The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Copenhagen as a monumental tragedy of the Commons > Comments

Copenhagen as a monumental tragedy of the Commons : Comments

By Sarah Bartlett and John Hickman, published 17/12/2009

Copenhagen will fail to come up with a genuinely workable solution to the crisis of global warming.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 10
  8. 11
  9. 12
  10. All
(whew ... someone should really have a look at your registration process, if you are trying to promote discussion you could make it waaaaay easier I am sure)

ok, thanks for that on the Tragedy of the Commons, I was aware of Hansen's opposition to cap&trade but now I am a bit clearer on the rationale

I have been watching the Copenhagen webcasts and the most discussed subject seems to be diplomatic niceties around making sure to thank everyone effusively for tasks that they are presumably very well paid to undertake (no disrespect intended, Yvo de Boer for one, is a canny fellow and seems to have his heart into it as well)

and Arnold Schwarzenegger's idea of grass roots is all good too - except I do not really think we have time to toilet train all of these governments from the bottom up

I agree with you that Copenhagen is not going to succeed, then what about Al Gore's notion of an additional COP in mid-summer in Mexico to finalize and give legal text to whatever does come out of Copenhagen?

waiting till then seems to me to let the 1.5 degree world slip right on by, too bad Tuvalu but you are expendable, and the intransigence of my own country, Canada, will not change (I don't think) until we have another election to get rid of Harper Mini-Me and God knows watch Alberta leave our confederation ... none of that before the end of 2010 at the earliest

personally, I could sure use some kind of positive plan of any kind, even if it is just to arrange to meet in Brasil and spend a few years having a good time on the beach :-)

be well, and thanks again for your concise and insightful essay.
Posted by David Wilson, Thursday, 17 December 2009 9:10:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Copenhagen was never going to get off the ground with any meaningful action.
The simple reason for that is the still preponderant belief in the corridors of power that they can continue BAU.This is quite contrary to what an unbiased and fairly informed observer would conclude.

It will take a crash to have any chance of changing that belief.

Australia should not pursue international agreements in the current circumstances.We should be doing everything possible to build a sustainable nation.Many of these actions would reduce our greenhouse gas emissions anyway.

With a Prime Minister who is at least a global warming sceptic,and probably a denier,with a government and opposition in the same camp by and large,there is no chance of anything constructive being done.The CPRS is just a sop to big business who actually own and run the country.

A political revolution is our only hope.The question is,how do you get a mob of dozy sheep to rebel? - apply painful stimuli.
Posted by Manorina, Thursday, 17 December 2009 9:30:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
isn't Australia's prime minister Kevin Rudd? I saw his speech to the Lowy Institute recently ( http://www.pm.gov.au/node/6305 for text & http://www.themonthly.com.au/climate-change-denialism-and-challenges-ahead-kevin-rudd-2141 for videos ) and he did not seem to be a denier then, in fact it looked like an excoriation of deniers ... so I am confused to hear you call him a "global warming sceptic and probably a denier"

?
Posted by David Wilson, Thursday, 17 December 2009 9:54:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Of course Copenhagen will be a flop as fare as the climate goes; but it hasn’t stopped Rudd from promising $100 million plus per year of Australian taxpayers’ money for gibbering idiots from the Third World to waste. How about that tyrannical maniac, Chavez, telling everyone the whole process is ‘undemocratic: he doesn’t even know the meaning of democracy.

The authors’ “individual over-use” of the “natural resource” (only one?) dodges the issue of over-population which, if it really is true that humans are the clause of climate change, is the important thing to be looking at. Australia’s per capita ‘footprint’ is nothing to our insignificant overall contribution to the global problem. But, Rudd wants to increase the population, making his boring ear-bashing about climate change hypocritical and totally without meaning.

The reluctance to address the issue of population by the very same people who rabbit on about climate change is one reason why Copenhagen will be a flop. All that is talked about is handing money over to people with the largest populations and without the ability to control their lives now – let alone the ability to handle the billions of dollars they expect to get out of any deal.

Every day of the conference has produced a lot of silly blaming and demanding from the world’s mendicant countries. If the do-gooders haven’t felt guilty about their ‘dreadful Western lifestyles’ yet, they certainly will by the end of the week. The undeveloped countries are using the conference to get as much money as they can from the West, and given the soft-headed luvvies who are running the show, they will get it somehow.

Another reason for the failure of the Copenhagen Conference will be the rambling, boring and meaningless talk that comes out each day, including that from the Prince of Wales and Arnold the Barbarian and the rubbish we can easily predict from the ‘world leaders’ at the end.
Posted by Leigh, Thursday, 17 December 2009 11:19:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David, I for one don't think Kevin Rudd as being a denier or sceptic of global warming. I think he's a man who gained power on the back of our former Prime Minister's defeat and promising all kinds of wonderful things pre election only to find out out that once in power he has little hope of controlling the big business forces that hold Australia and other developed countries by the throat.

This country is no longer the democracy it was when I was growing up. Today, out political parties are all stained with the taint of big business and their mantra of 'growth at all costs.'

Well, it's going to cost us plenty. The earth is warming and resources are depleting rapidly. The "Tragedy of the Commons" is indeed coming home to roost.
Posted by Aime, Thursday, 17 December 2009 11:22:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Copenhagen as a monumental tragedy of the Commons.

Yep, that’s a good way of putting it!

< Copenhagen will fail to come up with a genuinely workable solution to the crisis of global warming. Rather than a solution, we predict cheap posturing and an agreement that consists of little more than a license [sic] for further negotiations… >

And a licence to continue with business as usual, while being seen to be a little bit greener than previously, but only to the extent of a very thin green veneer.

In fact, coming up with a weak agreement is very dangerous in that it would tie countries into a course of action and make it much harder to develop meaningful targets and harder to organise another urgent meeting or forum for negotiations.

If there is no agreement from Copenhagen, then the ‘playing field’ will be uncluttered by piss-weak agreements, and the urgency to do something meaningful about climate change will remain undiluted.

So I’m inclined to think that the best outcome from Copenhagen would be for the whole thing to collapse and produce absolutely no agreement.
Posted by Ludwig, Thursday, 17 December 2009 11:29:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 10
  8. 11
  9. 12
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy