Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiObama Adviser Signals White House Giving Up on Climate Change Treaty
Is Copenhagen Dead?
Is the Obama administration giving up on reaching a comprehensive international climate change agreement this year? A statement released on Friday by John Podesta, who headed Barack Obama's presidential transition, is a big hint that the White House is looking to dramatically downplay expectations.
![[The sun sets above a cement factory in Sai Son village, outside Hanoi September 23, 2009. A summit of world leaders has dimmed hopes for a strong new U.N. climate pact to replace the Kyoto Protocol in Copenhagen in December, with details looking ever more likely to be left for sometime in the future.
REUTERS/Kham]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/dimminghopes.jpg "dimminghopes.jpg")
In the statement, Podesta, the head of the Center for American
Progress, and Rajendra Pachaur
i, the chair of the UN's
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, declare, "The world's
leading economic powers remain inactive in preventing an increase in
the serious impacts of climate change." The pair do not explicitly
criticize the United States and the Obama administration. But their
statement suggests that the Obama administration has not succeeded in
leading the major global powers toward effective action:
While current impacts of climate change may not have reached alarming proportions, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, that will happen soon enough if we do not take early action. What is causing increasing concern, as the December UN climate summit in Copenhagen draws ever nearer, is the continuing deadlock in political action to deal with this challenge.
Podesta and Pachauri note that the commitment reached last July by G-8 countries-including the United States-to reduce global greenhouse emissions by 50 percent by 2050 is not sufficient and that the ongoing negotiations in advance of the Copenhagen conference do not "reflect this imperative."
The two paint a bleak picture of the road to Copenhagen:
The interim U.N. meetings over the summer leading up to Copenhagen have not gone well. Still unresolved are fundamental differences between developed countries about whether the Kyoto Protocol should be continued or be abandoned altogether for an entirely new treaty. The document under discussion at the U.N. is some 200 pages of contradictory provisions from a variety of submissions from different countries. Practically every sentence contains bracketed language still needing debate and revision. The prospect of shaping this up into a coherent document by December, with only two more interim meetings to go, appears grim.
They conclude that the negotiations have reached an impasse, with the developing and developed countries disagreeing about how far each side should go to reduce emissions: "While it is true that developed countries carry the burden of historical responsibility, and must prove to be the first movers in mitigation, developing countries will become bigger emitters in the future; this intractable dynamic is proving unconstructive."
Looking for "a more positive track," Podesta and Pachauri urge the G-20 countries meeting in Pittsburgh-nations that together produce 80 percent of global warming emissions-"to focus on a series of mini-agreements that could be reached at or before Copenhagen." Their wish list includes measures that set-up multilateral collaborations to develop low-carbon technologies and that create financing arrangements to assist developing countries in meeting energy-efficiency goals and in slowing deforestation.
For enviros holding out hope for Copenhagen, the Podesta-Pachauri statement is a major downer. The two are dramatically depressing expectations-and plotting out an alternative track to the Copenhagen process. What makes Podesta's pessimism especially noteworthy is that for years he was a mentor to Todd Stern, who is now the senior US negotiator for Copenhagen. The two are close friends, and it is unlikely-make that, unimaginable-that Podesta, an experienced political player in Washington (who was a chief of staff for President Clinton), would express such a discouraging position on Copenhagen without consulting Stern.
Given that Podesta is quite well-informed on these matters, this appears to be a strong signal that the Obama administration-as the Senate puts off acting on climate change legislation-is giving up on achieving any grand accord to redress climate change this December. It's a stinging vote of no confidence in Copenhagen-and a sign that Obama administration officials, believing they cannot steer the nations of the world toward a meaningful treaty, are looking for a Plan B.
40 Comments so far
Show AllIs there any issue about which Obama's White House hasn't regressed? For now, I could live with 2 steps progress, 1 step back, but the current administration has a worse record than that and has been credibly
spineless.
That no climate agreement could come out of Congress before Copenhagen meeting was a foregone conclusion. Read about it in my article:
http://greeneconomypost.com/?s=albatross&submit.x=27&submit.y=14
If the administration is looking for a "Plan B", they should be informed that a viable one already exists:
http://vortexengine.ca
IMO, as well as F. Maugis, a French energy consultant from Association Energie-Environnement, it is the one technology that has the potential to provide humanity with all the energy it needs.
If we could turn Bush and Cheney into progressives and put them in the White House...
"They conclude that the negotiations have reached an impasse, with the developing and developed countries disagreeing about how far each side should go to reduce emissions...believing they cannot steer the other nations of the world toward a meaningful treaty"
It wasn't that long ago, when I pointed out that China and other Asian countries are excluded from Kyoto and the sort. When their turn came, very predictably, the "negotiations have reached an impasse". China is the largest polluter including CO2. The final outcome of all this is business moving from the US to Asia and polluting MORE there, with America losing almost completely its industrial base, unions and labor rights, all hard won by previous generations. When are the "compassionate saviors of the world" going to figure out that their pants are on fire? Kyoto was not about saving the environment, it was always about sucking the last bit out of delusional "good doers".
"believing they cannot steer the other nations of the world toward a meaningful treaty".That is real ARROGANCE!My way or I take my ball home.Why did they even bother when this was their plan B,plan A and all the way to plan Z?This, Iran,health care runs thru the greed filter.With their tunnel vision they cant see any profit changing anything now that they see that they can steal oh so much more than they have already.My mind at times just wont absorb what these people do.Things are not life it is existence at its most extreme!Tony
The planet or the bottom line: Which must be saved?
Guess the answer is pretty clear, huh? Humankind's insanity and lemming-like quest for suicide continues to snowball. For my part, I'm rooting for the Earth to take us out and start all over again.
Sooner or later everyone is going to figure out how shallow this bunch is. And how politically inept and inexperienced they are.
Retreads and 30 somethings with little experience is a disaster in the making. Compounded by the biggest set of fools in Congress since the Wilsonian era.
They have scared, insulted, denigrated and lied to the very people they needed desperatlely to get anything done. What you are seeing is the rebirth of the Republican majority. Leaders will come from the new generation for 2010 and 2012 and without a 180 (which I believe is far too late) all these idiots will be sent packing.
Copenhagen was dead before it started with a guy that only knows how to give a speech and doesn't have a clue about how to lead.
The Beige Bush shows his true colors again!
Poet
The White House has an excellent track record of giving up this, that and the other thing. Let's hope they "give up" on war when the dollar crashes.
"Let's hope they "give up" on war when the dollar crashes."
They'll resign before that happens and then leave it up to the next weasel to keep it going. I'm not holding my breath.
Since before his nomination, election and inauguration some of US have seen through Barack's blackmailed plans beginning with but not limited to (BNLT) flag-lapelling, through BNLT ex post facto exoneration of illegallly wiretapping telecoms to BNLT reappointment/acceptance of Gates, Lieberman, Specter and Bernanke! In the instant case of climate change treaty, too, the Obamanible plan B also remains the same: Plan BUSH!1 Bush-hog styed for the foreseeable future unless confronted with a DEM single term in 2010/2!!!
Rumor has it that Obama is threatened with reduced protection if he doesn't play the RIGHT game.
as if that would offer him an excuse . . .
Obama isn't the only problem. There are plenty of problems in the House, and many of those so-called Blue Dog Democrats are reregistered Republicans and all of them are marinated in corporate money. But the House pales compared to the Senate. Almost the entire Senate is completely lubricated in corporate money, and no bill will ever come out of the Senate that the corporations don't like. Not one.
Vote NO for ALL corporate politicians. Until we throw them out, we're just sitting ducks in corporate crosshairs. Senator Durbin had it right. A bunch of sociopaths own the place. We're just the suckers who keep it running for them and who keep on voting in their stooges.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
I propose that we put this shoe on the other foot. Since voting out all corporate politicians will take longer than we have, especially when any non-corporate politician is portrayed by corporate media as lunatic fringe, let's put the onus on the existing congress.
Congress could, meet and agree that there is a crisis of confidence in the nation, and that the way to address that is to institute public funding - they could call it a bailout for democracy if they like - and ban the purchase of representatives and legislators. No more corporate dole, no more endless war brought by AIPAC, no more legislating for any special interests. Overnight, congress would be free to vote their conscience for a change. Why not do it?
Let's stop beating ourselves with cries to vote out the crooks when you can't get there from here. Congress can and should clean up the corruption cesspool that they have created by selling influence to those who profit from harming the nation.
It's their job. We shouldn't have to wait for a perfect congress. The one we have is capable of pulling the nation up from its nosedive if they could stop raising money long enough to look with a fresh perspective.
Smuggling Europe’s and the USA's Waste to Poorer Countries
Article Tools Sponsored By
By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL
Published: September 26, 2009
ROTTERDAM, the Netherlands — When two inspectors swung open the doors of a battered red shipping container here, they confronted a graveyard of Europe’s electronic waste — old wires, electricity meters, circuit boards — mixed with remnants of cardboard and plastic.
Skip to next paragraph
Enlarge This Image
Michel de Groot for The New York Times
Arno Vink, left, and Harriette Smidt checking containers in the Dutch port of Rotterdam.
“This is supposed to be going to China, but it isn’t going anywhere,” said Arno Vink, an inspector from the Dutch environment ministry who impounded the container because of Europe’s strict new laws that place restrictions on all types of waste exports, from dirty pipes to broken computers to household trash.
Exporting waste illegally to poor countries has become a vast and growing international business, as companies try to minimize the costs of new environmental laws, like those here, that tax waste or require that it be recycled or otherwise disposed of in an environmentally responsible way.
Rotterdam, the busiest port in Europe, has unwittingly become Europe’s main external garbage chute, a gateway for trash bound for places like China, Indonesia, India and Africa. There, electronic waste and construction debris containing toxic chemicals are often dismantled by children at great cost to their health. Other garbage that is supposed to be recycled according to European law may be simply burned or left to rot, polluting air and water and releasing the heat-trapping gases linked to global warming.
While much of the international waste trade is legal, sent to qualified overseas recyclers, a big chunk is not. For a price, underground traders make Europe’s waste disappear overseas.
After Europe first mandated recycling electronics like televisions and computers, two to three tons of electronic waste was turned in last year, far less than the seven tons anticipated. Much of the rest was probably exported illegally, according to the European Environment Agency.
Paper, plastic and metal trash exported from Europe rose tenfold from 1995 to 2007, the agency says, with 20 million containers of waste now shipped each year either legally or illegally. Half of that passes through this huge port, where trucks and ships exchange goods around the clock.
In the United States, more states are passing laws that require the recycling of goods, especially electronics. But because the United States places fewer restrictions on trash exports and monitors them far less than Europe, that increasing volume is flowing relatively freely overseas, mostly legally, experts say. Up to 100 containers of waste from the United States and Canada arrive each day, according to environmental groups and local authorities in Hong Kong.
“Now we are collecting far more, but they can’t prevent it from going offshore. People talk about ‘leakage,’ but it’s really a hemorrhage,” said Jim Puckett, director of the Basel Action Network, a Seattle-based environmental nonprofit that tracks waste exported from the United States.
The temptation to export waste is great because recycling properly at home is expensive: Because of Europe’s new environmental laws, it is four times as expensive to incinerate trash in the Netherlands as to put it — illegally — on a boat to China. And the vast container ships that arrive in Europe and North America from Asia filled with cheap garments and electrical goods now have a profitable return cargo: garbage like steel cables, circuit boards and leftovers from last night’s pasta meal.
“The traffic in waste exports has become enormous,” said Christian Fischer, chief consultant on waste to the European Environment Agency, which released its first study on the topic this year, “but we need much better information about it.”
The Dutch have taken a lonely lead in inspecting waste exports and curbing the traffic, providing a rare window into the trade. They estimate that 16 percent of the exports are illegal. But in most ports where customs inspectors typically check imports far more thoroughly than exports, much probably passes through unnoticed.
The Somalia fishermen state waste in their fisheries as one reason they hold ships for ransom.
This is why the Mafia's ships sink in harbor with their toxic cargos.
In July, a shipment of 1,400 metric tons of British household garbage that was illegally sent to South America — labeled as clean plastic for recycling — was apprehended only after it landed in Brazil.
Rotterdam uses X-rays and computer analysis of shipping documents to pick out suspicious containers. But other countries need to do more, said Albert Klingenberg of the Dutch environment ministry, adding: “When they can’t get it out in Rotterdam, they go to Antwerp or Hamburg.”
The European Union’s laws governing waste disposal require more recycling of paper and plastic each year, and generally prohibit dumping in landfills. Incineration is now heavily taxed in most European countries.
The regulations also prohibit exporting waste to poorer parts of the world unless the receiving country accepts that kind of waste and it is going to a certified recycler. The guidelines fully ban the export of certain hazardous materials and so-called “problematic” waste, defined as waste that is not amenable to recycling and so would be harmful to the environment at its destination, for example, waste that is soggy or mixed household garbage.
The European laws generally follow the guidelines of the 1992 Basel Convention, the treaty that regulates dangerous exports of waste, and a proposed 1998 amendment.
The United States, during the Bush administration, was one of the few countries that did not ratify the convention. And much of the trash trade banned by Europe is still legal in the United States, where laws focus on only the most hazardous waste.
That may change. A State Department official, who insisted on anonymity because the new administration had not formally reviewed its policy, said, “We’ll be grappling with that in this administration.”
Some types of waste exports are environmentally sound, experts say. If products and packaging used in Europe are manufactured in Asia it may make sense to ship them back for recycling. The waste trade — legal and illegal — is partly propelled by the fact that fast-growing economies like China’s and India’s need the raw material. From Rotterdam, paper, plastic and metals tend to be sent to China. Electronic waste tends to go to African countries, in particular Ghana, Egypt and Nigeria.
But companies in Africa and Asia are “highly variable” in their recycling capabilities, dependability and safety records, said Mr. Fischer, the consultant to the environment agency.
In Rotterdam, inspectors uncover endless ploys to subvert the system: Containers are packed with legal goods in front to hide illegal material. TVs and computers are labeled as secondhand goods, which can be legally shipped, even though they are destined for dismantling.
The inspections office here is filled with plastic bags containing evidence; grease-covered pipes, fluid from toner cartridges and a mix of paper and plastic scraps share space with more traditional trafficking fare like cocaine, weapons and fake Croc clogs.
Despite fines of up to $22,000, traffickers feel it is worth the risk to send trash abroad, although repeat violations can lead to criminal prosecution.
Last year, the Dutch returned 80 illegal shipments to their countries of origin, their usual policy. But that is not always possible.
In one case, inspectors seized an American container carrying old paint cans and other material to Nigeria. They could not send it back, because the United States is not a party to the Basel Convention. Anyway, the hazardous contents were leaking, and the Dutch were left to dispose of them properly.
More Articles in Science » A version of this article appeared in print on September 27, 2009, on page A1 of the New York edition.
Isn't his the same B.H. Obama who was just flapping his gums at the UN the other day about how important is was that the world finally get down to DOING something about climate change?
And here is protecting the very industries and countries that are the most responsible.
Here's the 'Change(tm)' that his campaign promised. It's an able chameleon who can change Direction faster than a DC hooker at a convention.
Walk in peace.
I've heard people call Mother Jones a gatekeeper conglomerate, perhaps it's true. Corn is a shill, apologist, tool, and babbling fool.
Here's a more accurate depiction of the real Obama-
Adolph Reed’s 1996 assessment of Obama, shortly after the latter won his first Illinois state senate race:
“In Chicago, for instance, we’ve gotten a foretaste of the new breed of foundation-hatched black communitarian voices; one of them, a smooth Harvard lawyer with impeccable do-good credentials and vacuous-to-repressive neoliberal politics, has won a state senate seat on a base mainly in the liberal foundation and development worlds. His fundamentally bootstrap line was softened by a patina of the rhetoric of
authentic community, talk about meeting in kitchens, small-scale solutions to social problems, and the predictable elevation of process over program -- the point where identity politics converges with old-fashioned middle-class reform in favoring form over substance. I suspect that his ilk is the wave of the future in U.S. black politics, as in Haiti and wherever else the International Monetary Fund has sway.
So far the black activist response hasn’t been up to the challenge. We have to do better.”
“The Curse of Community,” Village Voice, January 16, 1996—reprinted in Class Notes: Posing as Politics and Other Thoughts on the American Scene
(New Press, 2000)
The Romans built dye shops with vats outside that served as free public toilets. Not only did they act as your basic "rest area" for passersby, but the urine was used to "set" cloth that had been recently dyed - the same way that vinegar is sometimes used today with natural dyes.
So too the Democratic Party. Since FDR, the move of the Democratic Party toward Social Democracy was stillborn; a casualty of McCarthyism which was as much a Democratic Party invention as it was anyone else's. The old coalition, such as it was, essentially fell apart under Kennedy and LBJ. Since Nixon, the "modern" form of the two party system has emerged.
Each Republican president dyes the political fabric a deeper shade of reactionary brown, and each succeeding Democratic president pisses on the new shade to set the color. Thus with Carter, Clinton, and now, Obama.
All of it is maintained through the ambiguity of middle-classdom and the rest, but people can be forgiven for thinking that the shirts are increasingly brown, all talk not withstanding, and that the whole scheme reeks of piss.
Of course the Romans used various scents to mask the process. Our assholes call it the smell of success and don't even bother with perfumes.
Great comment!Assholes is the proper descripter too!Tony
It's a wonder how o 'flickers' back and forth from his dr. jekyl-mr. hyde persona when one side of his face does something as great as canceling w & dick's russian intimidating eastern europe missile defense of iranian nukes(what bad/sad joke those who believe that) but now o decides NOT to participate in any discussions on climate change from possible human induced warming which is really corporatese for 'no regulations' in our unfettered global market.
Until we get a government back that recognizes lobbying for what it is, criminal bribery, and those participating in it are arrested and punished for those crimes, the country will get no where and yes, doing for one's self is far better than relying on any thing brewed up by the MSM which is along with lobbying the 2 most important things to stop and correct, after all the charade of 'town hall' meetings with one's senatewhores and representative is just that, meaningless but effectively distracting.
President Obama doesn't have time for global warming. He's got his smart war in Afghani-Paki-fillinthestan, the cold war is new and improved, with American treasure being sunk into back-burner quagmires like Azerbaijan, and his clean, green war in Iran. Netanyahu gives the UN what is described as a "final warning" and says it is "a milestone in the Mideast's march to war." Obama warns of all options on the table. If we enable Israel to make a nuclear attack on Iran - as some are saying must be one of the table's options - will we get to do a cap and trade? Does that count as reducing our carbon foot print?
Is it possible BO once elected was radically compromised by spooks? Took some bait and got caught on tape....maybe some long ago liason in the wings who will sing.....lyrics of infidelity or worse...
likely he is just a straight whore and liar, but his 180 was so absolute and perfect. I wonder.
blackmailed owned?
Please don't categorize "whores" with politicians....we are far more honest (get sex for your money) and actually make more people feel good through our actions than politicians do.
Politicians don't give you anything for your VOTE....just lies and empty promises and CHEAP TALK! Like I said....whores are more honest...
Obama is being Obama...he made a deal with the devil to get in the White House...the first black man to be something other than a servent in the most powerful house in the world...and he took it! It is payback time!!!
Like others, I am confused as to why the article tries to make it appear Obama is sincere about the need for a Climate Change treaty while other nations refuse to go along.
I am also confused as to why we can not as INDIVIDUAL countries do the right thing and move independently towards lower emissions.
This is like my saying "I will continue to drive a Hummer and throw out 40 bags of garbage a week because my neighbor does".
Canada pollutes TOO Much. It should not use as an excuse "China does it too".
You'd be surprised how many people in this country do say, "I will continue to drive a Hummer and throw out 40 bags of garbage a week because my neighbor does!"
But it's because they're looking for an excuse. That's the lifestyle they wanted anyway.
I'm glad someone else was confused by this article. I followed the link, which doesn't really do much to advance the thesis that the White House can't/won't lead on Climate Change. What happens in D.C. doesn't really reflect the direction of change.
Fact is the US has lost its leadership role, in no small part due to inaction on Kyoto. The idea that we could ignore Climate Change through the Bush years then set the agenda is silly.
Most greenhouse gases will come from developing nations, so the developed world needs to set a precedent. If we tie economic development to fossil fuels, so too will growing economies. It's a good thing China has committed to renewables, although the transition will take decades, in part because China seeks to be a better role model. Will we do the same?
Corn writes, "...It's a stinging vote of no confidence in Copenhagen-and a sign that Obama administration officials, believing they cannot steer the nations of the world toward a meaningful treaty, are looking for a Plan B."
- Note how the phrasing makes it sound like the Obama admin is (needless to say) trying its level best to act constructively & in good faith, but just can't get those #$%^*&* OTHER nations to go along. In fact, the Obama admin is probably the worst of the lot.
- Corn speaks of a "Plan B." What is Plan B? Letting the polar ice caps melt, while global temperatures rise by 4-6 degrees over the next century.
Interesting that the developing and developed nations can't agree on a common approach to the pending catastrophe. Oh, well, it won't be long before they all have one thing in common - their destruction.
ricg,
That sounds pretty much on target!
Since when has Obama taken the moral high ground with a serious commitment, to deserve Corn's implication that he is the one with the vision and cojones to "steer" the nations of the world towards an agreement?
Obama is a people-pleaser, an inexperienced politician, an intellectual who is out of his depth, IMO. He's a good campaigner and a poor leader. I don't like Hillary's positions but she has more guts.
Whats keeping you from gettin in the streets and gettin arrested?
Do the hero thing and show the world that Obama is foolin the left.
That is all we need. Life is simple.
It was notable that Anne Feeney did _not_ sing "Have you Been to Jail for Justice?" at the Pittsburgh demonstration yesterday...
Now that Obama got rid of Van Jones (really....let's face it...Obama couldn't save face and have Jones on his staff come Dec. at Copenhagen and not sign the environmental treaty agreement...Jones was heading out the door...it was just TV strong-man Glenn Beck who opened it for Obama who isn't supposed to reveal what he really is...a hack for industry) it is becoming harder and harder (I am hoping) for the liberals and progressives to keep giving Obama cover!
OBAMA IS A CORPORATE HACK....FOOLING THE "LEFT" BECAUSE HE SOUNDS SOOOO INTELLIGENT.
Gezzz come on people....WAKE THE F UP !!!
get mad...get in the streets and get in your politicians faces!!!
It's becoming evident that we have a president who knows how to get elected but not how to lead, a community organizer rather than a dynamic catalyst for change. But he's a smart guy, so there's hope. And ultimately, it's the people who elected him who have to force the issues. "In dreams begin responsibilities."
The very reason Obama received so much money from the status quo's $power sources" is that he has a knack for great rhetoric.
It happened twice:
During Obama's campaign, I received a call from one of his volunteers who had absolutely no idea that he had voted numerous times, to fund the Iraq war. She argued with me about it. She just couldn't believe it. It didn't match the rhetoric!
Another woman in a Dem party canopy downtown told me, "Obama voted against the Iraq war." I had to set her straight. The other volunteer in the tent sheepishly backed me up.
Oh come on......stop lying to yourself.....the sooner you face reality (how much corporate money bought his campaign and the very house where he is now living) the sooner you can join in the revolt against this corrupt system here in our own country.
I hope you are not teaching our children in the education system....this is no time to be apologetic!! It is time to face the facts...we are the ones we have been waiting for.....get out and DIY !!!!
ugh