Reuters: Big developing countries form climate change front

[OKIsItJustMe]

http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-GreenBusiness/idUSTRE5AQ2MF20091129

Big developing countries form climate change front

Sun Nov 29, 2009 3:03am EST

By Alan Wheatley

BEIJING (Reuters) - A clutch of major emerging economies including China and India have forged a united front to put pressure on developed countries at next month's climate change negotiations in Copenhagen.

Over two days of quietly arranged talks in Beijing, the countries said they had reached agreement on major issues, including the need for the West to provide finance and technology to help developing nations combat global warming.

The meeting was attended by senior officials from China, India, Brazil and South Africa as well as Sudan, the current chairman of the Group of 77 developing countries.

China is the world's top greenhouse gas emitter and India is the fourth largest, while Brazil is also a leading emitter, mainly through deforestation.

…

[joshcryer]

1. Didn't you hear? China is showing leadership!

Instead the only future emission increases are coming from developing countries (developed countries are, by default, lowering their emissions, with or without mandates).

I expect COP15 to be a stalemate.

[kristopher]

2. Another false statement, Josh?

You may disagree that China is providing leadership on climate change, that is your opinion and there is a subjective element to the question.

However making false statements such as "China is showing leadership! Instead the only future emission increases are coming from developing countries (developed countries are, by default, lowering their emissions, with or without mandates)."

At no time has anyone said that China will not increase their emissions from today's levels. Just because you are using sarcasm doesn't mean that you have carte blanche to fabricate claims and attribute them to others.

[joshcryer]

3. "At no time has anyone said that China will not increase their emissions from today's levels."

Did I ever say that they anyone said this?

[kristopher]

4. Ahhh...

That's my worm, er, I mean Josh.

Yes Josh, you said it.

Do you see the term "pragmatic competence" below? Relying on a low level of pragmatic competence in those you are communicating with is one of the hallmarks of the Bushies and their talk radio media machine.

You've said you are young and we know that means many of your formative years to date have been spent learning (particularly through media such as talk radio) the "rules" of social information exchange. In light of that let be offer a gentle suggestion? Consider the possibility that these rules you allow to guide you are based on poor models.

Pragmatics is a subfield of linguistics which studies the ways in which context contributes to meaning. Pragmatics encompasses speech act theory, conversational implicature, talk in interaction and other approaches to language behavior in philosophy, sociology, and linguistics.<1> It studies how the transmission of meaning depends not only on the linguistic knowledge (e.g. grammar, lexicon etc.) of the speaker and listener, but also on the context of the utterance, knowledge about the status of those involved, the inferred intent of the speaker, and so on.<2> In this respect, pragmatics explains how language users are able to overcome apparent ambiguity, since meaning relies on the manner, place, time etc. of an utterance.<1> The ability to understand another speaker's intended meaning is called pragmatic competence. An utterance describing pragmatic function is described as metapragmatic. Pragmatic awareness is regarded as one of the most challenging aspects of language learning, and comes only through experience.

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

[joshcryer]

6. No, it's clear your reading comprehension is lacking.

First the accusations against Terry ("land use") and then the accusations against me ("C2C climate activism"), and further the admission that you don't even read what people write (to Prometheuspan).

Here's a hint, the sarcasm indicates what I believe leadership to be, but because you are incapable of comprehending it, you insist that I am making claims I am not.

[kristopher]

9. No Josh, but you go on believing everyone is that dumb.

[joshcryer]

10. You go on reading non-sense into what people say.

[Quantess]

5. Help me understand something.

"..including the need for the West to provide finance and technology to help developing nations combat global warming."

I was under the impression that developing nations have a much lower "carbon footprint" than countries such as USA and China, so why is there such a need for "the West" to provide the finance and technology to developing nations? How about the USA starting at home?

[joshcryer]

7. Since I don't know the fine details, I'm not sure. Sounds like a contractual agreement.

If China can get some big wind turbine or solar panel contracts in the US, they can be our supplier. I agree that this is not a good behavior to help bring about a decentralized world energy economy. We need to develop it at home.

[kristopher]

8. There are two primary areas where they need assistance.

A low carbon footprint and a low standard of living are closely related. Since fossil energy is most often the easiest to tap into as a means of raising living standards, developing nations assert the right to place their priority on raising their standard of living by the most cost effective means possible - usually fossil fuels. Their negotiating position is that if we want to prioritize carbon emissions then we should assist them with the increased costs.

The second need for funds is mitigation for the effects of climate change, such as what might be experience by low lying, coastal population centers and islands.