FAMINE CAN BE A WEAPON, or it can be the consequence of systemic bungle, but either way, the results are catastrophic.THE Nation. is a thoughtful site, with an article by Samuel Moyn, "Totalitarianism, Famine and Us" that is worth pondering. The Chinese debacle is truly disturbing. With climate change in Africa and its droughts, the future has challenge.
After studying the Bengali famine during World War II, Nobel Prize–winning economist Amartya Sen famously concluded that democracy is an antidote to famine, because it breaks the information control and accountability vacuum that often impede getting available food to those who desperately need it. Of course, the great Chinese famine provides a vivid illustration of how ruinous and deadly policies occur as much because closed regimes correct their policies too slowly as because they target their populations for terror.
The ongoing March heat wave in
the Midwest will continue to set all-time heat records through Thursday,
gradually shifting its peak intensity eastwards during the week.
And ...
Record-breaking heat has also
penetrated into the Prairie provinces of Canada over the past week.
Winnipeg, Manitoba has broken its record high for the past five days in a
row, and hit 24°C (75.2°F) yesterday, its hottest March temperature on
record. Forecast high temperatures for Wednesday and Thursday across
Ontario are near 26°C, which will threaten the records for hottest March
day in history for Windsor, London, Hamilton, and Toronto.
Why?
The unusual warmth is due to a
loop in the jet stream that has created a large upper-level ridge of
high pressure that is stuck in place over the Eastern U.S.--a phenomenon
known as a "blocking pattern." Since the jet stream acts as the
boundary between cold air to the north and warm air to the south, and
the large loop in the jet places its axis far to the north of the
eastern U.S., summer-like warmth has developed over the eastern half of
the U.S. Conversely, colder than average temperatures have developed
over the western third of the U.S. behind the southwards-dipping loop of
the jet stream. This jet stream pattern is too extreme to be stable,
and the big loop over the Western U.S. will break off and form a giant
eddy on Wednesday. The resulting area of low pressure will be known as a
"cut-off low", because it will be cut off from the jet stream. The
cut-off low will drift slowly eastwards during the week, gradually
bringing an end to "Summer in March" over the Eastern half of the U.S.
... and Eastern Canada.
What caused the unusual loop and temperatures higher than have ever been recorded?
Surface heating and displacement. For some reason the cold air which usually resides over the pole was shoved southward.
That was caused, in simplistic terms, by the Arctic Oscillation being in a positive phase. (Lower than average pressure at the pole and higher than average temperatures across the landmasses to the south). Then it went negative. Europe got smacked with some significant cooling. But North America ended up with one of the wackiest Jet Stream configurations ever seen and that very odd and very dangerous loop.
There will be "water events". Big ones.
Please do not connect this with the effects of accelerated global warming. That might make you uncomfortable. It's best if you ignore it and believe that wearing shorts in Winnipeg in March is a great idea.
Oh yeah. Move to high ground. You can't hear Rex if your antenna is under water.
A massive snowfall along the Coquihalla Highway has prompted a travel
advisory for the route between Hope and Merritt today and could help
set the record for the deepest snow pack measured at the route's summit
since its completion in 1987.
Travel along the route today is not
recommended, said Dennis Kurylowich, operations manager for the Thompson
Nicola District, Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure.
Since
2 a.m., "we've had about 30 cm of snow," he said at around noon. As
much as 50 cm could fall on the Coquihalla by the end of today, he
added, stressing that people should "only travel if necessary."
The all-time snowpack record came in 1999 when 346 cm of snow was recorded at the summit.
As of two weeks ago, the summit's snowpack was 324 cm, he said.
Now, most of the readers here are smart enough to know that a snowfall, especially a heavy one, is a water event. And the event on the Coquihalla is a result of warmer, not colder, temperatures.
Heavy snowfall has been coupled with temperatures of about one or two degrees Celsius warmer across the region, he said.
Don't limit your thoughts of Daryl Hannah to her "Steel Magnolias" and "Kill Bill" roles. She is one tough debater as the shill for Big Oil finds out in their debate on CBC's "Power and Politics" today. She handles herself very well, is well-versed on the issues and makes a strong argument for the environmental side of this issue.
At one point a comment made by the Ethical(?!?)oil rep created the same response from Daryl and I at the same moment: "Oh my god!" (I'm not even a believer in imaginary beings, but that's a whole 'nuther story.) The shill brings out Canadian values of "respect for minorities and gays and lesbians" as a reason to support "fair trade" tarsands oil. Amazing thing to see and one wonders how he sleeps at night.
YALE ENVIRONMENT 360 is a site run by the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies. Really worth the visit, numerous articles of interest. One of 'em, "Spurred by Warming Climate, Beetles Threaten Coffee Crops" is of selfish interest. According to Erica Westley, our double-double access is in real peril. The article talks about arabicas; I wonder if robustus is unaffected?
Coffee production has long been vulnerable to drought or excess rains. But recently, a tiny insect that thrives in warmer temperatures — the coffee berry borer — has been spreading steadily, devastating coffee plants in Africa, Latin America, and around the world.
• • •
“Coffee is migrating,” said Dean Cycon, owner of Dean’s Beans, a Massachusetts-based specialty coffee company that works with farmers around the world. “As it’s getting hotter at the lower altitudes, the lower plants are dying off, so it marches the coffee forest up the slopes.” Jaramillo’s research indicates that the borers are migrating with the coffee plants.
io9 has a report by Alasdair Wilkins, "How Canada will become a superpower, making the Northern Rim the envy of the world". Could be tough on the polar bears, but . . .
Although climate change could still have devastating effects for much of the world, some regions stand to benefit immensely. Canada, Scandinavia, and even Greenland could all become economic powerhouses, making "The New North" a very attractive destination.
This is one of the central premises of respected climate scientist Laurence Smith's new book, The World in 2050: Four Forces Shaping Civilization's Northern Future, which is published later this month. Just as the Pacific Rim has gained ever-increasing economic importance over the last half-century, melting in the polar regions will allow a similarly powerful Arctic Rim to develop, providing an unprecedented economic jolt to Canada, Russia, the northern United States, Scandinavia, Iceland, and Greenland.
Touching on Alison's post which presents a shocking graphic image of Russia enduring the worst heat wave in its recorded and verbal history, it's worth looking at other regions. In this case, the Atlantic Main Development Region (MDR) for hurricanes is offering up July 2010 as the warmest July on record.
Dr. Jeff Masters at the Weather Underground did all the heavy lifting, analyzed the data from the UK Hadley Centre and discovered that July 2010 was the six straight warmest month on record in the region.
As you can see from the NOAA/NESDIS graphic above (click to enlarge), the departure from normal is over 1 degree C for the region. In fact, it is 1.33 degrees C above average for this past July breaking a previous record set in July 2005.
Pinpointing the reasons for this anomaly might appear simple, however there are a lot of factors at work. The North Atlantic Oscillation is one of the prime culprits along with the Arctic Oscillation. The NAO is not something new to climate science. It is one of the most well-known climate variables we have and knowledge of it reaches back several centuries. What is a little less well-known, and has now become significant, is the Arctic Oscillation and the effect it has on climate and the power to drive the NAO.
Another issue is the weakened Bermuda high. Winds flowing out of that high are unusually weak (and are forecast to remain that way). This has the effect of reducing the mixing which occurs in that area of the ocean. Normally, strong trade winds would cause a certain amount of upwelling bringing cold water to the surface and mixing with the heated surface waters causing a relative lowering of the sea surface temperatures. If that doesn't happen the ocean surface continues to heat up. That in turn causes low pressure to occur as the warmed surface air rises. In short, the ocean is going to ditch it's heat somehow. If the wind which drives surface mixing is not present then the warm air generated by warm surface temperatures will force that warmth upward. With lower seasonal trade winds comes lower upper level wind shear. All of that combined means that the globe's air conditioning system will kick into a higher gear and we have a recipe for hurricane formation.
I did not mention global warming. That is simply because, despite all the speculation, we don't have a firm grasp on what causes the NAO and the AO.
As we slide into August and prolonged higher than average sea surface temperatures it brings one phrase to mind: You ain't seen nothin' yet.
Added: While we're looking at graphics, take a look at the global sea surface temperature anomalies from 9 August 2010 (click to enlarge). See anything scary there?
Unless you live in areas bordering the mid-latitudes of the Eastern Pacific. (That would be BC, Washington State, Oregon and some of California in the Northern Hemisphere and the western shore of central South America.)
This is just Canada. (click on any image to enlarge)
That is the departure from "normals" and it produces a startling rise in spring temperatures. The redder it is, the greater the increase from the 63 year normal. From Environment Canada (where you can also get a copy of the Throne Speech)
[S]pring temperatures have warmed over the last 63 years by 1.7°C. The winter season shows the greatest warming of any season, but all seasons have shown a warming trend since 1948.
And that is causing a rapid melt of a lower than average snow pack, which lowers the albedo effect, which in turn causes the ground to absorb and retain more heat... well... fried eggs anyone? Not to mention what's happening in the Arctic, (which I will do shortly).
Here is what's happening globally over the same period. (Spring 2010).The above graphic constitutes just the land surfaces. We can make that even prettier by blending land and sea surface temperatures.Now you get a picture of a warming globe but the alarming part is what's happening to the northern most landmasses. Temperatures in the Arctic were 5 degrees C (9 F) above the seasonal normal. In fact, of eleven climate regions in Canada, five set new records for spring temperatures. Even the Pacific coast, which had the least above normal temperatures, was 0.7 degrees C above the 63 year normal.
Despite some people clinging to winter ice production in the Arctic as something significant, the spreading ice sheet was primarily first year ice or new ice. What happened in May was either shocking or depressing, depending on your mood. Arctic ice had experienced a late season growth through April and reached seasonal maximum almost a month late. In May the decline in Arctic ice showed how thin it was and the Arctic has experienced the fastest decline in the satellite record.
The rate of decline through the month of May was the fastest in the satellite record; the previous year with the fastest daily rate of decline in May was 1980. By the end of the month, extent fell near the level recorded in 2006, the lowest in the satellite record for the end of May. Despite the rapid decline through May, average ice extent for the month was only the ninth lowest in the satellite record.
What we do not know is whether the Arctic sea ice extent will reach a new record low. It is simply too early to make that forecast and depends on varying meteorological conditions.
I mentioned earlier that the snow pack was melting rapidly. In May the North American snow pack melted faster in May 2010 than in any other May since records have been kept. In fact, Canada experienced the most rapid overall spring meltdown ever recorded. The change in the radiation reflection co-efficient further speeds heating at the surface.
There's a lot more interesting stuff that I could discuss but suffice to say, it's hot out there, and it's likely to get a lot hotter. And with heat the Earth will engage its natural cooling system - rapidly rising and expanding air. That can kick off some fairly significant meteorological events.
Right now, in British Columbia, it's hotter than the right element of my barbeque. When the temperature difference in Victoria is a mere 2 degrees C lower than a typically hot Kamloops, things are cooking. In fact, inland Vancouver Island is actually hotter at the time of writing than the BC southern interior.
Not that such a thing indicates anything truly abnormal. Meteorologically, this is a spot condition brought on by the existence of a strong high pressure ridge. Using this "heat wave" (by definition it doesn't yet qualify) as evidence of anything except a short term met anomaly would be wrong and, more extensively, dishonest.
If I were to engage in the typical head-in-the-sand, dumb-ass Rex Murphy approach, I could blast away that the ability to grease the sidewalk and fry an egg, in a place where that would usually be impossible, is proof of global warming. It isn't.
Meteorology differs from climatology in a number of different ways but, since I am rather involved in both, an easy demonstration is to look at the length of forecast.
To a meteorologist five days is a long time and the sustainability of a long-range forecast is difficult. Too much changes too fast to achieve a high level of accuracy over that "long term".
To a climatologist, three months is a very short time. Too short a time, in fact, on which to base any assumptions or arrive at any conclusions. Three years is better and a solid gauge is three centuries of data from which one might be able to forecast the next 20 years. That would be an ideal situation - if we could afford the time. The truth is, in terms of good data and verification of climate models, we have about 20 years worth of model hindcasting with which to make forecasts.
Stupidity enters the picture when some climate denier (self-labelled "skeptics") puts a finger on any given point of a climate model result and says "That didn't happen." True enough, but that's a "user" view of a weather forecast. Take a step back and look at the longer model result and the accuracy is remarkable. Further, when one of these clowns points at a model forecast "spike" event which occured either later or sooner than forecast they commit a heinous sin - they ignore the obvious trend which is a consistent rise in global temperature and the fact that, while the model might have gotten the precise date wrong, the event actually did occur.
This video, produced by Peter Sinclair provides information on the how and when of one particular model.
The problem of the swatting off of climate deniers is further exacerbated by their pointing at one portion of a larger event. The latest one being that "Arctic ice is increasing; not decreasing". That's cherry-picking of the highest order. The truth is quite different and the scientists explain.
Things become even more egregious when complete knobs like Mark Steyn enter the debate. Instead of anything resembling research or, for that matter, the lay reading of the research of others, Steyn offers this bit of dross.
Lowell Ponte (who I believe is an expert climatologist and, therefore, should have been heeded) wrote his bestseller, The Cooling: Has the new ice age already begun? Can we survive?
Yeah, well, as Paul Wells will happily point out, Steyn is "fact challenged" on almost any subject you want to name. But to suggest Lowell Ponte is an "expert climatologist" is a demonstration of where Steyn belongs when it comes to discussions on anthropogenic induced global warming: back in school. Lowell Ponte has never published anything scientific in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Anything. That's because he's not a scientist. His formal education is in English and Journalism with an equivalent in International Relations. For Steyn to suggest otherwise is either just plain dishonest or, (and I tend towards this), he's just plain too stupid and too lazy to actually check facts.
Steyn then goes on to quote University of Adelaide professor, Ian Pilmer. That's nice. I like Pilmer, in an abstract sort of way. He's probably an excellent geologist. His contribution to climate change research is considerably less collaborative than those closer to the coal face and his criticism of climate models brought a sharp rebuke from the scientific community at large. His suggestion that natural forces were not included in models is quite frankly not true. The first video above demonstrates that.
Enough of Steyn though. The prince of the deniers is Anthony Watts who created his surfacestations survey. What Watt's never tells you is that his supposedly damning survey actually has climate collection data from surface stations falling within the NOAA margin of error. A video was produced which essentially annihilated Watts' digital-camera theory and lo-and-behold, Watts executes a DMCA take-down.
Well, the video must have been really on target -- it stung Anthony Watts so badly that he initiated a DMCA "takedown" action and got the "Watts Up With Watts" video removed from youtube.com!
That's an assumption, but one can see how it is easily made.
So, no, this little spell of hot weather doesn't prove anything... except that it's hot at the moment. This, however, is something I watch closely. And despite the warped station data mythology issued by the likes of Watts, the data collection is carried out by satellites and ocean buoys. (I'm sure someone will produce a picture of an air conditioner exhausting onto a few of those eventually.)
Still, it should be fun to sit in the local Tim Horton's and listen to all the ball-cap and mullet festooned idiots who were pointing at last winter's snowfall as proof of global cooling attempt to explain why, on the northwest sea coast, the air conditioning can't keep up with the heat.
A little point: All these journalists and out-of-field contributors to the community of vocal deniers of scientific research need to get a definition straight. They are climate deniers - not skeptics. I am a skeptic. I expect several points of proof before I will allow myself to be sent down a road, and I always accept that I may encounter a dead end - when another bona fide researcher produces it. Attempting to gentrify your position only serves to strengthen mine given that you think denying the effects of global warming is somehow shameful. Wear it with pride and continue to believe - even if your heroes knew better and were intentionally lying to you.
As to Foster's foolishness, well, if you have a million scientists and 1, 999,997 of them are climate experts who say global warming is real and man-made and three who are say, Christopher Monckton or Tim Ball or some other charlatan or serial prevaricator bought and paid for by the petroleum industry, I think it is fair to say the science is settled. (Click the links to see a laundry list of the way and places such people have been discredited.) The jury is not out on climate change any more than it is out on whether the earth is flat, to say otherwise is simply false. If you still have any doubts, try any of these links offered here. Note to climate change deniers on the far right: Just because you hate Al Gore doesn't mean he's wrong about climate change.
Foster's statement that "Earth Hour" is somehow facistic leads me to wonder if he has been spending too much time reading Mr. Jonah Goldberg's recent unintentionally comic magnum opus. As has been pointed out elsewhere, how is an event that is strictly voluntary and does not involve appeals to notions of racial or cultural superiority or militant nationalism facistic? Truly, Foster gives one pause when he erupts with such stupendous statements as this:
"Leo Burnet's chairman, Nigel Marsh, demonstrated his skill both in semantic perversion and moral obfuscation when he declared: "I'm an optimist about climate change. The human race eventually abolished slavery and gave women the vote. We eventually work it out." Get the implication? "Deny" the dubious science or dangerous politics of anthropogenic climate change and you're the kind of person who would support slavery and keep women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen!"
A simple statement of optimism by Marsh, that people will eventually choose to do the right thing, brings an astounding outburst of defensiveness from Foster that just because he is out to lunch on climate change, doesn't mean he supports slavery or keeping women pregnant, shoeless and chained to stove. I might wonder aloud which part of the political spectrum it was that fought to continue slavery and deny women the vote and equal rights (Hint: not liberals) but that, gentle reader would be a less civil area of discourse.
Suffice to say that a shorter version of Foster's article written in a different time might go something like this: "Anyone who thinks walking upright is a good idea is a fool. And this whole notion of banding together and sharing the work - nonsense! No one has proved that division of labour and cooperation results in more food and even if it did, what would we do with the extra time? Paint on the cave walls or learn to make fire? Bah, humbug!"
As to the aforementioned proprietress of Small Dead Animals (nope, I will not link to her site. Use Google if you must), I haven't really much to add to CC's analysis -- and by analysis I mean pointing and laughing -- of her contention that Earth Hour was a failure because she urged her regular readers to use as much energy as possible during the hour in question.
Her argument seems to be that because energy use in the set period did not go down, but merely did not increase as much as it does on an average day, she is somehow a winner and people who are in favour of saving energy and using less expensive fossil fuels are somehow losers. That is rather like saying that if you slam on the brakes while going 100 kph and your car doesn't suddenly go in reverse, but instead just slows down, your brakes are broken.
I think that is the kind of dishonesty that CC was talking about when he proposed this challenge.
As for the foolish contrarianism of people who went out of their way to use as much electricity as possible during Earth Hour, there have been numerous suggestions for declaring other days of activism during which you can feel free to "stick it to the Man" by doing the opposite. We over at the Woodshed (by which I mean me) are declaring tomorrow "International multicultural, gay rights, feminist, anti-global warming Don't-pour-hot-sauce-in-your-eyes Day" Do what you feel you must.
Whoops, my bad: I mistakenly identified the author of the piece of tomfoolery in the Finanacial Post as Richard Foster, when in fact the man's name is Peter Foster. Sorry about that. Thanks to Pogge for catching my error. See, this is what you do when you make a mistake, you admit the mistake, correct it and move on. You do not insist that you are right in the face of all available evidence and declare victory. You do not insist that such empirical evidence is a plot by your political opponents. You do not pretend that such a mistake never occurred. Not that I'm accusing anyone...
More oops:Dad-diddly-durn burn it! I was sure I had typed "2 million scientists"
Whoa! Would you look at that! A polar air mass covering most of eastern Canada. That would normally be clear stable air... if it weren't for the Great Lakes. So, eastern Canada and the northeastern United States are getting a two stage snow storm.
It's called Lake Effect. Yes, it's happening later than it should and this year has been particularly heavy. That would be because the Great Lakes aren't as cold as they should be. That leads to more, not less, snow.
Whether you believe in global warming or not, I'd make sure you keep your snow shovel in good shape. From UCS:
... lake-effect snow may increase as a result of warmer lake surface waters and decreased ice cover, burdening cities with increased cost for snow removal.
Most people have already recognized that fact. Unless you think it's all a hoax.
Although it's a little difficult from my current location to produce and move posts, this one is worth the extra effort.
David Sassoon sent this via email. His blog is Solve Climate and it's worth a good look around. His latest post is a chronicling of the events which led to the somewhat watered-down concensus reached by the G-77 at the Bali UN climate change conference. The whole post is a "must read" but this part stands out.
The headlines from Bali are reporting that agreement for a road map for future progress on climate action has been reached. What is not being reported is how the assembled nations of the world confronted the isolated Bush delegation and humbled it into agreement.[...]
And then it was the turn of the United States. Assistant Secretary of State for Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky, with only the absolute bare minimum of diplomatic language, stated flatly that the United States rejected the changes. It was not prepared to accept the G-77 text.
Then occurred one of the most remarkable sounds that has perhaps ever been heard in the annals of international diplomacy--like a collective global groan--descending then to a murmer, then increasing in volume to a full-throated expression of rage and anger and booing and jeering, lasting for a full minute, so that finally the Minister had to call the meeting back to order.
The assembled nations of the world, without the benefit of the once stalwart "honest broker" from North America, lashed out at the United States with full venom. They dropped the diplomatic gloves and called the U.S. position "unwelcome", "without basis" and told the U.S. "if you're not willing to lead, please get out of the way."
In short, the world is prepared to do whatever the collective nations assembled can and the U.S. can go to hell. Take your Canadian flunky with you.
Then the U.S. suddenly changed it's position and accepted the G-77 text. They had to be booed into it.
EU lays down ultimatum to U.S. at Bali climate talks
U.S. 'principally responsible' for deadlock, Gore says Last Updated: Thursday, December 13, 2007
A deadlock between the United States and the European Union jeopardized the climate change talks in Bali Thursday as EU nations threatened to boycott a U.S.-sponsored meeting next month unless Washington accepts their figures for negotiating deep reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.
_______________
Meanwhile, former U.S. vice-president and climate change activist Al Gore told an audience at the conference that the U.S. is "principally responsible" for the deadlock at the Bali conference, which is aimed at launching negotiations toward a new climate change pact.
"My own country, the United States, is principally responsible for obstructing progress here in Bali," said Gore, who shared this year's Nobel Peace Prize with the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for helping alert the world to the danger of global warming.
_______________
U.S., Canada a 'wrecking crew': environmental group
A number of environmental groups have been critical of Canada, which has adopted a similar bottom line as the U.S. in Bali.
Environment Minister John Baird has said Canada won't accept a climate deal unless it includes major polluters like the U.S., China and India.
Jennifer Morgan of the Climate Action Network accused the U.S., Canada and other countries of holding up the document's final ratification.
"There is a wrecking crew here in Bali led by the Bush administration and its minions," Morgan told CBC News. "Those minions continue to be the governments of Canada, Japan, Saudi Arabia and others." (Emphasis mine, ed.)
Well isn't that just special?
'Ole stevie, john baird and their ilk have successfully progressed to "minions" from the #1 Poodles they were previously.
'Ya gotta give stevie, john baird and company credit.
Their stance in Bali comes naturally as they follow in bushco's dirty footsteps:
Democrats accuse White House of cooking climate-change testimony
By Erika Bolstad and Lesley Clark | McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — The White House censored climate scientists and edited their testimony on global warming before Congress, Democrats charged Monday after a 16-month investigation into allegations of political interference with scientific inquiries.
The Bush administration was "particularly active in stifling discussions" of a potential link between climate change and the intensity of hurricanes, according to the findings in a draft report issued Monday by Democrats on the House of Representatives Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
_______________
The report also charges that the administration has engaged in a "systematic effort to manipulate climate change science and mislead policymakers and the public about the dangers of global warning."
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino called the report "rehashed rhetoric" and said that the Bush administration understands the "urgent challenge that is posed by climate change," a term the White House prefers to "global warming" because it doesn't suggest that human activity is responsible.
Perino said she was unaware of any attempts to downplay any scientific information that conflicted with the White House's politics.
_______________
The report also singles out an e-mail sent by a Commerce committee staffer for Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who oversaw NOAA's climate research when he chaired the committee.
The e-mail came from Tom Jones, who worked on the Disaster Prediction and Prevention subcommittee, then chaired by Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C.
In an e-mail to Noel Turner, a NOAA staffer who was writing a statement for former National Hurricane Center director Max Mayfield's upcoming committee testimony, Jones suggested that the hearing be used to discredit any link between hurricanes and global warming.
"We're going to work on smacking the s(ASTERISK)(ASTERISK)(ASTERISK) out of this issue," he wrote.
In his e-mail, Jones urged NOAA staffers to write phrases for Mayfield such as, "The individuals who are implying that Katrina has something to do with global warming are just plain wrong. They don't understand the science, and they're shamelessly trying to make political hay out of a national tragedy."
At Kyoto talks in Bali during which China is talking for the first time about "commitments", the new Canada, US, and Japan org, henceforth to be known as CUJO for short, could certainly use a little branding help to clarify their crappy bad boys spoilers rep on the world stage. And a dangerous rabid dog seems about right.
"In the most contentious move of the conference so far, Japan insisted it is “essential” for the world to “move beyond the Kyoto Protocol.” Just a few minutes later, in what appeared to be a prearranged move, Canada threw its weight behind the Japanese position, lending crucial support to Washington's refusal to sign the Kyoto treaty."
U.S.: the next climate agreement must be “economically sustainable” and must promote economic growth for people and nations “everywhere.” Japan : there must be “compatibility” between environmental protection and economic growth. Canada : there must be a “balance” between the environment and “economic prosperity.”
Synchronicity! None of the three mentioned binding commitments or mandatory targets for reducing greenhouse gases or short-term targets for an agreement to replace Kyoto when it expires in 2012. And yet, most amusingly, despite Canada's assertion that there must be a 'balance' between the environment and 'economic prosperity', the G&M reports that "Canada is not sending any ministers to the meetings of trade and finance ministers at Bali." Apparently although we place the highest priority on an economically sustainable environment treaty, somehow we just don't feel like talking about it to anyone else right now.
Hopefully The Yes Men will yet make an appearance on our behalf.
