US DOE says NO Negative impact on Economy,

support for the Kyoto Protocol. Why?
 

I am a 20 year old Philosophy Major at the  College of Wooster in Wooster, Ohio. This past  week I was a member of the US Student Climate  Summit in The Hague, Netherlands at the Sixth  Conference of the Parties (CoP6) to the United  Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change with myself and 224 other American students from 44 different states attended CoP6 as observers.  The Conference was billed as perhaps the last chance for countries to "Work it out" (meaning the  Global-Warming Treaty) in time to meet their  pollution reduction commitments in 2012. What we  learned about the Umbrella Group of countries  (Japan, Australia, Canada, and the US) by  attending this crucial climate summit was  astonishing. Our own country was especially  disruptive to the process.    In the Hague I didn't see one single delegate,  organization, or observer who questioned the  science of climate change. You can talk about  volcanoes and history all you like, but the  science of our rapid impact on the climate has  become very clear to the rest of the world. The  chair of the IPCC, Bob Watson told everyone at  the convention on Monday that the world will warm  between 1.5 and 6 degrees celsius between now and  2100 and the best way for us to stop that is to  reduce our greenhouse gas pollution dramatically.  He concluded by telling all of the 160 country  delegates that "the world is in your hands".  I was shocked at the stance of the United States,  my own country, having heard all of this sobering urgency from  every government leader, scientist, and  even economists at the convention. Our delegates  talked about economic efficiency and "pragmatic  solutions" all week. Despite serious pressure  from the rest of the world to compromise their  position, they remained married to "the economy."  The sad part is that the US Department of Energy  had just put out a report saying that we could  meet our Kyoto agreement levels through more than  75% domestic emissions reductions With NO Impact  On The Economy.  Despite all of the evidence showing that  it made sense to fight for a strong Kyoto  Protocol, our government insisted on throwing in  ludicrous loopholes that led to the demise of the  talks.    Now I've returned home from Holland to the  land of big cars, big roads, big cities, big  hamburgers, and big egos. Having heard stories  from respected scientists, furious  environmentalists, and concerned German, African,  Asian, South American, AOSIS, French, and other  delegates about the need for a strong Kyoto  Protocol without loopholes and industry handouts, I am  primed to tell my story to every single American  I can find.   Our lifestyle is radically different from the  rest of the world, and it's no coincidence that  we contribute 25% of all greenhouse gas pollution  despite having only 4% of the world's population.  In the Hague I watched thousands of faces turn  sour at our country for ruining Kyoto Protocol. If this  Protocol does turn flat and the world does  continue to warm at an alarming rate, this  failure will not only be seen as unfortunate, it  will be seen as nothing short of a crime against  humanity. If only you could have seen what I  saw.  It's time for us all to step back from our  comfort zone and witness the casualties of our  oversized ecological footprint.  At the very least, we could join the rest of  the world in taking a conservative approach to  reducing our greenhouse gas pollution by telling  our representatives to help make a strong Kyoto  Protocol that doesn't give credit for business- as-usual.  Sincerely, Joshua Lynch mailto:mightylime@moose-mail.com Care2 make the world greener

P.S. For links about the climate and global warming, click here.
For a little more of my rants on the subject try here and here.
 

Subject: <Hague> Conclusion

   Hello once again curious climate cohort.

   My 10 days at the United Nations World Climate Change
Conference in Den Haag are now over and I'm back to the big life
in the good ol' USA.

   Unfortunately, the world has now been further violated by our
country's resistance to economic change.  Last week I was able to
witness first hand, the blatant disregard for scientific warnings by
the world's richest countries.  Japan, Australia, Canada, and
the United States refused to back down in their fight for what they
label 'market-friendly' flexible mechanisms in the Kyoto Protocol
They resisted right down to the bitter end.

    The result is that AOSIS (Association of Small Island States)
countries will soon be ravaged by the very real affects of global
warming in the next few years.  And later we will all feel the
violent consequences of this economic concession.

    The shocking part of this story is that these warnings didn't come
from radical environmentalists or political outcasts.  These warnings
were echoed loud and clear by mainstream scientists, political
leaders throughout the third world and Europe, and even by many
economists in the business community.

    Bob Watson, the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (a group of the worlds 2,500 best climate scientists) made a very
sobering statement to the Convention on Monday, describing the
reality of Global Warming and the necessary benefits of reducing
greenhouse gases.  He said that the global temperature will increase
between 1.5 and 6 degrees Celsius by 2100.  He concluded by
declaring to the delegates that "the world is in your hands."
Sadly, the delegates have dropped the responsibility.

    Fortunately not all hope is yet lost.  Jan Pronk, the extremely
concerned president of the convention, has expressed his intentions to
hold a CoP 6.5 next May in Bonn, Germany to work out these details in
time for compliance to become real.

     Our job is to pressure the Umbrella Group of industrialized countries
to back up a step from their hard stances against real solutions and
realize the importance of taking steps to phase out fossil fuels in
their own countries.  This means making global warming political.
Give it some attention.

     Without doing this, any agreement that is made in Bonn will be so
watered down that countries will actually be able to increase their
greenhouse gas pollution instead of making it obsolete.

     One of the most critical points that I've learned from attending
this conference that many didn't seem to recognize is that this
problem is not an isolated one by any means.  I talked to a delegate
 from Germany who told me about how Germany had moved beyond an
obsession with economic growth to a more sustainable system.  He told
me that it was ironic that in order to reach its' emissions targets,
the US wouldn't have to sacrifice its lifestyle at all.  This is
ironic because it is that lifestyle that has caused the world such a
headache and will ultimately have to change.  However, by making the
technological switch to more passive, less input intensive energy
technologies like solar and wind power, we won't have to sacrifice
economic growth.

     It is my belief that in order to make every aspect of our lives
sustainable for the long-term future, there is no way that we can
simply look to technological conversions and market solutions to
support our affluence.  Growth has to be redefined to encompass a
more socially and environmentally oriented paradigm.  There's a lot
to be learned from the hunter-gathering societies of our ancestors.

     In the meantime, ride a bike, buy local, invest responsibly, and
elect representatives who will restrict amoral institutions and
corporations from controlling our lives.  Oh, and tell your current
governing bodies to support a strong Kyoto Protocol without carbon
sinks, excessive emissions trading, and nuclear, large hydroelectric,
or "clean coal" solutions.  You have more power than you think.

in hope and solidarity,
   Joshua Lynch

Care2 make the world greener !