Skip to comments.Key climate decision should wait for new US president: UN (Yvo de Boer)
Posted on 04/01/2008 11:24:43 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
BANGKOK (AFP) - A global decision on how much rich countries should slash their greenhouse gas emissions in the next decade should be made after the United States has a new president, the UN climate chief said Tuesday.
Yvo de Boer, head of the UN Convention on Climate Change which is chairing talks in Bangkok, said the highly sensitive issue should be thrashed out next year, after the US elections in November.
"There are some topics which it makes sense to leave for later in the process, for example what sort of targets or commitments are industrialised countries going to agree to," he told reporters.
"That is something which is perhaps more sensibly discussed with a new administration."
Under President George W. Bush, who will leave office in January, the United States backed out of the Kyoto Protocol, the landmark pact on cutting emissions whose obligations expire at the end of 2012.
Bush argued that the treaty was unfair by making no demands of developing countries. But the three major candidates vying to replace him have all pledged tougher action on global warming.
Frustration with the current US stance grew so great during landmark talks in Bali, Indonesia, in December last year that American delegates were booed during the conference's closing hours.
All participants eventually agreed to reach a new pact on post-Kyoto commitments by the end of 2009.
But the Bali Road Map contained no explicit mention of emissions cuts for rich countries.
he United States is pushing for fast-developing nations such as India, China and Brazil to sign up to binding carbon emissions cuts, while Europe is leading calls for rich countries to slash emissions by 25 to 40 percent by 2020.
De Boer said US participation had so far been positive at the Bangkok talks, which aim to lay out an action plan for negotiations toward next year's pact on halting the ravages of climate change.
"The US is very much engaged in the process here. That doesn't mean that we immediately have consensus and everybody is ready to sign up to a final deal," he said on the second day of the Bangkok meeting, which ends Friday.
He said the US delegation has been "constructive" in the Bangkok talks, including by putting forward an idea on how to organise key parts of the discussions on reaching a new treaty.
De Boer, who has warned that time is running out to forge a new pact on global warming, said he was encouraged with progress in the Thai capital.
"We could potentially have had a big fight over the agenda, we didn't. We could potentially have had a fight over the fact that very interesting meetings are happening in parallel. We didn't," he said.
"I take from that a sense that countries really want to get down to work, rather than fight procedural wars."
...of destroying the United States.
We’re on the train to Bangkok, aboard the Thailand Express...
We’ll hit the stops along the way, we only stop for the best!
This is not a good election for those who want to keep the US out from under the UN. For all Bush did wrong, not surrendering to the UN was not one of them.
I am in R&D in the energy industry (oil & gas) and the DOE (Department of Energy) has been giving out grant money to research institutions (private & educational) for developing a means for CO2 sequestering.
Hopefully this is a step toward telling all the Kyoto-Freaks to bugger off on the amount of energy we use because we can tell them that the C02 is being sequestered. This should drive the eco-nuts crazy in that they will have failed to halt the great evil USA.
Let them dare to invade us.
“Under President George W. Bush, who will leave office in January, the United States backed out of the Kyoto Protocol,...”
I’m sure they meant “Clinton” and “Bush” was simply a typo.
No sense blackmailing or bribing the wrong people...
Seeing what the current options for prez are, I think we may look like Japan soon- all riding scooters and bicycles
or mass transit.(whether you want to or not)
About 20 years ago a large lake that held great quantities of CO2 at its bottom, through entirely natural processes, warmed a few degrees and one day the gas all bubbled to the surface where it then rose like a shaken sodapop, covering the surrounding shore; it spilled over the edges and spread out across the village like a blanket, smothering all breathing life in its path.
The socialists are anxious to destroy the U.S. economy by putting asinine limits on CO2 emissions. The object is to destroy our country economically. It has NOTHING to do with the environment. The current crop of Presidential candidates are socialists. They will be happy to destroy our economy by adopting these asinine CO2 limits.
Lakes Monoun (1984)and Nyos (1986) in Cameroon. Approximately 1800 deaths.
Here is a link to USGS providing details:
CO2 = 381 PPM, or 0.038% of the Atmosphere
Where then can we safely place our planned reservoirs?
This is highly illegal. Call the vice squad.