Al Gore swoops in Bali after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in Stockholm and, with his enthusiasm as a prophet of ' effect greenhouse attempt at the last minute to steal the thirteenth world conference on climate change in an almost complete failure: "The planet threatened by global warming is expected that this conference brought out clear commitments on reducing greenhouse gases. I hope there's a change of attitude on the part of some countries, and especially by my which is the main cause of stalling any progress here in Bali. " In any case, Al Gore asked the participants to advance to 2010 the deadline for an agreement to reduce gas land "even without the agreement with the United States." "We make sure that the new, more stringent system for cutting CO2 emissions begin in 2010 she" and not in 2012 the expiry of the Kyoto Protocol , is the appeal launched by Nobel in Bali. But Gore's charisma does not seem sufficient to give a breakthrough in negotiations and to ensure a future for the troubled Kyoto Protocol beyond its 2012 deadline.
Twenty-four hours after the end of the long negotiations Bali positions among the various groups which has fragmented the conference appear to be irreconcilable. Europe and the majority of developing countries are determined to request that the final document contains a binding target for the developed world by 2020, greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced by a percentage varying between 25 and 40 %, compared to 1990. So a goal much more challenging and costly than the current 5%. Categorically reject this claim on the future not only the U.S. but also Japan and Canada, "Every long-term agreement must be flexible in order to allow the various countries to choose policies most suitable to their economic realities," invokes the Canadian Environment Minister John Baird, recalling that his country despite having subscribed to Kyoto, like the United States is opposed to reduction quotas halter.
The most likely outcome of these conflicts that, at least for now, is not expected areas of mediation, will be a final document that relies on a new phase negotiation, lasting two years, the development of a new global agreement to reduce greenhouse gases. If this is still similar to the Kyoto Protocol in that it contains dates and quotas to mandatory reductions, as sought by Europe, or whether it will be much more flexible and rely heavily on voluntary actions, as claimed by the United States, we'll know only at the Future Summit Copenhagen in 2009.
Twenty-four hours after the end of the long negotiations Bali positions among the various groups which has fragmented the conference appear to be irreconcilable. Europe and the majority of developing countries are determined to request that the final document contains a binding target for the developed world by 2020, greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced by a percentage varying between 25 and 40 %, compared to 1990. So a goal much more challenging and costly than the current 5%. Categorically reject this claim on the future not only the U.S. but also Japan and Canada, "Every long-term agreement must be flexible in order to allow the various countries to choose policies most suitable to their economic realities," invokes the Canadian Environment Minister John Baird, recalling that his country despite having subscribed to Kyoto, like the United States is opposed to reduction quotas halter.
The most likely outcome of these conflicts that, at least for now, is not expected areas of mediation, will be a final document that relies on a new phase negotiation, lasting two years, the development of a new global agreement to reduce greenhouse gases. If this is still similar to the Kyoto Protocol in that it contains dates and quotas to mandatory reductions, as sought by Europe, or whether it will be much more flexible and rely heavily on voluntary actions, as claimed by the United States, we'll know only at the Future Summit Copenhagen in 2009.
Pergamon Journal of Earth Observing 
0 comments:
Post a Comment