U.S. May Not Make Emissions Pledge in Copenhagen, Pershing Says

[OKIsItJustMe]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=aJD6KWQ9yPWY

U.S. May Not Make Emissions Pledge in Copenhagen, Pershing Says

By Daniel Ten Kate and Alex Morales

Oct. 9 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. may not agree to cut greenhouse-gas emissions in a new treaty this year because there is no domestic law setting a framework, the country’s top negotiator said at United Nations climate talks in Bangkok.

Without legislation advancing in Congress, it will be difficult for the world’s biggest economy to pledge an emissions target for itself, U.S. negotiator Jonathan Pershing told reporters today as negotiations wound up in the Thai capital.

“It will be extraordinarily difficult for the U.S. to commit to a specific number in the absence of action from Congress,” Pershing said. “The question is open as to how much we can do. It’s not really possible to answer.”

The UN aims to approve a treaty to stem global warming by December in Copenhagen. Countries have three weeks of talks left to close gaps in the accord to reduce heat-trapping gases: one in Barcelona next month, and two in the Danish capital.

…

[FreakinDJ]

1. List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita

thought you might find this interesting since the US is always targeted as the No 1 carbon producer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita

I seriously doubt if the Communist Government of China accurately reported to the UN

[OKIsItJustMe]

2. “This article may need to be updated.”

So, if I run my car on gasoline refined from oil produced in Saudi Arabia, whose footprint does that count against? What if I purchase a product manufactured in China?

http://www.carbonfootprintofnations.com/content/ranking/79/
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/es803496a

[FreakinDJ]

3. Those numbers are flawed / skewed against America

"The footprint is strongly correlated with per capita consumption"

Of course they will show the USA as THE major producer of Carbon. We are the largest consumer base.

What they don't show isn't so obvious. They don't account for the measures the USA has already taken to clean up the air, rivers, and US manufacturing sources of pollution. What that type of accounting does do is REWARD countries who pollute huge quantities of pollution through manufacturing and don't provide good jobs for the working class (there by eliminating their means to consume the goods they produce)

You want to see a HUGE reduction in Green House gases - Bring manufacuring back to America and let Americans buy USA manufactured goods

[OKIsItJustMe]

4. “Reality has a well-known liberal bias.” — Stephen Colbert

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/30/1441/59811

To an extent, we have outsourced our pollution. So, rather than our consumption leading to our rivers flowing thick with industrial effluents, now, China’s rivers do (while they manufacture goods for our consumption.)

[FreakinDJ]

5. A fine counter argument

The treaty being discussed is a disaster for the US and the World.

It punishes the countries who have worked the hardest to mitigate carbon emissions and rewards those that pollute the most. In fact you could call it an "Epiphany of the Bush Administration's Clean Air Act".

[OKIsItJustMe]

6. "It punishes the countries who have worked the hardest to mitigate carbon emissions"

I don't see that.

For example, is Spain being punished by this proposed treaty? (What about Denmark?)

[FreakinDJ]

7. Check out this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=213046&mesg_id=213046

[OKIsItJustMe]

8. (More of a posting than a thread per se)

So, here's an idea…

We say, “We won't make a pledge until China does,” and China says, “We won't make a pledge until the U.S. does.” So, neither country makes a pledge, and this will improve the situation… how exactly?

[FreakinDJ]

9. China and India already said "NO - they won't reduce emissions"

and IF the US stopped buying those product they would just find another place to sell them - So how exactly does that reduce carbon emissions

[OKIsItJustMe]

10. So, let's just be clear here

Are you saying that the US should not agree to any sort of limits? None, whatsoever?

How, exactly, will this help the situation?

[FreakinDJ]

11. They need a different means of determining REDUCTION

Sure the per-capita method seems fair but it is not going to stop tyrannical governments like the Chinese from exploiting the treaty - of course that is a MUTE point since they have already determined they won't agree to it.

AND since the developed consumer Nations are the ONLY countries willing to do what it takes we need a NEW approach. Those who generate the emissions are responsible for THEIR emissions. NOT THE CONSUMER.

Who cares China and India won't agree to it - they are not going to agree to any thing any way. The Consumer Nations just impose tariffs on High Pollution Products and use the proceeds of the tariffs to further reduce carbon emissions

[OKIsItJustMe]

12. So, then you believe the U.S. should plege to reduce our CO2 production?

(Since you believe it makes no difference whether or not India and China pledge to do so.)

Is that right?

[joshcryer]

13. Tarrifs = forcing developing countries to reduce, too.

[FreakinDJ]

14. Not by the "Per Capita Carbon Emissions" means - NO

Per Capita Emission Allowances will ENCOURAGE all developing countries to "Pollute their way into Prosperity". Today it is China and India, in 10 years it will be yet another 10 developing countries, in 30 more years it will be yet more developing countries - the pollution never stops

Technology is JUST NOW developing that literally "Sucks the CO2 out of the air", - emissions if you must. Yes the USA MUST develope and implement that technology through market incentives.

But first off make the Producer - not the Consumer responsible for their emissions

No Easy Out for polluters

[OKIsItJustMe]

15. OK, so which is it?

Should the U.S. pledge to reduce our emissions or not?

(You've already said it makes no difference whether or not India and/or China will, since you don't trust them to keep their pledge.)

You see, if we don’t make the pledge, how can you expect any other country to?

[FreakinDJ]

17. How about we pledge to Tax/Tariff High Pollution Products

Domestic and Abroad

If it's made here - we tax it
If it's imported here - we tariff it

No way should these funds be used for the General Fund - but rather Development and Implementation of Clean Technology, and in No Way should the funds be used outside the borders of the USA.

Can you imagine the incentive the Consumer Based Carbon Credit System being discussed gives Multi-National Corporation for setting up shop in 3rd world countries. Where wages are $2-a day, and paying kick backs to corrupt political leaders so they can pollute to their hearts content. Then moving on to the next "Sucker/Corrupt Country when all the Carbon Credits are used up.

Talk about Creating Anti-American Sentiment

[OKIsItJustMe]

19. So you believe we shouldn't pledge to cut our emissions then?

So, other nations will say, “The US apparently doesn't give a damn, so, why should we?”

A pledge to cut emissions will not in any way prevent us from placing a carbon tariff on imported goods.

[FreakinDJ]

20. The Per Capita Carbon Emissions formula ENCOURAGES POLLUTION

Let me say it again

The Per Capita Carbon Emissions formula ENCOURAGES POLLUTERS to KEEP ON POLLUTING

The Multi-National Corporations (who are really responsible for the CO2 emissions) will set up shop in some poor 3rd world country. Throw Kick-Backs at the corrupt political leaders and use up all the carbon credits for the impoverished populace, and then move on to the next poor impoverished 3rd World Country and do it all over again.

So HOW THE FUCK HAVE YOU REDUCED SO MUCH AS 1 TINY IOTA OF CARBON EMISSIONS

You Haven't and YOU KNOW IT

The Per Capita Carbon Emission Plan is simply set up to punish developed countries like the USA and EU, Destroy what ever Manufacturing capabilities they have left, and force a huge Transference of Wealth from the Working Class to Corrupt 3rd World Leaders.

Its a planned disaster for the Democrats who will quickly be disposed of in the next election cycle if they support this proposal

THANKS BUT NO FUCKING THANKS

[excess_3]

16. concerning US food exports ...

which country should get tagged with the pollution
it took to grow the food?

US
importer

[FreakinDJ]

18. Would be the "Producer" - the USA Grower

Next thing you know we would have tractors that are NOT Gross Polluting