Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Agreement Reached at Bali Climate Conference
Voice of America ^ | December 15, 2007

Posted on 12/15/2007 1:50:29 AM PST by snowsislander

Delegates at the U.N.-sponsored climate change conference in Bali have agreed on a plan to negotiate a new anti-global warming treaty by 2009.

The deal was announced Saturday after two weeks of intense talks among 190 participating nations that were extended by an extra day. The agreement came after a personal appeal by U.N. Secretary Ban Ki-moon.

A major sticking point was a demand by the European Union for rich nations to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 25 to 40 percent by 2020, a plan strongly opposed by Washington.

The two sides eventually settled on a statement that simply said "deep cuts" will be required to reverse climate change.

But the U.S. delegation nearly rejected the pact because of a demand for rich nations to do more to provide clean technologies to poor and developing nations. After being jeered and booed, the U.S. reversed course and pledged to support the plan.

The so-called "roadmap" is meant to provide a framework for negotiating a new climate change treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol. That treaty, which expires in 2012, requires rich countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions by five percent compared to 1990 levels.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: agw; bali; carbon; globalwarming; kyoto
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last
To: snowsislander

The media is gloating how much of a defeat and humiliation this is for Bush, but is it?

“Readers should understand that this was a huge victory for the U.S., and what was indeed missing from the Kyoto Protocol the Clinton administration, with support from then Vice President Al Gore and 95 senators, refused to ratify in 1997. Now, ten years later, developing nations are the ones that have capitulated and agreed to participate in emissions cuts.”

“Though most media will downplay this, it was indeed a win for the Bush administration and America, as it establishes that any agreement to emissions cuts in the future - assuming such occur - will include developing nations like China and India. This potentially assures that any climate change agreement the U.S. enters into in the future will not give such nations an unfair economic advantage.”

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/12/15/manic-misinterpretations-us-capitulation-climate-change-bali


21 posted on 12/15/2007 10:33:42 AM PST by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
Of course developing nations will not agree to such cuts. Bali is going nowhere.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

22 posted on 12/15/2007 10:35:58 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
“Though most media will downplay this, it was indeed a win for the Bush administration and America, as it establishes that any agreement to emissions cuts in the future - assuming such occur - will include developing nations like China and India. This potentially assures that any climate change agreement the U.S. enters into in the future will not give such nations an unfair economic advantage.”

Well, I guess it is some comfort to think that if we agree to put ourselves in an untenable economic position that India and Red China have also promised to join us.

23 posted on 12/15/2007 10:44:48 AM PST by snowsislander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

“Of course developing nations will not agree to such cuts.”

True. But if they don`t, that will give us an excuse to back out of any cuts we agree to.


24 posted on 12/15/2007 11:17:09 AM PST by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: tlb
TEXAS SIDESTEP

RPTR1: Governor, what do you think of the crisis in the Middle East?
GOV: I was saying, just this morning at the weekly prayer breakfast in this historic capital, that it behooves both the Jews and the Arabs to settle their differences in a Christian manner.

Fellow Texans, I am proudly standing here to humbly say,
I assure you .. and I mean it ..
Now who says I don’t speak out as plain as day;
And, fellow Texans, I’m for progress and the flag, long may it fly.
I’m a poor boy, come to greatness, so it follows that I cannot tell a lie.

RPTR2: What the hell did he say?
RPTR1: Same as usual … not a damn thing.

Oooh, I love to dance a little sidestep,
Now they see me, now they don’t, I’ve come and gone.
Oooh, I love to sweep around the wide step,
Cut a little swath and lead the people on.

Now, my good friends, it behooves me to be solemn and declare,
I’m for goodness, and for profit,
And for living clean and saying daily prayers;
And, now, my good friends, you can sleep nights, I’ll continue to stand tall.
You can trust me, for I promise, I shall keep a watchful eye upon y’all.

RPTR1: Did you get any of that?
RPTR2: I hear him talking, but he don’t come in.

Oooh, I love to dance a little sidestep,
Now they see me, now they don’t, I’ve come and gone.
And, oooh, I love to sweep around the wide step,
Cut a little swath and lead the people on.

MPT: Governor, Melvin P. Thorpe, Watchdog News. Why has the Chicken Ranch operation been so long ignored?
GOV: We should be having some acoustic problems in here.
MPT: Aren’t you afraid of possible pay-offs and bribes?
GOV: Melvin, I’m proud of you.
MPT: Enough of this pussy-footin’ governor, what do you intend to do about Miss Mona and the Chicken Ranch?

Now, Miss Mona, I don’t know her, though I’ve heard the name, oh, yes.
But, of course, I’ve no close contact,
So what she is doing, I can only guess.
And, now, Miss Mona, she’s a blemish on the face of that good town.
I am taking certain steps here,
Someone somewhere’s gonna have to close her down.

RPTR2: Do you have any idea what means?
RPTR1: Is that a “yes” or “no”?
RPTR3: It’s a possible “maybe”.

Oooh, I love to dance a little sidestep,
Now they see me, now they don’t, I’ve come and gone.
And, oooh, I love to sweep around the wide step,
Cut a little swath and lead the people on.

25 posted on 12/15/2007 11:21:48 AM PST by BlueLancer (Der Elite Møøsënspåånkængrüppen ØberKømmändø (EMØØK))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
Snippets from the Washington Post:
The deal...could transform the way rich and poor nations work together to preserve a rapidly warming Earth, observers said.
Now it's "rapidly" warming?!
...the U.S. delegation acceded to language pledging industrialized countries to provide quantifiable technological and financial aid to less well-off nations, including the economically burgeoning China, India and Brazil.
Hey! When everyone complained about the economic consequences of all these environmental restrictions, the eviro-weenies told us how all the new techonological research would IMPROVE our economy. Now we're being told to give it all away!?!!! To China?!
...developing nations also agreed to take specific steps to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions with the assistance of wealthier nations....Rapidly industrializing nations such as China and Brazil pledged to account for their global warming contributions as long as developed nations provide them with clean energy technology and help bolster their ability to respond to climate change.
Is there anyone who can't see the writing on the wall on this one? When "developing" nations (like China) do nothing, they now have an excuse: Those greedy Americans didn't give us enough money!
The agreement also establishes a mechanism for giving tropical nations financial compensation for preserving their rain forests and calls for expanding financial aid for countries struggling to adapt to climate change.
What?! WE are going to pay THEM for not cutting their forests? What about all OUR "old growth" forests that have been "preserved"? Let me guess: ours don't count. This whole thing is simply a mechanism for squeezing more money out of us. We should simply tell the U.N.---since they say this is the most important issue on earth----that we are going to draw all "developing nation compensation" from funds we had designated for the U.N. It would be a hoot to see how fast they would "discover" that Bali doesn't need $20 billion after all.
26 posted on 12/16/2007 3:53:15 AM PST by Timeout (I hate MediaCrats! ......and trial lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Beowulf; Defendingliberty; WL-law; Normandy

~~AGW ™ ping~~


27 posted on 01/01/2008 7:52:08 AM PST by steelyourfaith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson