The chart above demonstrates the Greenhouse Gas comparison between many other countries in the world and the USA, which consumes about 25% of the available global oil supplies to produce this tremendous amount of GHG's. In addition to fuels like natural gas and many coal-fired power plants as is mapped out here.From Mark Lynas, about the last day of talks at the United Nation's Climate Conference (COP15) in Copenhagen., in The Guardian: Dec 22, 2009. The complete article at The Guardian goes into far greater reporting detail.
"...Here's what actually went on late last Friday night, as heads of state from two dozen countries met behind closed doors. Obama was at the table for several hours, sitting between Gordon Brown and the Ethiopian prime minister, Meles Zenawi. The Danish prime minister chaired, and on his right sat Ban Ki-moon, secretary-general of the UN. Probably only about 50 or 60 people, including the heads of state, were in the room. I was attached to one of the delegations, whose head of state was also present for most of the time.
"What I saw was profoundly shocking. The Chinese premier, Wen Jinbao, did not deign to attend the meetings personally, instead sending a second-tier official in the country's foreign ministry to sit opposite Obama himself. The diplomatic snub was obvious and brutal, as was the practical implication: several times during the session, the world's most powerful heads of state were forced to wait around as the Chinese delegate went off to make telephone calls to his 'superiors'.
"To those who would blame Obama and rich countries in general, know this: it was China's representative who insisted that industrialised country targets, previously agreed as an 80% cut by 2050, be taken out of the deal. "Why can't we even mention our own targets?" demanded a furious Angela Merkel. Australia's prime minister, Kevin Rudd, was annoyed enough to bang his microphone. Brazil's representative too pointed out the illogicality of China's position. Why should rich countries not announce even this unilateral cut? The Chinese delegate said no, and I watched, aghast, as Merkel threw up her hands in despair and conceded the point. Now we know why - because China bet, correctly, that Obama would get the blame for the Copenhagen accord's lack of ambition.
"China, backed at times by India, then proceeded to take out all the numbers that mattered."
A couple of weeks prior to the extensive Chinese preparation for this tactic, the Wilson Center published a poll on Dec. 16, 2009:
In a new poll conducted by WorldPublicOpinion.org in September, an overwhelming 96% of Chinese said that at the conference in Copenhagen their government should be “willing to commit to limiting its greenhouse gas emissions” as part of an agreement. Seventy-eight percent of Chinese also said that “dealing with the problem of climate change should be given priority, even if it causes slower economic growth and some loss of jobs.”
Posts
