Climate change discussion is stalled again

[hellheaven1987]

Needless to say realpolitik is the reason.

The latest round of UN climate talks has made little progress, observers say.

The meeting in Bonn, Germany saw angry exchanges between rich nations, fast-industrialising ones and those prone to climate impacts.

Campaigners spoke of a "coalition of the unwilling" including the US, China, India and several Gulf states.

Developing countries are also concerned about the lack of firm pledges on finance beyond the end of this year.

This was the first negotiating meeting since last December's ministerial summit in Durban, South Africa.

The key outcome there was an agreement to begin talks leading to a new global deal involving all nations.

The "Durban Platform", as it is known, will see the agreement tied up by 2015 and coming into force by 2020.

Opening the Bonn session, UN climate convention (UNFCCC) executive secretary Christiana Figueres told negotiators that progress depended on ambition - "ambition to support developing countries, ambition to mobilise finance and... ambition to decisively and tangibly reduce emissions according to what science demands".

By the end, several observers including Tove Maria Ryding of Greenpeace International concluded that ambition had been largely absent.

"It's absurd to watch governments sit and point fingers and fight like little kids while the scientists explain about the terrifying impacts of climate change," she said.

Source

I am not surprised about this, since considerable developing countries have extreme large population that doubtless would produce more carbon byproducts. Just don't cry when our descents three generations later curse us as one of most short-sight generation.

[AqD]

We need a new earth, or many.

Investment on fixing climate is just like flogging a dead horse. The whole environemnt may one day become uninhabitable no matter what we do or don't do.

[Mangalore]

We need a new earth, or many.

Investment on fixing climate is just like flogging a dead horse. The whole environemnt may one day become uninhabitable no matter what we do or don't do.

The answer to your solution needs the same solution as being able to fix the climate: Understanding how to keep a planetary climate within a sustainable zone for optimal resource generation without wrecking havoc on this or that habitable zone be it glaciers in Naples or deserts in Stockholm.

What debate?
Its a massive lie.

None mentioned a debate?

[jamson]

What debate?
Its a massive lie.

[justicar5]

What debate?
Its a massive lie.

That it's not happening? Yes biggest and most deadly lie I can think of. When it does go, the deniers should be moved to coastal regions...the ones now a few metres under water. With pockets stuffed with gold. After all they took bribes to lie to the population for the energy companies, so a few pounds of gold and a hundred metres of water mix well. If they swim clear..add more weight and throw there children in.

[Kanaric]

What debate?
Its a massive lie.

Its funny when only forum members and politicians say something scientific that scientists overwhelmingly believe is a truth is a lie. Thats what happens when science is made political i guess, the ignorant and stupid will believe the rhetoric over 99% of scientists. The remaining being as legitimate "scientists" (usually engineers and people who have nothing to do with any related science) as those people who hunt bigfoot on history channel programs.

How many universities and labs back you up in this? None? Thanks, go away.

edit: BTW a conservative think tank is not a lab. Oral Roberts University is not a reputable place to get science from.

[nameless]

It's a stupid waste of time IMO.

Regardless of whether or not climate change is happening the money and time that's being spent debating and penalizing people and nations should be focused on renewable sources and more highly efficient technology. That and space travel (It's time we started polluting outer space anyways). Besides, the public in general is also becoming more aware of not wasting things either. In Hong Kong I remember seeing a 10 year old kid lecturing his grandpa for using too many paper towels and that he was killing trees.

Look at TV's and computers for example. Back then there were huge machines that took up lots of energy and rooms. Now we got miniature computers to run on efficient batteries and then there are now LED lights which last longer and use even less electricity compared to the common light bulbs. Our insulation technology has also improved as well as using trash and recycling. That's where we should be focusing on and no one would debate or cry about it. What company wouldn't love to develop a highly efficient solar machine that could drive an M1 Battle tank? (For example).

And look at China. It's one of the biggest producer and users of renewable sources of energy (And the US I believe do have some solar panel farms but not on the same magnitude). I remember being in Shanghai and almost every household and apartment building had a solar panel on top of it. In Zhenzhou, they were hosting numerous renewable energy conferences.

[Admiral Piett]

Until an economically viable renewable resource is discovered, little will realistically change and its not worth throwing a lot of precious money at in times of recession.

[hellheaven1987]

Or even more realistic lets just put money into space colonization instead continuing this strange mother complex towards Mother Earth.

[Fernandez_1492]

yeah i havent heard much from gore lately.
cold fusion anyone? or h3 which is in abundance on the moon.
energy is a primary mechanism of control. the population must remain dependent of oil so they can be controlled. we are lied to about energy alternatives and have seen the suppression of super efficient and even free energy technologies.

[Mangalore]

yeah i havent heard much from gore lately.
cold fusion anyone? or h3 which is in abundance on the moon.

While fascinating you are talking about wannabe technology depending on extremely expensive logistics when we are just now seeing first attempts at privatizing low orbital shipping programs and satellite delivery.

[Fernandez_1492]

While fascinating you are talking about wannabe technology depending on extremely expensive logistics when we are just now seeing first attempts at privatizing low orbital shipping programs and satellite delivery.

trust me, the costs wont be a problem. what does private sector do best vs government?
They keep costs down im sure they will fine a cost efficient way to transport the resources.

[Shaun]

trust me, the costs wont be a problem. what does private sector do best vs government?
They keep costs down im sure they will fine a cost efficient way to transport the resources.

That's like one of the weakest and most naive arguments I've ever heard on this site.

[Mangalore]

trust me, the costs wont be a problem. what does private sector do best vs government?
They keep costs down im sure they will fine a cost efficient way to transport the resources.

Keeping the costs down should not be your primary concern when transporting highly explosive hydrogen with rockets and deliver it via heat shields to the surface.

That's why we keep services and infrastructure important to not break within governmental oversight and away from business plans meant to generate profit via cost reduction.

[Denny Crane!]

Without renewable energy sources and all the other things we are running out of there is nothing that can be done about climate change, would we really limit growth/employment etc. Of course not.

[magpie]

Growth will be the death of the human species. There must be a finite limit to how much the worlds economic drive and resource use can go.

[a tw player]

The Matrix explains this pretty well

I'd like to share a revelation that I’ve had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species, and I realised that humans are not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment; but you humans do not. Instead you multiply, and multiply, until every resource is consumed. The only way for you to survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern... a virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer on this planet, you are a plague, and we... are the cure.

Edit - To actually add something useful in here...

In my opinion, this shouldn't even be about climate change. Yes, CO2 emissions are a result of combusting finite fossil fuels in the main. When these run out or become more expensive over time (peak oil and such), we're basically screwed if we don't have a large infrastructure in place of alternative fuels such as nuclear power. So, regardless of whether CO2 is causing anthropogenic climate change, the fact is that we should be changing our type of energy consumption anyway, in order to facilitate any sort of sustainable development.

[Phier]

Climate change discussion is not stalled. Climate change idiocy is. Thank Darwin for that.

[Fernandez_1492]

wonder how Australia is doing with their carbon credit scheme

[Prosaic Visitant]

wonder how Australia is doing with their carbon credit scheme

Ours doesn't start until the 1st of July.