China and the Green Energy Revolution

For the longest time, many considered China to be the place where green energy was doomed to failure. After all, this was a country that was building one coal factory every single week, in a slow week. Clouds of pollution would obscure entire cities and it was so bad that the country had to stop half the city from driving during the Olympics. Clouds of pollution from China could even be seen from space making their way over to the United States.

However, things have changed and China may become a world leader in green energy. As part of its economic stimulus package to restart the economy after the financial meltdown that swept the world, China created the largest green investment program in the entire world by giving out $336 billion in funds to green companies. That is well above the $80 billion put aside by the United States and the $45 billion by the European Union.

China has expressed that it wants to have energy security as part of its economic transformation and the country has pushed ahead with renewable energy development. Roughly 17 percent of the electricity in China currently comes from renewable sources and the country has the largest number of hydroelectric generators in the world. In 2007 the country had 145,000 megawatts of hydropower and by 2010 that had increased to 190,000 megawatts. Thanks to the heavy investment into green energy, China is expected to be able to supply all its power itself, through renewable resources, within the next 20 years.

Currently, China produces one-third of the solar photovoltaics in the world and the country has led the world with the manufacturing of these photovoltaics with its six biggest solar companies amounting to $15 billion in value. Nearly one gigawatt of energy is produced in China by solar energy, putting it second only to Japan. In 2007, there was 20 megawatts of installed solar capacity and that more than doubled in 2008 to 50 megawatts. By 2012, it is expected to be 232 megawatts and by 2020 most expect China to be producing 20 gigawatts of energy from solar resources.

In addition to solar energy, China has the largest wind resources on the planet, with 75 percent of those resources being found off-shore of the country. Currently, wind power in China accounts for 12.2 gigawatts of energy and the country is the fourth largest producer of wind power after the United States, Germany and Spain. This past year, China also became the largest maker of wind turbines in the entire world. While the country wanted to have 10 gigawatts of wind energy installed by 2010, it will most likely exceed 25.1 gigawatts within only a couple years. By 2020, the country plans to have 100 gigawatts of energy coming from wind energy.

Clearly, China is showing the world that when it does something, it does it on a large scale. With China pushing green energy, one of the worst polluters on the planet may become the greenest country in history.

More A. Dawn Articles:

BMO’s 8 New ETFs

The Equal-Weight ETFs from BMO

Old Age Security pension or OAS

The Environmental Trend of Using Sod Roofs

Is A Dawn Journal The Best Personal Finance Blog?

GREEN CAR TECHNOLOGY: THE CURRENT WAVES

Green car technology is a method that is adapted in an attempt to save our precious environment by avoiding the usage of fossil fuels that makes the environment polluted. Over the years researchers have been experimenting with the technology that facilitates the use of electrically maintained cars and are also trying to find a substitute to the existing vehicles that use fossil fuels. Earlier this century, it was quite shocking to know that our planet was on its threshold with respect to greenhouse effect.  The main reason behind this was known to be the usage of fossil fuels which in turn contributed to the depletion of ozone layer thereby increasing greenhouse effect. With an attempt to reduce this menace, car manufacturers across the globe began manufacturing greener ecologically aware cars.

Presently in this century, the vehicles have been manufactured with a hybrid engine which is nothing but a conservative motor engine, which is combined with the usual electric engine. These are capable of toggling between power of an electric motor and the ignition engine.  With normal speeds, the car is powered by electric motor and at high speeds; the ignition engine powers the vehicle. Here are a few green technology cars presently available:

Electrically powered vehicles have gained a lot of popularity in the recent past as they possess an electric motor, which is powered with battery packs and these packs are a combination of Nickel metal-hydride or Lithium-ion, which are charged with a connection to main power supply typically charged for an entire night.  Also, these electric cars have iterative braking system due to which the batteries are charged when brakes are applied

Currently, hybrid cars use both the electric motors and petrol engines.  The electric motor is powered by the batteries, which are charged and useful at lower speeds, while the petrol engine possesses a small unit which powers it during high speeds thereby allowing this engine to function only at optimum speed.  Also, the renewable energy sources like rapeseed; sunflower or soybean oil is used to produce biodiesel, wherein the carbon dioxide gas emitted is neutralized as it is absorbed by the fuel crop, which facilitates its growth.

Ethanol, which is a sugarcane product, contains high octane content, which increases engine performance and is broadly used in Europe wherein flexi-fuel vehicles are developed on Ford, Saab etc. Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) contains propane and butane, which produces less CO2 than petrol and diesel. The internal engine can be modified because of which the vehicle can use petrol or LPG.

Fuel cells are conversion devices which provide energy from electrochemical reaction and electricity can be continually produced with the flow of reactance.  However, this technology is proven to be expensive.  Another fossil fuel is the compressed natural gas found underneath the earth surface, which also produces less CO2 gas and this gas is compressed in the cylinder and mixes well with the air before combustion, thereby making it an efficient fuel.

However with the advent of the green technology, environment awareness is being fast spread to various industries and manufacturers thereby creating efficient business opportunities to the investors. This awareness has led to the creation of vital engines with most advantageous performance and is also eco friendly. Green car technology has revolutionized the vehicle manufacturing process thereby saving our planet Earth to a certain extent.

Some hand-picked related and non-related posts:

Real Estate in Turkey

Family Skiing in New Zealand

How To Go Green with Cleaning

New Mortgage Rules Come To Canada

A Brief History of An Emerging Giant: China

What to know before buying a home in Canada

Copenhagen Summit Roundup – Part 4

Early into the United Nations Copenhagen Summit, fears were in place that the conference would not be able to come up with a unified agreement as originally hoped.  All around the world, leading climatologists (and even some politicians chimed in) led the discussion that this particular climate summit was our ‘last chance’ to turn things around; that is, our final opportunity for the world community to form real agreements that would reverse, and ultimately eliminate the public health and environmental threat caused by harmful carbon emissions.

Some blame China for what is seen as the failure of the summit.  Despite the fact that an accord was adopted, China is seen as a villain for causing so much distress because of their refusal (until, some say, forced by the hand of the United States, and more specifically President Barack Obama) to submit to a transparent process for monitoring progress toward emissions reductions.  Some blamed the United States for, as usual as these critics charge, pushing smaller, less affluent countries around.  Still others blame ’smaller’ players like Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Nicaragua for threatening to veto the accord, in part out of protest for the forced hand of big, rich players like the United States.  However, a new, more nefarious ‘enemy’ to the accords has recently been identified, and it might surprise some to know that that ‘villain’ is Denmark, herself. 

Did the host country ruin the Copenhagen Summit?  Critics charge that the host government, who convened a unilateral meeting of 26 hand-picked (by Denmark’s Prime Minister,  Lars Lokke Rasmussen) that would threaten the strength of a document drafted multilaterally by all of the attending nations.  In fact, other world leaders ‘warned’ Rasmussen to not convene such a unilaterally motivated meeting of the minds, as it would undermine any document or accord that would be presented as a result of pain inducing discussions involving more than 190 countries throughout the two week summit, and, actually for the last four years of climate change discussions between the participating countries. 

Despite the warnings and admonishments from other participating government, the Danish government did indeed produce and present a document that seemed to explicitly conflict, at times, with the multilateral and democratically negotiated accord where 193 countries had collectively been involved in coming to an agreement on the many-faceted climate deal. 

Especially since these unsanctioned meeting occurred during the last days of the Copenhagen Summit, the move by Denmark is seen as a way for the host country to bring attention to itself as a solution finder, and more for public image and relations than trying to contribute to a true and lasting accord.

What the long-term effects of Denmark’s move will be are up in the air.  As the host country, their move has been seen as some as a showcasing of the host country’s government.  Still others fear that this move will cause irreparable harm to the ongoing discussions that will continue for the next few years, as the world (it is hoped) community comes to some sort of agreement on how to reduce harmful carbon emissions.

More posts:

Global Green Archive

Barack Obama and Copenhagen Summit

Copenhagen Negotiations Creating a Stir

Copenhagen Summit – Only The Beginning

Copenhagen Summit, America, And China

Copenhagen Summit Roundup – Part 3

Many people who followed the United Nations Summit on global climate change are aware that, at the last moments before the conference closed, United States President Barack Obama flew to Copenhagen, Denmark, where the summit was taking place.  However, his actual role is not so well understood.  Did he help the talks?  Or, as many suggest, were his efforts more for show.  Or, perhaps, more realistically, somewhere in between?  Whether or not President Obama’s role had any real and meaningful effect on the Copenhagen Summit probably depends on your perspective and stance on the issue itself.

White House reports coming out of Washington, D.C., state that President Obama’s efforts demonstrate a lofty diplomatic achievement.  Surely, Obama’s speech at the Copenhagen Summit did not mince words as he criticized the lack of a reasonable agreement between the meeting nations.  Perhaps his boldest move was reports that Obama ‘crashed’ a meeting that was occurring between China, Brazil, India and South Africa – four countries that United States representatives had been trying to meet with.  When he noticed that the four countries were meeting, Obama apparently stated something to the effect that, ‘we’ve been wanting to meet with all of these countries, and now here’s our chance.’

Although many concede that the final agreement is far from perfect, journalist and Copenhagen Summit watchers from around the world were pleasantly surprised to hear that, after two weeks of discussions that had basically been stalled, in fact quite stuck, any agreement had been made.  Barack Obama, according to his and the White House public statements is taking credit (albeit according to his own words, Obama admits that his contribution was ‘modest’) for pushing through what many had figured was the impossible; ‘enticing’ China to agree to accountability measures that it had so vigorously resisted.

The final agreement, as noted by climatologists who watched the Copenhagen Summit closely, falls far short of what needs to be done to halt global climate change.  Even so, that point may be mute as several countries are threatening to veto the accord, effectively making it null and void; representatives from Venezuela, Bolivia, Sudan, Saudi Arabia and Nicaragua particularly are incensed that the United States may have forced their, and China’s hand.  If vetoed by those countries, some may, in the end, consider the entire Copenhagen Summit a failure.

Even Barack Obama admits that the long-term picture may be bleak as, to paraphrase his words, ‘by taking one step forward, the frustration and resentment may make us take two steps back.’  Perhaps, however, the bigger step forward was the actual dialogue and contention that all participating nations agree to a transparent process for analyzing progress toward emissions reductions.  Ultimately, only the near future will tell us if the accord will ’stick,’ and only after decades of living with the ramifications, negative and positive, of the Copenhagen Summit will tell us what the true results of the efforts of key players like U.S. President Barack Obama ultimately played.  Maybe then, Barack Obama can claim he ‘won’ a battle toward reducing global carbon emissions.

More posts:

Global Green Archive

Copenhagen Negotiations Creating a Stir

Copenhagen Summit – Only The Beginning

Copenhagen Summit, America, And China

Copenhagen Summit Roundup – Part 2

The landmark United Nations summit on climate change that took place in Copenhagen, Denmark, earlier this month is still causing conversation and debate.  Much of this debate was around the conflict between two major players; the United States of America and China.  In a nutshell, the discussion centered around the two countries with the highest per-capita carbon emissions on the planet.  At the core of the debate was the insistence that all countries submit to outside verification, or external monitoring, total emissions.  Still, China is hesitating over this part of the agreement.

What led up to this part of the summit?  Many blame the fact that the United States, up until this summit, had universally rejected many of the climate change accords that had been previously negotiated (at the Kyoto agreements, for example).  Despite the changing attitude toward the United States, in general, toward a more open approach, there is still a bit of ‘bully’ mentality perspective; for example, surveys taken world wide have indicated a more positive view of U.S. Politics and world stance.  But, even so, the U.S. tends to come across as an overbearing force by telling other countries, new to the worldwide power stage (aka China) what to do.

This, of course, set up some interesting discussions.  It can be argued that China has, in some way, surpassed the United States in an economic sense.  China’s economy has been growing, while the United States economy is still in recovery from what some describe as a light depression.  Considered a ‘developing’ country by some standards, China argues that in order to sustain their economic growth and position, they must be given some flexibility when it comes to emissions.  The United States, long the biggest user (per capita) of natural resources, is in no position (paraphrases China) to dictate a reduction in emissions.

In the end, the United States made a situation during the Copenhagen summit that forced China’s hand.  It was, some say, a strategic move by the U.S.  And, others say that it is a bit of manipulation.  Either way, the result was that the U.S. would contribute more than $100 billion to poor countries, via an international fund.  But, there was a catch (here’s where the manipulation might have been involved) in that any major countries signing onto this assistance would be required to to commit to a reduction in carbon emissions by signing a binding agreement and submit to verification by external means or so-called ‘transparent verification.’

The assistance ‘catch’ specifically mentioned “all major nations,” and all who were involved in the discussions, and close observers knew that “all major nations” really meant China.  From the beginning of the summit, China steadfastly refused ‘transparent verification,’ and so this deal was a way to put to rest some of China’s stubbornness on this part of the agreement.  Nevertheless, the end result was what most saw as an important facet to the entire Copenhagen summit.

But, there’s some bad news.  Reports are that China is quite angry over having been ‘forced’ into this particular agreement.  Some Chinese officials made statements that these demands were, in fact, an ‘insult’ to China and might even be considered a violation of China’s sovereignty and national security interests. Another report states that China, more or less, snubbed bilateral discussions that had been previously arranged with President Barack Obama. 

Only time will tell if China and the United States will be able to find some common ground on the talks that started at the Copenhagen summit.  Needless to say, decades may pass before we know the ultimate result of these accords; both environmentally and politically.

More posts:

Global Green Archive

Copenhagen Negotiations Creating a Stir

Copenhagen Summit – Only The Beginning

Copenhagen Summit Roundup – Part 1

Dubbed the largest environmental meeting in the world, the United Nations Climate Summit that took place in Copenhagen, Denmark, from December 7 thru December 18, 2009.  With almost 200 (192, to be specific) nations from around the globe gathering to discuss possible solutions to the state of our environment, the summit has been getting intense attention since its opening ceremonies, and will surely be examined as the years go by.

The main issues that the climate summit tackled were related specifically to reduce carbon emissions, believed by the vast majority of environmental scientists to be a major contributor to negative changes that we’re seeing in today’s climate, due to human-kinds activity and use (and/or abuse) of natural resources.

The challenge is finding consensus between the 192 countries related not only to the definition of the issue at hand, but the possible solutions, and (more complex) each nations’ role in the solution.  Finally, the summit had to agree on the verbiage of the agreement – this is where much of the debate occurs as all of the countries involved in the summit had to come to a mutual understanding, and stated in a way where they could all agree.

Key challenges also included core issues; carbon emissions, of course, being the main core issue.  Other core topics included the developing worlds’ use of carbon emitting resources, how might a global industrial system operate when considering a reduction of carbon emissions, and deforestation, especially in the rain forest regions of South and Central America.

Trying to agree on any one of these points would be difficult, so you can imagine how heated some of the debate might have gotten when factoring all of these highly complex topics.  Most of the critical debate came from the hardship of finding common ground between developing countries (China, for example) who have quickly growing economies, and are, as a consequence, emitting extremely high levels of carbon-based particles into the environment.  At the same time, there are so-called developed countries (the United States of America), for example, who argue that developing countries must curb their carbon emissions, while (at the same time) some developed countries (and the United States is an example of this) emit high carbon emissions per capita.  Therefore, must of the discussion resembles a finger-pointing type of scenario. 

Ultimately, the summit did result in a lengthy written agreement – critics state that the accord does not go far enough.  Basically, the agreement was to work toward reducing carbon emissions allowing each country to set their own so-called ‘green-house gas’ reduction goals for 2020.  In addition to the goal to reduce emissions, other parts of the agreement state, essentially, that an emissions verification (for accountability purposes) system will be setup, and that deforestation (the stripping of trees in fragile ecosystems like the rain forests in Central and South America) will also be reduced.

Although some may be disappointed by the, let’s be honest, highly limited reach of the summit agreement, the good news might be that the problem of global climate change was recognized as scientifically valid, and deemed an extremely important priority for public health.  In addition, another positive outcome was that all countries agreed that global warming should be limited to 2 (celcius).  Additional talks and actions will follow, and this summit was really only the beginning of a world-wide look at this global issue.

More posts:

Global Green Archive

Copenhagen Negotiations Creating a Stir

Great Fears Expressed In One Day Global Warming Summit

India and China Oppose Global Warming Initiatives from the West

China has The Most Impressive Carbon Emissions Reduction

It may appear that finally leaders of the world’s strongest nations are waking up to the reality that something needs to be done if we are to save the planet that we all call home. The days of lone ranger tactics are now gone and we must pull together as the human family of destroy the planet through our bad practices. The 1997 Kyoto protocol has come back to haunt us and there efforts to strengthen it or may be replace it with a better alternative. At a recent summit it emerged that countries such as US and China are gearing up towards drawing some ambitious programs that may be forerunners of what to expect in the climate summit to take place in Copenhagen in December 2009

The American president, who was also in attendance, took note that his country is leaving no stone unturned as it looks for an internal solution through the congress, which is battling to pass a new energy and climate bill which will go a long way in working out measures that could see a drastic reduction of the emission of green house gases. It may appear that finally the chickens have come home to roost and everyone is determined to play their honest role in this great undertaking.

During the one day conference it emerged that the greatest contributors to the problem are actually fast developing countries with the highest economic rate, chief of which are the two Asian giants of China and India, who jointly need to pull up their socks and encourage some green development because they seem to be catching up fast with the developed nations in contributing to the problem of global warming. The good news is that the Chinese president himself assured the participants of his county’s determination to work out their own domestic solution to the global problem, especially in trying to reduce the carbon intensity produced by his country’s economic activity.

China has emerged to be one of the countries with the most impressive records in reduction of carbon emissions in the last five years, having reduced her intensity by a whole 20% and things look like they are going to be much better. This is according to the vice president for climate and energy at the UN foundation in Washington, Reid Detchon. The US president now wants focus to be directed towards least developed nations who suffer the greatest consequences of global warming and yet are least prepared to face the challenges that obviously facing them. He believes a lot more financial help is in order so that these nations at least get equipped.

As nations prepare to go to Copenhagen at the end of the year it is the desire of the UN secretary general to see fresh ideas brought into the up coming summit because this summit taking place in Paris in June this year did not go as far as it would have been possible. One would hope that all the other forums that will be taking place in preparation for the Copenhagen meet will do substantial groundwork so that every country does its share in order to save our planet.

Some hand-picked related and non-related posts:

Why Buy International Real Estate Abroad

Do You Really Need That Extra Credit Card?

The Sky Is the limit for India China Trade Relations

Entrepreneurs Just Need An Idea To Become Successful

India and China Oppose Global Warming Initiatives from the West

India, China, and Global Warming

You may want to call it a strange cohabitation of convenience but whatever name you give to it, there seems to be a resolve among these two neighbouring giants that are India and China that the west is not going to dictate them at all, no matter who is going to suffer the consequences. These two Asian neigh bours have decided to hold firm ground in their resistance to sign the protocol that is going to bind them toward the reduction of green house gases that are believed to be the cause of global warming, a subject the whole wide world seems to be pre-occupied with. They simply will not budge in the bid to have them commit to afford even limited reductions as the world looks or other measures that could bear more fruit on the same.

The China and India partnership is viewed by some as the major element that has lately brought together a group of close to 37 developing nations who have proposed an amendment to the renowned Kyoto Protocol, and they have come up with their own figures which they feel should be the basic greenhouse gas emission levels to be undertaken by especially those countries they consider the main contributors to the problem of greenhouse gases.

It appears to be almost apparent here that this is a case of tow bulls fighting because the developed nations themselves have their own set of assessments and they laid claim that the new targets are actually causing a confusion which according to them is simply impractical. You wonder who then is going to suffer as these two opposing sides continue to flex their muscles, with none of the sides considering ceding any grounds whatsoever. Talk about having vested interest and you have a real case scenario here.

The G-77 group of nations has stuck to their guns regarding the original targets of trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 40% and they feel this must be enforced. They are looking to move forward to the second phase of the plan which is envisaged to take place between 2013 and 2020 which according to them will see a reduction from countries such as Japan, Russia, UK and the United States playing their major roles in saving the planet from the affects of global warming, which we have started to feel all over the planet currently.

The current trend of climate talks seem to be headed to a stalemate again with India insisting during a recent forum that no one was going to force anything down their throat since it was still at the negotiating stage. All the analyses according to the delegates who attended the meeting are subject to debate and open to discussion. It remains to be seen what the results are going to be, but according to many, the insistence of the Asian sisterhood of India and China that the west must lead by example since they are the major contributors to the problem, is going to be a hard nut to crack and only time will tell how far the resolve of the bullies from the west is going to push them.

Some hand-picked related and non-related posts:

Your Holiday and the Environment

The Internet and Personal Development

Free E-Book: 101 Reasons to Love a Recession

Speaking The Language When You Travel Can Help

Online Money Making Scams – Separating Fact from Fiction

Copenhagen Negotiations Creating a Stir

Negotiation Focus on U.S. Possible

Obama trumps the pack as the House passes the Cap and Tap Bill, leading into the Copenhagen Negotiations. Under heavy fire from the U.S. citizens as they stand divided against or with the new bill is still an enormous volleying game. President Obama took this Bill as a proof positive to lead the Negotiations that the U.S is serious about stopping their damaging greenhouse emissions by capping the amount certain companies and industries can produce in a given period. In the future years, this cap will lower on a basic percentage until they are safely under the damage control level of concern.

By bringing this Bill into the negotiations, Obama hopes this will ensure U.S. dedication and aid in developing countries to make the decisions to join in the efforts as well. Does Obama plan to back the heavy requests by the developing countries or add this Bill as the top offer and non-negotiable? That is where the negotiations could hamstring. It is perceived that the Bill will represent the top offer to appease these developing countries, in reference to ask what they have done on their own to help the present circumstance clouding our future progress as a unified global economy.

The many debates regarding the Bill will filter into the negotiations and will plausibly be the turning key in these talks. There are several flaws rumored to be found in the Bill and these flaws will be the main propaganda used against the U.S. As one of the leading polluters in the world, it is believed that the U.S is simply not doing enough. The Bill, it seems, keeps companies with revenue to by the rights to produce green house pollutants, and if they exceed their limit, they buy more. This can create extreme energy costs for consumers and further kill the economy as well as let the powerhouse industries keep polluting while they overshadow and buy out smaller companies by purchasing their energy pollutant tickets.

The upside is that if the government can legitimately mandate this program it could be successful. However, the faith and trust in the U.S. from other countries will prove as to if this Bill is the answer. The percentage of those aware of the Bill believe it is an underhand ploy to maintain confidence that the U.S. is serious in expunging green house emissions but at a profit. If everything leading to the negotiations remains focused on big business, and monetary gains or losses the focus is going in the wrong direction.

It is also assumed that Negotiations will focus strongly on the fact that we as a global environment need to change our energy resources dramatically, which can also boost the economy of several countries and create a magnitude of employment opportunities. Developing countries will still need aid from the U.S., China, and Russia as well as other powerhouse countries to comply with these demands, the same demands they faced at Kyoto. The same demands that have never been negotiated will hang heavy as talks begin.

Will there be a concern that we as a global community need to aid our fellow brothers and sisters, at every cost to ensure our children will have a future? Who will be the first to point fingers? What arguments will ensue and what type of damage control tactics are in place. There are so many variables it is unclear as to whether everyone is ready to reach a negotiable resolve. As the populations around the world watch their governments prepare there is a since of apprehension, and uncertainty. One can only hope as a populous the best concerns for health and the well-being of people and planet will be addressed, as wealth and competitive gains are not mandating the outcomes. It is important to remain on an economic incline, but the costs to humankind must be highly regarded and evaluated safely.

Let us hope for once that our governments are working in our best interests.

Some hand-picked related and non-related posts:

Do We Really Reap What We Sow?

Real Estate Property In Croatia

Are Money Making Ads Real or Just Hype?

Canadians Are Confident But Keeping Eggs Safe

Tahiti, Bora Bora, and Moorea – Heaven on Earth

The Copenhagen December 2009 Environmental Summit

How To Use iGoogle To become Efficient, Productive, and Save Time

Copenhagen – Get Your Pessimism In Early

In December this year, the Danish capital Copenhagen will play host to the most important environmental summit of the past decade, and the most intensely-awaited since the Kyoto summit of 1997. Kyoto has come in the eyes of many to symbolise the greatest missed opportunity to turn back the tides of environmental damage, as the protocol set down in the agreement which was signed at the end of the summit have failed to be adopted by some of its signatories, and even those who have adopted them have as yet failed to make all of the required adjustments. The hope is that Copenhagen will see the attending administrations make good on the essential failures of Kyoto – but already there is doubt as to how likely that is.

The signs are not good, if you believe the sounds being made after US President Barack Obama spoke at the UN to a one-day summit on Climate issues. Although he was strident in his words, and spoke like the born orator many believe him to be, something was lacking. He gave his commitment to push through cuts in emissions and called for focus from all leaders in trying to bring about a solution to climate change, but his speech was lacking in specifics. If Copenhagen is to achieve anything in terms of driving back climate change, there will need to be a broad consensus before the parties sit down to negotiate. Otherwise, all we can look forward to is “talks about talks” with the likely outcome that another convention will have to be summoned before 2010 is out.

Perhaps unfairly, there has been a lot of criticism directed towards the relatively new American administration in the aftermath of Obama’s speech. Yes, it was light on specifics beyond a reiterated commitment to his existing initiative to cap carbon emissions at a commercial level – but there has been precious little in the way of bright initiatives from anyone else at the same time. A recent, and bold, Australian government bill aimed at cutting emissions has failed to win parliamentary support, and with PM Kevin Rudd threatening to dissolve Parliament and call another election rather than moderate its terms, the picture is one where consensus is going to be hard to find in sole countries let alone worldwide.

It could be that all of this pessimism leads to something good, however. Although the prospects for success at Copenhagen are deemed to be poor, this pessimism may ironically drive the negotiations to be more searching and less posturing. A result from Copenhagen is not impossible until the final days of the conference, and if the leaders show goodwill between now and then a deal is not out of the question. However, the deal has to be right. If all we see is another fudge like Kyoto, we cannot afford to wait another twelve years before we sort that one out. There are two months to go before the politicians begin to sit down. Will they take the chance to work on something meaningful? We can only hope.

Some hand-picked related and non-related posts:

Is The Kyoto Protocol Dead?

Chiang Mai – The Rose of the North

Entrepreneurs And Opportunism vs Cynicism

Ryugyong Hotel – The Ugliest Building on Earth

Why Decluttering Makes Perfect Financial Sense

How Financial Crisis Affected Credit Card Borrowers

Should You Share Your Problems With Those You Trust?