Tweet
After a couple weeks of increased momentum for the climate talks in Copenhagen, President Obama announced that he will attend the conference. He will be in the region anyway, accepting the Nobel Peace Prize.
An administration official said Obama will travel to the Danish capital Dec. 9, one day before he visits nearby Oslo to officially accept the Nobel Peace Prize.
There had been doubts about whether the president would attend the climate change conference. He had said for weeks that he would go only if his presence would help produce a meaningful result.
While nobody expects a long-term treaty to come out of Copenhagen, there has been growing support for an interim treaty that would include emission reduction targets.
While Obama’s participation in Copenhagen is a good sign, the climate director for the World Wildlife Fund had a good idea for where the President could additionally concentrate his energies if he wanted to contribute to fighting climate change:
“To make good on any promises made in Copenhagen,” (Keya) Chatterjee added, “the President should put the full weight of the White House behind Senate passage of a climate bill in the first part of 2010.”
UPDATE: Here’s the release from the White House, on the flip. Note that it includes an emission reduction target of 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, and 83% by 2050, consistent with the targets in the Waxman-Markey bill:
The White House announced today that President Obama will travel to Copenhagen on Dec. 9 to participate in the United Nations Climate Change Conference, where he is eager to work with the international community to drive progress toward a comprehensive and operational Copenhagen accord. The President has worked steadily on behalf of a positive outcome in Copenhagen throughout the year. Based on the President’s work on climate change over the past 10 months – in the Major Economies Forum, the G20, bilateral discussions and multilateral consultations – and based on progress made in recent, constructive discussions with China and India’s Leaders, the President believes it is possible to reach a meaningful agreement in Copenhagen. The President’s decision to go is a sign of his continuing commitment and leadership to find a global solution to the global threat of climate change, and to lay the foundation for a new, sustainable and prosperous clean energy future.
The White House also announced that, in the context of an overall deal in Copenhagen that includes robust mitigation contributions from China and the other emerging economies, the President is prepared to put on the table a U.S. emissions reduction target in the range of 17% below 2005 levels in 2020 and ultimately in line with final U.S. energy and climate legislation. In light of the President’s goal to reduce emissions 83% by 2050, the expected pathway set forth in this pending legislation would entail a 30% reduction below 2005 levels in 2025 and a 42% reduction below 2005 in 2030. This provisional target is in line with current legislation in both chambers of Congress and demonstrates a significant contribution to a problem that the U.S. has neglected for too long. With less than two weeks to go until the beginning of the Copenhagen conference, it is essential that the countries of the world, led by the major economies, do what it takes to produce a strong, operational agreement that will both launch us on a concerted effort to combat climate change and serve as a stepping stone to a legally binding treaty. The President is working closely with Congress to pass energy and climate legislation as soon as possible.
Underscoring President Obama’s commitment to American leadership on clean energy and combating climate change, the White House also announced today that a host of Cabinet secretaries and other top officials from across the Administration will travel to Copenhagen for the conference. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson are all scheduled to attend, along with Council on Environmental Quality Chair Nancy Sutley, and Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change Carol Browner.
For the first time, the U.S. delegation will have a U.S. Center at the conference, providing a unique and interactive forum to share our story with the world. In addition to working with other countries to advance American interests, U.S. delegates will keynote a series of events highlighting actions by the Obama Administration to provide domestic and global leadership in the transition to a clean energy economy. Topics will range from energy efficiency investments and global commitments to renewables policy and clean energy jobs. The following keynote events and speakers are currently scheduled:
· Wednesday, December 9th: Taking Action at Home, EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson
· Thursday, December 10th: New Energy Future: the role of public lands in clean energy production and carbon capture, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar
· Friday, December 11th: Clean Energy Jobs in a Global Marketplace, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke
· Monday, December 14th: Leading in Energy Efficiency and Renewables, Energy Secretary Steven Chu
· Tuesday, December 15th: Clean Energy Investments: creating opportunities for rural economies, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack
· Thursday, December 17th: Backing Up International Agreement with Domestic Action, CEQ Chair Nancy Sutley and Assistant to the President Carol Browner
5 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
One way to know this is a Good Thing: All the right people are whining about it. The far-right nutters at American Thinker are calling this a “suicide pact” even as the initial Kyoto results are showing that the cap-and-traders that are part of the Kyoto agreement are on their way to cutting their overall carbon emissions by 13% from 1990 levels by 2012 — which is more than half again as much as the original target of 8%.
Obama’s role in reviving the Copenhagen talks was noted by those media outlets (mostly outside of the US) that were actually paying attention instead of freaking out over bows:
http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Obama+China+trip+could+Copenhagen/2232987/story.html
When the depression hit last year, the older Chinese steel factories, by far the worst of the polluters (and the ones that weren’t contributing much to their economy anyway), were the first to be idled. Even as they’re kept idle (and under consideration for retrofitting to more modern, less polluting standards), China is putting up windmills and solar facilities at an astonishing rate — China had less than a gigawatt’s worth of wind turbines at the end of 2004 and it’s now the fourth-largest wind-power producer in the world, soon to be the second-largest.
Another thing is that China’s current lack of official emissions limits didn’t cause a stampede of European manufacturers to its shores when Kyoto was implemented.; nor were these countries hurt economically by the Kyoto protocol, even as they’re cutting emissions by over half again as much as their original target. Thus, two key incentives for not having limits are no longer operative.
Finally, China’s last argument for not putting any limits on its CO2 emissions was that the US under Bush wasn’t going to do so. However, that argument is being taken away from Beijing as well, pending Congressional approval of Waxman-Markey.
I call bullshit on this whole kabuki theater by the U.S.; “UPDATE: Here’s the release from the White House, on the flip. Note that it includes an emission reduction target of 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, and 83% by 2050, consistent with the targets in the Waxman-Markey bill:”
Why? BECAUSE IT DOESN’T COME CLOSE TO WHAT IS NEEDED!!!
From someone trying to put a ‘positive’ spin on Copenhagen:
‘Encouraging signals’
De Boer said that there had been “encouraging signals” for the summit in recent days, including a revised pledge by Russia to restrict emissions to 25 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020.
The European Union is pushing for a commitment to a cut of 20 per cent, raising the target to 30 pecent in the event of an international agreement, while Japan has offered 25 per cent, but attached conditions.
“But still the aggregate pledges do not match up to the level indicated as necessary by science,” De Boer said. “There is no time to lose.”
The UN Climate Panel said in a 2007 report that developed nations should cut emissions by between 25 and 40 per cent from 1990 levels by 2020 to avoid the worst of heatwaves, droughts, floods and rising sea levels.”
From here
AND THE U.S. HAS INCREASED IT’S EMISSION OUTPUT 15 PERCENT FROM 1990 !! So the 17-20 per cent from 2005 levels means just a few per cent (2-5 per cent) from the 1990 levels everyone else is using as the ‘standard’ and WHAT THE SCIENCE DEMANDS.
Oh Gee, another fantastic speech coming up and nothing will get done.
Climate change is real, but nobody wants to spend money on fixing anything.