Community | November 25, 2009 | 49 comments

Obama will go to Copenhagen: Pledge firm emissions cuts

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/26/us/politics/26climate.html?hp

Image
current89
WASHINGTON — President Obama will travel to Copenhagen at the start of the United Nations conference on climate change on Dec. 9 just before flying to Oslo to accept the Nobel Peace Prize, White House officials said Wednesday.

Mr. Obama, who had not previously committed to making an appearance at the climate conference, had been under considerable pressure from other world leaders and environmental advocates to make the trip as a statement of American seriousness about the climate change negotiations.

Mr. Obama will tell the delegates to the climate conference that the United States intends to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions “in the range of” 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050, officials said. The administration has resisted until now delivering a firm pledge on emissions reductions because Congress has not yet acted on global warming legislation and because several large developing nations, including China and India, have not detailed their own plans.

White House officials said earlier this week that Mr. Obama was now prepared to offer a tentative figure based on the work completed in Congress so far. The United States had never before declared any promise of specific reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

Carol Browner, the president’s senior adviser for energy and climate change, said the president hoped that the announcement of the American target would spur other countries to show their cards.

“Obviously we hope other major economies will put forth ambitious action plans of their own,” she said at a White House briefing Wednesday morning.

In June, the House passed a bill calling for greenhouse gas reductions of 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. Last month, a Senate committee passed a measure calling for a 20 percent cut, but that is expected to be weakened as the legislation moves through other Senate committees and onto the floor, perhaps next spring.

The United Nations-sponsored climate talks, involving more than 190 nations, are expected to produce a wide-ranging interim political declaration but stop short of proposing a binding international treaty. Delegates are expected to pledge to complete the treaty next year.

Mr. Obama has said recently that he would attend the session if his presence could help lead to a successful outcome. It is significant that he will appear at the beginning rather than at the end of the 12-day meeting. Most major decisions at such environmental forums come at the very end of the process.

In making the announcement, the White House also announced that several cabinet secretaries will speak at the Copenhagen conference to explain actions the United States is taking to address global warming and to urge other nations to step up their efforts.

Among those who will be dispatched to speak in the early days of the meeting are Lisa Jackson, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency; Steven Chu, the secretary of energy; Ken Salazar, secretary of interior; Gary Locke, commerce secretary; and Tom Vilsack, secetary of agriculture. Ms. Browner and Nancy Sutley, chairwoman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, will also represent the United States at the talks, the White House said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/26/us/politics/26climate.html?hp
  1. groups:
    Community,   Green,   US Politics,   World Politics,   5 more
  2. tags:
    Climate Change,  United Nations,  Copenhagen,  Progress
  3.     
    |

49 comments // Obama will go to Copenhagen: Pledge firm emissions cuts

  • s0uthc0ast
    • 0
      s0uthc0ast  

    • Where is the coverage on the revelation of the global warming hoax?
      Is 0 going to Copenhagen to try to repair the scam?
      Could it be that with this scam exposed, Al Gore will no longer to make billions more to finance this website?
      C'mon folks, how about some honesty on the greatest and most expensive gimmick in history?
      Pretty sad that someone seeing Jesus in there grilled cheese sandwich would get coverage over the greatest scandal on scientific history.
      At least in the legacy media.....

    • 2 years ago
  • nobamayomama
  • nobamayomama
    • 0
      nobamayomama  

    • What a fool. What happened to the liberals advancing "global cooling" in 1974 wanting to create a mechanism to put CO2 into the atmosphere to warm up the earth? IT'S A HOAX to get MORE TAX REVENUE from the masses.

      Cap N Trade (aka Cap n Tax) sells POLLUTION CREDITS to businesses who will still be allowed to POLLUTE. Then, the businesses who SELL the credits to polluters will TRADE them on WALL STREET and ALL the heads of state will get rich!

    • 2 years ago
  • LowShred
    • 0
      LowShred  

    • If all of this "going green" nonsense brings down my electric/gas bill and lowers how much gasoline costs, count me in. I think with my wallet, and right now, it's looking a little skinny.

    • 2 years ago
  • nobamayomama
    • 0
      nobamayomama  
    • LowShred:

      Sorry, but your bills ARE probably at their lowest. If you have high energy costs now, it could be due to subsidies of corn fuel, wind farm grid upgrades and a number of things.

      The taxpayer has to pay for electric companies to upgrade their grids for the intermittent power an inefficient wind farm supplies.

    • 2 years ago
  • nobamayomama
    • 0
      nobamayomama  
    • LowShred:

      The only thing that's really gonna lower your gas/electric bills is the US being able to drill baby drill. Mexico enjoys 65 cent a gallon gas because they drill their own oil. They're our #2 supplier of oil - so while they enjoy our factories, our fruit of capitalism and our money from oil, they gladly watch their people flock here to rape our welfare systems, jobs and health care thru illegal immigration, all the while we sit on all our potential riches via oil, gas, nuclear power while we tax our companies (and jobs) out of the country because they're so bad. Enjoy 99 weeks of unemployment folks.

    • 2 years ago
  • sespian
    • 0
      sespian  

    • Do the research...
      Notable members of the Kleiner Perkins include partners:

      * former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell

      * former U.S. Vice President Al Gore -part of a collaboration between KPCB and Gore's firm Generation Investment Management, to promote green technology business and "policy solutions"(see GIM below)

      * Chi-Hua Chien formerly with Morgan Stanley
      * John Denniston formerly with Smith & Barney, as well as Citigroup
      * Ben Kortlang recent addition after serving Goldman Sachs for last 8 years
      * Aileen Lee formerly with Morgan & Stanley
      * Michael Linse formerly with Goldman Sachs (joined 2009)
      * Daniel Oros formerly a VP at Goldman Sachs
      * Risa Stack formerly a Principal at JP Morgan

      GIM, Generation Investment Management noteworthy members:

      * Chairman, Al Gore
      * Senior Partner, David Bloom - former CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management 1999-2003
      * Managing Partner, Mark Ferguson -formerly with Goldman Sachs
      * Managing Partner, Peter Harris -formerly with Goldman Sachs
      * Managing Partner, Peter S. Knight -former Chief of Staff for Al Gore and former campaign manager for Bill Clinton
      * Director, Lisa Anderson -formerly with Goldman Sachs from 1998 to 2004
      * Director, Martin Bray -formerly with Goldman Sachs
      * Director, Damon Guirdham -formerly with Morgan Stanley from 1996 through 2005
      * Director, David Lowish -formerly with Goldman Sachs from 1999-2007
      * Associate, Robert Denning -formerly with Goldman Sachs
      * Associate, Zoe Galea -formerly with Goldman Sachs
      * Associate, Phillip Harris -formerly with Goldman Sachs from 1999-2005
      * Associate, Lucy Hodgson -formerly with Goldman Sachs
      * Associate, Selina Jarrett -formerly with Goldman Sachs
      * Associate, Nicholas Kukrika -formerly with Goldman Sachs
      * Associate, Flavia Lugangira -formerly with Goldman Sachs
      * Associate, Louise Martin -formerly with Rothschild Asset Management and Lehman Brothers
      * Associate, Lesley Martinez -formerly with Goldman Sachs from 1993 to 2008
      * Associate, Jennifer Trickett -formerly with Goldman Sachs
      * Associate, Loretta White -formerly with Goldman Sachs

    • 2 years ago
  • robidog
    • 0
      robidog [removed]  
    • sespian:

      You do not perceive or appreciate the extent of the corruption and self interest involved. The most important figure in the story of the emperor's new clothes is the little boy. He sees clearly because he hasn't been hoodwinked by consensus group think, His vision hasn't been fogged by conformity and blind belief in authority. There is integrity and clarity in his innocence that cuts through the lie. For adults it is fear that prevents them from stepping out of the group think consensus and standing alone. If Obama had any integrity, he would not go to Copenhagen, and tell all the brainwashed warmists to get lost.

    • 2 years ago
  • robidog
    • 0
      robidog [removed]  

    • Haters? Don't make me laugh! It's pathetic how incapable the AGW fanatics are of responding to any challenge to their theories...and that's what all this insanity is about...THEORY. The warmists accuse sceptics of denial....this is pure projection. The real denial here is of anything that contradicts the psychosis of AGW theory.

    • 2 years ago
  • DeliaTheArtist
  • Nephwrack
  • snaganalf
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  

    • This site has been hijacked by haters. And if you actually look at this, Copenhagen will not now be a binding legal treaty BECAUSE world leaders want climate change to become worse. If we actually decrease emissions as scientists are recommending must be done now to avoid a tipping point in our climate and we begin to see progress especially regarding developing countries becoming more self sufficient regarding water and agriculture, governments and their corporate colluders won't be able to take over land, water, seeds, and other resources as easily using it as a pretext. I have stated it more than once and I will state it again. Political partisanship and hate will be the downfall of this country. This site is a golden example of it.This goes WAY beyond Al Gore or Barack Obama.

    • 2 years ago
  • Leonidis
  • ibrake4rappers13
  • robidog
  • snaganalf
    • 0
      snaganalf  

    • They need to count the number of factories that have closed since the early 90's and the fuel that is no longer being burned by those employees traveling back and forth to those factories. I bet that has cut a lot of emissions. Even though some of those factory workers did find work else where not all of them did or will. Of course the emissions of those factories are now in China, India, Malaysia and Taiwan.

    • 2 years ago
  • Thousnd
  • samthesixth
  • sespian
    • 0
      sespian  

    • I agree, that environmental issues need to be addressed for prosperity and posterity sake, but global warming is a hoax. The environmental movement has been hijacked:

    • 2 years ago
  • QV
    • 0
      QV  

    • I wonder if anyone will tell bho the global warming is a hoax and pack of lies. While I despise most hackers these guys did a great just exposing the global warming lie. People need to go to jail over this, starting with the criminal kingpin and general pinhead al gore.

    • 2 years ago
  • QV
    • 0
      QV  

    • I wonder if anyone will tell bho the global warming is a hoax and pack of lies. While I despise most hackers these guys did a great just exposing the global warming lie. People need to go to jail over this, starting with the criminal kingpin and general pinhead al gore.

    • 2 years ago
  • maasanova
    • 0
      maasanova  

    • So I guess the Obama Administration is going to play along with the mainstream media establishment (save for FOX News)and just ignore the hoax of the century? The emperor still has no clothes.

    • 2 years ago
  • bushama
    • 0
      bushama  

    • ah hello are you people her really this fucking dumb, climate change is a fraud, did we not just go over this. why does this make the news on current but the fraudulent email post did not. Oh let me guess because the fraudster Al Gore owns it. Current is no better then other MSM outlets like fox, msnbc, all worthless stories to distract the sheeple from reality

    • 2 years ago
  • PirateSauce
  • slimpunk
  • robidog
  • unclecharlie
    • 0
      unclecharlie  

    • Obama's using a sorry excuse to visit Denmark. Didn't he say that he will also be the man who will destroy the Taliban, and get us out of Iraq? Amazing how many people fell for his eloquent BS..............HAHAHAHAHHA!!

    • 2 years ago
  • robidog
    • 0
      robidog [removed]  

    • When an oil well ceases to be economically viable ( in present circumstances ) and extraction ceases, roughly 60% of the oil remains untapped. Therefore, we have yet to extract even 40% of the oil in established wells. Known oil fields are likely to be dwarfed by unknown ( although currently not economically viable ) resrrves.

      Meanwhile, coal reserves are utterly gigantic. At this rate we can go on using it for thousands of years. Moreover, using Fischer-Tropsch type processes, powered by nuclear, coal can even be turned into a liquid substitute for petrol and jet-fuel. As a matter of fact, the USAF is well into a programme of rating every aircraft they operate to run on coal-sourced jet-A substitute. Already such well-known aircraft as the B52 are being flown on a hybrid mix of synthetic fuels.

      But really, its the old Malthusian short-sightedness here. According to Malthus, the Human race would have run out of sustenance centuries ago. He didnt anticipate changes in agriculture, etc. Similarly, in the 19th Century, "scientists", without computers but using computational models, predicted that as the population of Manhatten kept growing, the horses needed by those people would eventually produce so much manure that there would literally be a point at which it was being accumulated faster than it could be removed and
      would make life there impossible. And indeed it might have, but for such inventions as the internal combustion engine, which made horses and their s-h-one-t unnescessary.

      The same absurdity applies to climate hysteria and resource obsessionalism. The predictions necessarily ommit all unknown future technologies or changes in lifestyle.

    • 2 years ago
  • Nephwrack
  • JohnA
  • PirateSauce
  • SamuraiDave
  • PirateSauce
  • LowShred
  • robidog
    • 0
      robidog [removed]  

    • The "horrors" presented by climate change alarmists are all simply changes, not in themselves good or bad. Just a disruption of the status quo, occurring over a period of centuries. Less rain here, more rain there. Desertification here, but a reversal of it there. Even the image of rising sea levels is ludicrously inconsequential. So, Tuvavo might dissappear beneath the waves ( although that event is already running years behind predictions ) but so what, 4000 people live there. They can go live somewhere else. Even if it was 40,000, 400,000 or even 4 million displaced, thats a figure dwarfed by the migrations that occurr world-wide anyway.

      So WHAT exactly IS so bad about the worst that can happen? NOTHING!

      But theres a more fundamental question for you: "Why the hell should I give a damn". Why the hell should I make sacrifices of lifestyle or materially for the benefit of people I do not know, in another part of the world that has no relevance to me. There is absolutely no rational reason why I, or anyone else, should.

      You might say that makes me a selfish person. But thats a moral judgement, not an objective reason as to why I should give a damn. Just for the record, I am a selfish person. EVERYONE is, ultimately. When confronted by the notional dilemma, "We will cause you extreme pain unless you press that button to kill a million unseen strangers", almost EVERYONE will ultimately press that button. Most people deny it, but thats only a self-deception. In fact, ample scientific research demonstrates that it takes far less to get people to commit acts harmful to strangers. Knowing this, I prefer to be honest. I would press the button every time.

      So why the hell should I give a damn about climate change?

      Which is all beside the matter of whether AGW is legitimate science. It isnt. I do so with no axe to grind, because, as I have declared, I dont give a damn either way.

      Neo environmentalism is a symptom of the self loathing perpetuated by the left who hate that which allowed them to flourish. Namely vibrant advanced western democracy.

    • 2 years ago
  • JanforGore
  • starfocus
  • csmonut
    • 0
      csmonut  

    • It is time for the US to take a lead in the global climate talks. Of course, we are in a bad resession/depression, as are many other countries, but we should be stepping out to make a difference
      Many on this forum do what they can as individuals, and it makes a good difference. But unfortunately, it takes government backing to really get things rolling.
      I keep hoping....

    • 2 years ago
  • bushama
  • ras_menelik
    • 0
      ras_menelik  

    • 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

    • 2 years ago
  • current89
  • JanforGore
  • ras_menelik
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  

    • Oh, so it's just a side trip. And "firm" is misleading because 17% by 2020 is not good enough and not in line with scientific recommendations. PERIOD. So based on that forget about reaching 83% by 2050. It ain't gonna happen, especially with rapid glacier melt already dooming many glaciers worldwide by 2030 at the current pace of melting. And Tom Vilsack is speaking? I'm sure Monsanto is happy about that regarding their monoculture carbon credit scheme. I hope he also tells them as well that the US is going to start pumping in carbon intensive bitumen tarsands from Canada once the Alberta Clipper pipeline is up. That sure shows our credibility on emission targets, doesn't it?

      We then need a stronger bill out of our own Senate.

      http://pdamerica.org/articles/news/2009-11-21-15-56-59-news.php

    • 2 years ago
  • Nephwrack
  • ras_menelik
  • current89
    • 0
      current89  
    • Image

    • Keya Chatterjee, director the World Wildlife Fund’s climate program, said she hoped that Mr. Obama would offer more than words at the conference.

      “We are pleased that President Obama will be in Copenhagen during the early part of the climate summit,” Ms. Chatterjee said. “It’s important that his words during this important moment convey that the United States intends to make climate change a legislative priority, not simply a rhetorical one.”

      She added that if the talks appear to be bogged down, “we hope the President will be willing to return to Copenhagen with the rest of the world’s leaders during the final stages of the negotiations.”

      Representative Edward J. Markey, the Massachusetts Democrat who co-sponsored the House climate change legislation, said the president’s embrace of even an imprecise target could spur other nations to make firmer commitments about their own ambitions.

      “By putting a serious number for U.S. emission reductions on the table, the president just called the world’s bet and then raised it for our negotiating partners,” Mr. Markey said in a statement. “The president’s attendance at the conference demonstrates his personal commitment to getting a deal that is good for the U.S. and good for our energy future. It’s a powerful statement that the U.S. is back, ready to lead the world.”

      Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, said that Mr. Obama’s decision to announce a target was a “game-changer” for the negotiations and restored American credibility on environmental matters.

      Photo of Senator John Kerry (D-Mass)

    • 2 years ago
more from Community:
from the community

top videos