Community | July 11, 2009 | 19 comments

Environmentalists angry at perceived failure of G-8 on climate

source: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2009/0711/1224250465047.html

Image
JanforGore
What Barack Obama hailed as a “historic consensus” on climate change at this week’s G8 summit in Italy has been greeted with widespread disappointment, and even outrage, by environment and development campaigners.

Greenpeace activists on inflatable boats yesterday painted a coal ship in Civitavecchia, near Rome, with the message “G8: FAILED” at the end of a week of protests in Italy and elsewhere calling on world leaders to set a more ambitious agenda.

More than 100 activists occupied, painted, blocked and hung off cranes at five Italian coal-fired power stations, pointing to coal as “the world’s worst climate killer”. They ended these protests yesterday after G8 and other leaders left L’Aquila.

“G8 inaction has brought the world one step closer to catastrophic climate change. They are hiding their lack of leadership behind hollow words and empty gestures,” said Julien Vincent, of Greenpeace Australia, from on top of the Brindisi coal plant chimney.

“We call on all people to take whatever peaceful action they can to compel their leaders to deliver strong targets for cutting greenhouse gases before the new climate treaty is negotiated in December.” He was referring to the UN climate summit in Copenhagen.

By agreeing to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80 per cent by 2050, but with no interim targets to be achieved much earlier – by 2020 – Greenpeace said the G8 leaders had “abdicated action on climate change to future generations”. “They had an historic opportunity but have squandered it, by failing to commit to mid-term emissions cuts and deferring discussion on money to enable the developing world to tackle climate change”, said Guruswamy Ananthapadmanabhan, its international director.

Christian Aid said G8 leaders needed to demonstrate “much greater political courage on climate change” – otherwise their commitment to take measures to limit the increase in average global temperatures to two degrees would be “little more than hot air”.

Dr Alison Doig, climate policy expert at Christian Aid, said the G8 had undermined its credibility by failing to adopt an emissions target for 2020, or indicating how they will help developing countries meet the proposed temperature goal and global emissions target.

UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon, who was at the summit, also criticised G8 leaders for failing to make more substantive commitments. “The policies that they have stated so far are not enough, not sufficient enough,” Mr Ban told reporters.
  1. groups:
    Community,   News and Politics,   Green,   Current Tonight,   3 more
  2. tags:
    News,  News and Politics,  Green,  Earth and Science,  9 more
  3.     
    |

19 comments // Environmentalists angry at perceived failure of G-8 on climate

  • Rorenado
    • 0
      Rorenado  
    • Image

    • We should probably make sure that our people get to the 2009 Amsterdam Conference or Maybe the UN's Earth Summit (though that hasn't occurred in a while).

    • 2 years ago
  • Rorenado
    • 0
      Rorenado  

    • Education is definitely the best policy for right now. Most people don't think anything of harming the environment. They'll shrug it off, and say, "It's not my problem." And they're right. But it's our children's problem. And their children's.

      The G-8 is not the place to start, though. It's an economic conference, not the Kyoto Protocol. We need to voice our concerns to the world, and lobby for an environmental conference, but not limited to the 8 major producers in the world. We need to open it up to more people. The G-8 is only 8 countries out of nearly 200. Catch my drift?

    • 2 years ago
  • JanforGore
  • lalapabrada
  • Nader123
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  

    • It's not about what we WANT, it's about what the Earth needs in order to be able to sustain humanity. But I wouldn't expect you to understand that.

    • 2 years ago
  • JimboTheHippo
  • JanforGore
  • JimboTheHippo
  • clownpuncher
  • rockstarmillionaire
  • JimboTheHippo
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  

    • Yes, a pardiagm shift is definitely in order. I used to think the human species was up to that task. I have to admit I have some reservations about that now.

    • 2 years ago
  • quixotic12
    • 0
      quixotic12  

    • Economic interests always seem to reign over the environment on the list of priorities, no matter what we do. It seems we need a major paradigm shift on how we approach this problem.

    • 2 years ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  

    • We don't need just steps and more meetings, we need action. And the US can't even commit in THIS country to doing what is necessary. But of course, some who continue to place their politics before the moral imperative will never see that.

    • 2 years ago
  • current89
    • 0
      current89  
    • JanforGore:

      "We don't need just steps and more meetings, we need action. "

      Can we do both? Serious question here. I think it's highly possible to have both. I agree with you that we're running out of time, but you can't form plans without meetings, right?

      :Edit: I read your statement incorrectly. Ignore what i just posted, my bad.

      I would agree with you that their are some politicians and folks who put greed ahead of 'morality', I just think we'd disagree as to who. (trying to find common nhere)

    • 2 years ago
  • current89
    • 0
      current89  

    • “The policies that they have stated so far are not enough, not sufficient enough,” Mr Ban told reporters.

      Completely agree that the policies they have committed to aren't enough, not by a long shot. From my understanding both Europeans and the U.S. wanted higher measures, but they couldn't be obtained in the negotiations. Which is a shame.

      However, with that said, I'll have to agree with Dr. Rajendra Pachaur that this is a step in the right direction.

      Excerpt from article

      Nobel laureate Dr Rajendra Pachauri, who chairs the IPCC, praised the L’Aquila declaration’s mention of a two-degree limit, but said more details were needed.

      “It certainly doesn’t give you a roadmap on how you should get there, but at least they’ve defined the destination.”

    • 2 years ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  

    • Too bad the phrase wasn't "Historic ACTION." When do we get to that phase? When it for sure is too late for the world as a whole to mitigate/adapt to this?

      Cynicism my a**. This is REALITY.

    • 2 years ago
more from Community:
from the community

top videos