A 20% emissions reduction as calculated in poodle years.
Posted by Kate at December 17, 2008 12:30 AMClearly AGW is an existential menace that will wipe out mankind if not addressed immediately.
/end sarcasm
Posted by: Colin from Mission B.C. at December 17, 2008 3:16 AMThis leaves the door open for someone to claim victory over the dreaded global warming event.
Because it is not warming. Or cooling. It is just the weather.
And then charge us(or the Europeans) for it.
Ok, so if I read tht correctly, all the EU has to do to meet its goals is to find a couple dozen more former communist eastern European countrys to add to their list and they should have their pre 1990 levels........
They should think about adding some of the worst off African countrys to the EU as well. Soon enough they would be dang near pre-industrial.
Posted by: AtlanticJim at December 17, 2008 7:23 AMStill do not understand how these greenhouse gas calculations are made. It seems like total land area, size of population, density of population, total wilderness area, total forest area, total cultivated(renewable) crop area, total grazing area, total hayland area or total wetlands areas are not calculated into formula. The only pertanent criteria seems to be the total gullability of the population and the total size of the GDP of the country, as well as the (dis)ability to believe in the ramblings of Gandalf the Gore and Dumbledore the Suzukoid. If we as a nation emptied Toronto and Montreal ala Khamaer Rouge(Pol Pot) and rehabilitated these places ala Cultural Revolution (Mao) and replanted the Carolinian Forest ecosystem back to these areas, would that be considered enough to get the remainder of the country off the hook and back to a normal guilt free existence. Or do we also have to repatriate everyone to Europe after resurrecting the Passenger Pidgeon?
Posted by: uuess at December 17, 2008 7:58 AMBjorn Lomborg fisks Obama on his climate change ramblings...
"IN one of his first public policy statements as America's president-elect, Barack Obama focused on climate change, and clearly stated both his priorities and the facts on which these priorities rest. Unfortunately, both are weak, or even wrong."
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24799129-7583,00.html
Posted by: Fritz at December 17, 2008 8:05 AMRemember the Caribbean island that wanted to be a part of Canada? Ideal for averaging out those nasty greenhouse gas quotas.
Posted by: Texas Canuck at December 17, 2008 8:20 AMI like!!!
Can we pick the one we want though? The north coast of Jamaica comes to mind. Ocho Rios, Montego Bay, Negril......... hmmmm 7 miles of white sand beach.
Posted by: AtlanticJim at December 17, 2008 8:27 AMUN AGW ponzi scheme with AL Gore and Maurice Strong at the top tier.
Obama ready to drag the US into the mess, don't go there Jim Prentice.
Posted by: Joe Molnar at December 17, 2008 8:47 AMAtlanticJim: **...all the EU has to do to meet its goals is to find a couple dozen more former communist eastern European countrys to add to their list and they should have their pre 1990 levels...think about adding some of the worst off African countrys to the EU as well...**
In addition there is a provision for "paying for emissions reductions in developing countries". Let's see,,how many Kwacha in a Euro?
Posted by: glasnost at December 17, 2008 10:34 AMThis is exactly when they green jackboots want 1990 used. it's the year the commies collapsed (well, between 1989 and 1990) and all the filthy, soviet factories were closed and all they stopped making yugos and ladas.
In soviet times, oil pipeline ruptures were "fixed" by increasing the pressure and letting X percent of the oil flow out of the hole. You could use Alberta's oil sands technology to mine the spills. There are millions of barrels of oil seeping into the ground.
If REAL reductions are to be made, and I don't buy the thesis to begin with, then you need to use 2000 as your base year (or any year thereafter) AND you have to stop the Euroliars from doing what they won't agree to let the rest of us do: use geographical averages of a number of countries. We aren't allowed to team up with other countries so why should they?
That and include the third world. Their argument that we've done the over-consuming is moot. They've done the over-breeding and are quickly catching up to the over-consuming.
None of this is relevant as nothing will be accomplished except empty posturing, hypocritical finger wagging, and a lot of champagne and caviar consumption by the trough-wallowing government jet-set.
Posted by: Warwick at December 17, 2008 10:35 AMDon't worry Jim, I'm sure you could pick one up on ebay... cheap.
Posted by: Warwick at December 17, 2008 11:13 AM