Saturday, December 08, 2007


Yesterday, I openly mused about the possibility of Canada SWEEPING the daily awards in Bali. Well, Canada has defied the odds and made us all proud. The trifecta!:

In view of Canada’s leaked instructions to its negotiators, today’s Fossil of the Day Awards recognize three stunning anti-contributions to progress at Bali contained within the Harper position paper.

Canada takes third for proposing no short- or mid-term targets, mentioning only a 2050 target date for emissin reductions from an undisclosed baseline. Mr. Harper will be 91 years old by the time 2050 rolls around.

Canada sweeps into second for urging a wide-open special exception for “national circumstances” to ensure that particular countries aren’t “unduly burdened” by strong targets. Linguists tell us that “national circumstances” is Canadian for “having loads of tar sands.”

Canada captures first for the second day in a row for demanding absolute binding emissions targets for both developing and developed countries from the start, in a clear attempt to sabatoge Bali progress. (Canada’s per-capita emissions are five times those of China and ten times those of India.) Canada urges us to follow the model of the Montreal Protocol on Ozone protection—but Canada has forgotten that the Montreal Protocol began with developed country commitments only. Developing countries took binding limits only later, with extra time for compliance and financial support from developed nations. Note to Harper: try reading the Montreal Protocol. It shouldn’t be hard to find—particularly for a Canadian.

For those keeping score, today's impressive haul now puts Canada clearly in the lead on the world stage, snagging 7 awards in a mere 6 days. Woo hoo!


wilson said...

Ok, I'll bite.
Third place: appears to be a negotiating position. Set the end game and negotiate the middle.
We have to set acheivable targets. Enough with sign anything and hope global cooling is the next fad.

Second place: exception for national circumstances no unduly burden for strong targets,... isn't that an opening for US, China and India as they have rejected hard targets?
The tar sands/mfg/auto industry isn't exceptional because it is a choice, but 7 months of winter and huge land mass sure is.
We consume more energy as a result.
Small example: feeding livestock in the winter. Fire up a tractor to feed cows due to no grass ( baling feed and beddding for the winter), heated watering bowls...

First place: 'but Canada has forgotten that the Montreal Protocol began with developed country commitments only. Developing countries took binding limits only later'
hmmm... developing nations were already given a pass with Kyoto 1. And in that period of time the developing nations ghgs grew and China is now poised to pass the US as the largest ghg emitters.
Why give them a second pass?
Is this not the largest threat to humanity the world has ever known?

Steve V said...


Face it, the gig is up and Harper is finally be exposed for the fraud that we already know. Unfortunately, Canada's reputation is taking a large hit on the international scene. People see through the rhetoric, it's all just a ruse to look relevant.

wilson said...

Yah, I know what you think of PMSH, Steve,
but what about my points on first, second and third prizes.

I am also of the opinion that, the developed world should and is paying the cost of R&D for clean air technology.
We made the mess, we have to find the means to fix it.
Developing countries are taking the route we did 50 years ago, adding the the mess.
And while doing so, taking developed world jobs because they can produce cheaper product using dirty energy.

So, the developed nations pay for R&D for clean air tech and have paid the cost to their economies re:job losses.
Both factors have boosted/benefited developing nations economies at a speed far faster than the now self-developed nations enjoyed.
Developing nations should BUY our technology, and put the cost of such purchases onto exported goods.

If developing nations won't get on board, developed nations may level the paying field for them.

Canadian maufacturers are calling for an end to cheap China imports, perhaps Canada will have to tax those imports to pay for having to over-compensate for China/India refusal to sign on.
Buzz would be happy.

Oxford County Liberals said...

That first point would be good if it's valid Wilson; unfortunately it isn't. The developing world has been asking the developed world (see Canada, the US and so on) for help in implementing greener technology and so on, but we have refused to help with the costs of the project.

Get back to your Harper Constituency Office, Wilson. I'm sure they'll eventually come up with sone new excuses.. er.. talking points for you.

wilson said...

My mistake Steve, didn't recognise that you wanted only Harper bashers to comment.

Steve V said...

"perhaps Canada will have to tax those imports to pay for having to over-compensate for China/India refusal to sign on."

I don't disagree with that, in fact I've mentioned it before. If Canada really did take the lead and enact a tough regime, then it takes the moral high ground. Through action, it can then exercise pressure on others, and if that doesn't happen, then there could be an environmental levee put on all goods, coming from countries which produce without the economic implications of tough standards. Unfortunately, the Harper government doesn't want to lead, which is why we have this deliberate attempt to sabotage, under the guise of including everyone, while simultaneously arguing for "special" status for Canada.

ottlib said...

There are still huge numbers of people in the developing world who do not have access to the basics we take for granted. You know, things like electricity and clean water.

Those countries will not accept the developed world telling them they now have to stop or slow down their development to fight global warming. This is particularly true when you consider the amount of resources the developed world consumed and the amount of pollution it produced to transit from the agrarian societies they once were to the modern industrialized societies they now are.

The developing countries are going to argue, rightly, that it is wrong for the developed world to create the problem of global warming during their development and then to expect the developed world to compensate for that by stopping their development.

So, the international community has to come up with a plan that will allow the developing world to continue development while still reducing global ghg emissions.

That means deep cuts for the developed world while urging the developing world to develop in a much smarter fashion than the developed world did and providing them the technology to do so.

Mr. Harper's "plan" fails in that goal.

Steve V said...


The problem exists today BECAUSE of the developed world, extrapolating to the future is one thing, but you can't expect the developing world to accept responsibility now, when we have shown nothing.

As I keep saying, the developed world needs a tight regiment, which then allows for future pressure and could involve an environmental tariff to augment the economic disparities. You go first, then you have the moral authority to demand something, using economic leverage.