4C increase should translate into a 9C overland increase. Israel routinely hangs out above 36C during the summer. Israel routinely has 98% humidity in the summer. Humans cannot survive 100% humidity at 45C. I'd therefore expect that Israel will be effectively uninhabitable by humans in 2100, although obviously their humidity might change before then.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
The outcome of these talks is just not enough. An extension of Kyoto is not nearly enough. I just ran out of hope. This issue will not be solved and a lot of people will die as a result.
Look at the continent of Africa...pretty much everything south of the oil fields IS A WASTELAND. A black preacher said it best...."you blacks ain't built nothin' ". Yep, pretty much hits the nail on the head! Why should countries, that actually BUILT up their nations, be forced to once again prop up countries that want to run around barefoot, shooting each other with spears? Oh, but their countries are run by dictators? Yeah, and where do you think the trillions already handed to these countries (unicef) has gone?
I guess no one offering to take in refugees from Maldives or Bangladesh?
'We're past the mitigation [emissions cuts] and adaptation eras. We're now right into the era of loss and damage. What's next after that? Destruction?'
Obviously, the ultimate answer to this question is the same as for the Fermi paradox: greed.
Video of some good progressive thrash music
Just like US elections, the majority voted to take money from the successful minority and have it given to themselves.
Mod parent funny!
Watch this Heartland Institute video
Countries paying an undefined compensation in proportion of their wealth won't solve anything. If we want to incentivize emission cuts, we should require countries to pay up (or receive aid) in proportion of their emissions. That's what the old emission credit system did, and while it wasn't perfect it was still much better than the current treaty. But that wasn't good for the radical greens, now look at what we've got as a result.
Don't worry, Hugh, Jennifer and her bankster elite puppet-masters will pay for saving the planet. Using your pension and tax funds, of course. I seriously doubt the UN is going to bother Arab oil sheiks, Chinese Party bosses, or the Indian Parliament to fund this "aid". Damned sure better not bother me.
A few hundred triillion in "damages" would not do a DAMNED thing about climate change, WHATEVER it's cause. This is a shakedown, pure and simple.
I will suggest to you that Ms. Haverkamp and her pals have a much, much bigger disconnect to deal with. There's more than a tort here, there's hanging offenses.
Not the least of which is the perversion of science.
Sorry to be blunt. I wish more people would drink less Kool-Aid(tm), though.
...whose old man [father] was into dirty coal, too.
This whole discussion makes me puke.
You think that artifically driving up the cost of energy in "carbon trading or fines" is going to somehow save the planet? It's really, really simple, even you retards can get it if someone explains it in simple enough terms. So here goes:
You make my gas artifically expensive, I use a little bit less of it. Maybe I use a whole lot less of it. In any case, I demand less. The price drops a bit. This means that China/India/Whoever can access more of that resource, and get the habit too.
Does overall comsumption go down? No, of course not. I remains stable, but perhaps gets burnt in a less efficient, more polluting engine.
It's this simple: While the resource is there, humans will use it. When it's gone, humans will look for something else. This has nothing to do with rich or poor.
So, my suggestion is this: Go to the Chinese government, get them to stop burning their shitty brown coal for their energy needs, and while you're there, get them to pay for the flood damage on my house.
And look how well "institutionalization culture" has done in Africa so far: The more money arrives, the more it feeds the corruption and the more it ends up in the wrong pockets. That's the real story here: we've got a band of banana republics lobbying for more corruption fodder...
Actually most people alive today would never have existed without the fossil fueled economies. Some might argue that this is bad for the species since so many are marginally independent at best, a la Heinlein. Consumers only...
is that "rich" countries are pretending that they are rich. Most appear to be insolvent and much of their educated populations are headed for extinction for failure to reproduce.
People of 'Science' believe that the earth was created billions of years ago, based on research.
People of 'Faith' believe that the earth was created thousands of years ago, by a supreme being, because he could.
People of 'Climate Change' believe the earth was created 200 years ago, because that's when the base their temp data, because its convenient.
If all the Climate Change people would simply run into the chipper/shredder (I'll make a solar powered one if they fear the emissions) we can get on with life.
I'm thankful for them for several reasons, the least not being the burr they figuratively place under the saddle of certain mid-east nations.
The maintenance of a beautiful country that keeps it friendly for me as a u.s. American to visit. Krav Maga, small machine guns and sexy women. These are a few of my favorite things...
I agree what happens to Israel is karma, but for disobeying YHVH when originally told to eliminate those inhabiting the promised land to the last breath. In retrospect this would probably made today quite different. Sometimes pity really is a weakness,in spite of not, most of the time.
Nazis I won't consider part of the equation, since they would've gladly eliminated the local Islamic along with the Jews, both are Semitic.
As far as blowing taxes, I recall we aren't Constitutionally allowed to do much of anything outside of defending our own borders. This policing the ungrateful assholes of the world came along with the "New Deal" horseshit back when the Repubmocrat tyranny first conspired. None of it is our fucking problem and I don't want to hear anyones lame ass excuses about foreign business interests. That is why we set borders to begin with and outside investments are a worse GAMBLE than chances taken on domestic ones. Tough droppings.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
And everyone called Glenn Back a scare monger when he mentioned this was their purpose. Have the rich countries pay the poor countries. He has been saying this is the purpose of climate change advocates for the past 5 years. Everyone says he is a loon, but then when he is right, nobody says anything.
So here you go all you anti Beck guys who never listen to him and just listen to what people say about him. He was right and has been on so many things...like the 08 fiscal cliff and the endless wars in the middle east, and all the Bush spending, and all the Obama spending.
He predicted this 5 years ago.
Please don't delete this comment like the last one I posted saying the same thing.
It's one of the reasons I remain skeptical. Where there are billions, or trillions, of dollars to be made, you can be fairly sure the motives aren't going to be pure.
Rich and give to the poor.
As the subject line notes, I'M SELFISH.
Allow me to elaborate.
I believe the world needs a 'reboot'. There is far too much wrong in the world that I think we need to start over.. not as cavemen, but the governments of the world need to be replaced, as does the allocation of wealth. I don't mean wealth resdistribution, as I am a capitalist, but the way things are now, capitalism can't work... too much control (patents, copyrights, barriers to entry) for people to bring themselves up. Too many roadblocks. Not to mention the problems (yes I consider them problems) of surveillance, too much government control, taxes, over-population, censorship and so many other ills of the world. Of course this could blow up in my face, but I do belive most of the world is corrupt and in need of rebuilding.
Secondly, as has been noted recently, it would appear that Russia and Canada could very benefit from climate change. As a Canadian, I would welcome some warmer weather, and I VERY resent having to pay someone, somewhere for alleged damage, without considering the good, for something that I can benefit from, and actually want. Notice that I'm not denying it, or skeptical of it... I am looking forward to it, and I hope I live to see it.
I also have a wife and 2 kids, including a 3 year old whom I love very much, but I fear for their future the ways things are now.
Call me selfish, but I want the world rebooted, and my home just a touch warmer ;)
Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity!
200 nations... but all the major ones will either be exempted by the new treaty (China, India) or won't accede to it (US, Russia).
I'm just glad "man-made" climate change was proven to be 100% bullshit.
The Governmental Employees soaking up the booze and per diem have like found a source of Zombi Power.
Who would have thought that after the Official Ending, the Zombies managed a Coup De Gras and resuscitated
the Kyoto Protocol and champion 'Climate Aid' from the 15% still desperately holding on to the Kyoto Protocol.
Even Japan has abdicated from the Kyoto Protocol!
Well.
I would hazard that 'Climate Aid' is like the 'AIDS' fund for countries who have not the talent nor money to have
any kind of GNP.
"Oh ... The Horror ... The Horror ..." as one Doha delegate being removed from the proceedings proclaimed wile
prone on a slab.
XD
....was getting "free money".
How *exactly* does sending money to other nations help fight alleged climate change?
Ferret
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
is here. Maldives encouraged to request assistance with infrastructure projects worth $50M, in exchange for supporting the US climate agenda.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
More precise modeling alows IPCC climate report to backstep from previous hysterical claims and hoopla that every recent unusual weather event was a harbinger of doom to come.
Sea level rise in next century, not even a meter. Hurricanes & sever storms, somewhat LESS of them. Arid areas, become slightly more arid and areas with frequent precipitation have somewhat more rain. Total temperature rise in next 100 years, 2 degrees C on top of the 1 degree C rise over 20th century.
In short, not a doomsday scenario, not the end of the world.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/science-hone-climate-change-warnings/story?id=17906408#.UMVJntHQQSk
All we need to do is invent a new fiat currency, convince the third world that it has value, and pay them in that. Problem solved.
I wish America would stop supporting these unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats. I am sure there is more to this story, but I'm sorry, the united nations is a complete joke. Dissolve the united nations. There is nothing united about it.
Making money flow to them.
What a shock.
We tie their payments to their human rights, women's rights, religious freedom (to have or not to have), and free speech. Oh, you don't have those? Too bad.
No good deed goes unpunished.
NATIONS do not pay these bills.. their taxpaying citizens do. And taking the money earned by individual taxpayers and redistributing it to another nation because of climate change is NOWHERE in the constitution. I guess that doesnt matter to some of you? We should just let the government do whatever it wants.. because they couldnt possibly abuse the power or anything.. or that sits unethical even f it were constitutionally sound. Funny how you all scream about constitutional power when it comes to internet privacy and personal freedom but you throw it all out the windows when its a cause that makes YOU feel better.
Appeals to scientific textbooks are fallacious, but unsupported conjecture about a vast international pan-professional conspiracy corrupting every venerable scientific institution on the planet is not?