Some real butthurt for the environment there
All good. I’m sure the new Prez will get it sorted
Yeah well, the environment shouldn’t have mouthed off like that!
3 Likes
There’s two accords that have been total shams and dead letter laws since shortly after they were signed: Paris and Oslo. If any good comes out of the next four years, it will be that world leaders will no longer be able to pretend “carbon credit our way to net zero” is compatible with limiting global warming to 1.5c. It’s long gone, just like the two state solution for I/P
I think you’re making the confusion of thinking that any step or agreement has to be the final one? Let’s get the entire world to agree on a comprehensive, all-encompassing, effective agreement, all in one go. Good luck with that.
Agreeing is the easy bit, it’s the following/enshrining into law for each individual country that’s impossible. All you need is a new government and suddenly those promises are out the door
I’m of the opinion that people shouldn’t lie about the outcome of a policy, yeah. There’s a long history of that around climate change, so much so there’s a word for it - greenwashing. And the Paris Accords were greenwash.
National governments signed up to an agreement which states that members would reduce emissions to keep us within a relatively stable, safe climate with no more than 1.5c of warming. They then turned around and enacted policies that were not in any way, shape or form ever going to lead to that actually happening.
Paris didn’t lead world leaders incrementally in the right direction towards 1.5c. Paris did what it was designed to do and provided a polite fiction that we were heading in the right direction. But 1.5c is gone. The Barrier Reef, drinking water for a billion people alive today, and countless ecosystems which have been around as long as agriculture - none of that mattered as much as continuing to accumulate capital from extracting fossil fuels.
The changes Trump will bring are just the icing on the cake, and by the time he’s done the lie will be so certain it will be impossible to maintain.
1 Like
No Western government has ever implemented policies in line with keeping global warming to 1.5c though.
ED: or the longer version. Notice how no countries are green on this map.
I’m not sure anyone ever properly believed that, did they? And everything I ever hear or read about these things is that at the end people are already thinking about the next stages, and of trying to keep governments to honour those agreements given there is no real punishment for not doing so.
But that will always be the case no matter what better agreement would be made.
If we’re trying to say it’s not good enough, we agree. If you’re trying to say it has no purpose or good, I find it hard to believe that total inaction would have seen us better off. The same goes for Paris or Oslo.
That’s… that’s exactly my point. That’s the whole of it. Governments have been able to say oh but we’re taking climate action, in line with Paris, etc etc etc and it’s all been absolute lies. I don’t mind incremental change if it actually involves telling the truth that you aren’t yet doing the thing you intend to do. But there’s simply no longer any point with climate change. 1.5c is gone thanks to the deliberate time wasting of Paris, and we all need to prepare for summers that make 19-20 feel like a holiday.
It would have, because people who aren’t going to read policy documents and scientific papers have not really worried about changing their personal lifestyles, or demanding better from their governments, because they thought it was being handled - down under they at least did once Albo was elected. Because everyone was lying through their teeth to them.
I know that, but the issie is that even the smaller promises arent being met purely due to changes in government
Nothing like making a set of facts disappear!
COP29, the UN’s Climate Change conference, is being held in Baku, Azerbaijan.
Not only is i a rather difficult country to get to without taking multiple flights which creates a massive carbon footprint, their major source of income is from the mining and export of fossil fuels.
Kind of defeats the purpose of the meeting, doesn’t it?
Apparently everyone knows the purpose isn’t actually to protect a safe climate…
Not entirely sure what you mean here?
The Taliban are going to be at the summit
But no US representative, apparently.
Edi Rama has openly questioned the summit’s effectiveness. Someone had to say it. Source is a live text feed on the Guardian.
4 Likes
The president of Azerbaijan just said oil is great and had a massive go at climate activists… may as well just give up on the world
For a moment I thought that said Albanese and nearly did a spit take. But no, normla service resumes
1 Like