News Sections
Critics: G8 climate goal needs firm base line
CTV News Video
|
Watch: See all Videos in the Player
CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Tue. Jul. 8 2008 9:33 PM ET
G8 leaders have endorsed a goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions in half by the year 2050, but critics say the declaration is meaningless because it appears to lack a firm base year.
The Group of Eight declaration was issued Tuesday, as Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the other leaders planted trees and posed for photographers in the Japanese resort village of Toyako.
Harper praised the declaration as a breakthrough from the 2007 G8 summit in Germany, when the United States and Russia would only agree to "seriously consider" such a plan.
"Russia and the United States have both agreed (to the declaration)," Harper said. "This is the first time either of those countries have conceded the necessity of having a long-term, mandatory goal for reduction."
But Marthinus van Schalkwyk, South Africa's minister of environmental affairs and tourism, said the declaration was useless without stronger targets.
"To be meaningful and credible, a long term goal must have a base year, it must be underpinned by ambitious midterm targets and actions," he said. "As it is expressed in the G8 statement, the long-term goal is an empty slogan."
It's unclear what base year G8 countries will use to measure their reductions. A Canadian official told The Canadian Press countries would be free to choose their own base level, while Reuters quoted Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda as saying it would be "current levels."
Whichever the case, Antonio Hill of Oxfam International denounced the announcement as a stalling tactic. "At this rate, by 2050 the world will be cooked and the G8 leaders will be long forgotten," he said.
The declaration calls on developing economies like China and India to cut emissions, which is seen as a diplomatic win for Canada and the U.S.
South Africa, Mexico, Brazil, India and China are to meet Wednesday with the G8 leaders to discuss climate change and other issues.
The five nations issued a statement Tuesday urging developed countries to set an interim target of at least a 25 per cent cut below 1990 levels by 2020.
A step forward?
Harper said Tuesday's declaration shows G8 countries are willing to work hard at long-term goals at reducing GHG emissions.
There is "a firm recognition of all countries that to make these objectives effective, even in the long term, we have got to have mandatory participation by all major economies, by all major emitters," he said.
The complex declaration holds that all major economies must sign on to a future plan to curb GHG emissions, but with different roles and responsibilities.
China and India, two of the biggest emerging economies, were excluded from having to make GHG cuts under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol.
But as their economies have grown, the emissions of the two Asian giants have risen significantly. China is now considered to be the world's biggest total GHG emitter, although its per-capita emissions are still about one-quarter of those in the U.S. and Canada.
The world is currently negotiating a successor treaty to Kyoto, which expires in 2012. Harper has previously said any new deal must include China, India and the U.S.
"What we want to see is an effective agreement that will help avoid dangerous climate change," Environment Minister John Baird told Canada AM from Japan. "If we want to fight climate change, we need all oars in the water."
The world will hold a major climate meeting in Copenhagen next year.
Canada's Conservative government has said it won't try to meet this country's Kyoto commitment of a six per cent cut below 1990 levels by 2012.
The Tories have blamed Liberal inaction, but they killed a 2005 Liberal plan that would have made Canada Kyoto-compliant -- albeit through buying emissions credits. The Tories fiercely opposed that approach.
The Conservative plan focuses on industrial emitters and sets a target of a 20 per cent cut below 2006 levels by 2020. Critics have said even if the Tory plan works, Canada wouldn't reach its Kyoto target until 2025.
Oil prices
The leaders have also called on oil-producing nations to increase production in an attempt to reverse the trend that has seen crude's price shoot up by nearly 50 per cent since January.
Analysts expect the trend to continue in the second half of this year.
Harper said Canada, which he has described as an emerging energy superpower, has expanded its supply of oil.
A call for cheaper oil, however, would appear to conflict with the goal of dramatically reducing GHG emissions over time.
"I think what we want to see is do what we can to increase the supply so that causes the price to go down," Baird said. "There's no doubt that with the emerging economies of China and India, we're going to see an increase in demand."
Baird noted that in terms of gasoline, Canada is short of refining capacity. New refineries planned for Ontario, Quebec and the Maritimes will take years to come on stream.
Harper said G8 leaders also discussed ways to reduce demand and increase energy efficiency. They like the idea of Britain's Prime Minister Gordon Brown to establish an energy forum in which producing and consuming nations could discuss ways to prevent price surges in the future.
With a report by CTV's Graham Richardson and files from The Canadian Press
User Tools
Related Stories
Related Websites
Most Popular
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
This is just wrong but if I were to send something to the politicians I would have sent the brain!
Canada AM is a production of CTV News, and is Canada’s most-watched morning news program.
Email
Comments are now closed for this story
Linda
said
Those who think we should do nothing are unwilling to budge.And environmentalist are unable to be content with anything less than a complete shutdown of all fossil fuels.
Neither side has a chance of getting all it wants,so eternal the stalemate keeps us from accomplishing anything.
weezelle
said
Kevin
said
I guess what I am saying is that we cannot 'afford' to not switch to alternative fuel currencies BOTH financially and environmentally for the future of our province as we now know it. We must push forward past this hurdle as we have done with other technologies in the past.
Kevin
said
"As for *Kevin* replying to Andrew, he obviously has no idea about living on the rural prairies - where, incidentally, Canada's bread comes from. It is all very well to go on and on about alternatives, but can the average rural dweller in Saskatchewan afford that? NO. Are city dwellers willing to pay the taxes so Andrew and other prairie dwellers can have their homes and vehicles use alternative fuels? NO!"
I grew up (18 years) in rural SASK. A town of 500 people that was agriculture based. My parents still live there and I now live in Saskatoon. I believe that I, and my parents can answer YES to both your questions and pose some other more pertinent ones. Can the average Saskatchewan (rural or urban) citizen afford $1.50 per litre for gas? $2.00 per litre for gas? How about gas rationing in 2050 (read about peak oil - that is only 40 years away)? Can they afford longer and more severe drought? Can they afford to import water or desalinate it when we run out of glacier water?
Clearly you are thinking short term PBW which is alright in terms of predicting your economic situation over the next 5 - 10 years but we have done so for so long that I think we need to think to the future in terms of which fuel currency we will use. Notice I did NOT say biofuels here or in my other post.
I am willing to pay higher taxes in the city so the province can switch to other fuel currencies such as hydrogen generated by solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, etc.
We need to rethink both rural and urban lifestyles and business being sure to prioritize farming for FOOD and not FUEL.
jr
said
Scientist
said
HadCRUT3, UAH and RSS datasets are some of the official ones, which track the mean global temperature of the earth.
These datasets are openly available to the public online and free to use. Just Google them or check out the website, Watts Up With That.
Mean global temperature peaked in 1998, flatlined since 2001 and in the past year has decreased. Yet, atmospheric CO2 levels have increased.
It seems that at least for the most recent 11 years, increasing CO2 is not tracking with temperature. CO2 has not overwhelmed natural processes during this period.
I would encourage everyone to read the study published in the journal Nature by Keenlyside et al. on May 1, 2008. Manmade global warming has been halted until 2015 due to natural variations in the world's climate, which will offset any possible anthropogenic warming.
The Earth's climate is expected to cool for the next decade not warm.
AGW is a dead theory.
PBW
said
As for *Kevin* replying to Andrew, he obviously has no idea about living on the rural prairies - where, incidentally, Canada's bread comes from. It is all very well to go on and on about alternatives, but can the average rural dweller in Saskatchewan afford that? NO. Are city dwellers willing to pay the taxes so Andrew and other prairie dwellers can have their homes and vehicles use alternative fuels? NO!
Harper must go
said
The odds are none that made the announcement will be alive when 2050 arrives and definitely none will be in a position of responsibility. All it is, is feel good words from Harper and Bush and the words are worth the same as most politicians promises.
Jamie G.
said
MRM - are you kidding me??? 2050? I guess by then we can grow wheat crops in Greenland - we'll need to since such a vast percentage of the planet will be under water. this could have been Green Tuesday - but those green hopes have turned very black.
This isn't just meaningless - it's a slap in the face to the millions of people worldwide who the G8 have just given a raspberry to. they're not listening and have basically said: "we're not listening, we don't care - we're in power you're not - good luck."
This may just prove to be one of the blackest days in history.
Wade
said
The Canadian Press seems to have the least credible polls or all the other ones are wrong.
A poll in BC showed 85% of BC doesn't like the 10 cent gas hike that was suppose to be 2 cents.
Nancy - Montreal - Big Scam
said
by even the most agressive idealists are not credible as effecting global warming.
The more I learn about Global warming the bigger sckeptic I am, the whole this is a bigger fraud than Santa Claus and if enough socialist politicians say it true our ignorant masses beleive it.
TVic
said
Your legacy will be 'all talk and no action' just like the politicians that preceded you.
Don't count on my vote for the next election. You are no better than the people that preceded you!!
Gary
said
The best part is Harper's proud of this!
What a buffoon! Then again, of course he's proud. He got another delay in action. Just what he wanted. A field mouse has more courage.
Wise Wajid
said
Alex
said
The scientific evidence is there, people. There's nothing to worry about. Let's start worrying about real issues.
Ben Hendrix
said
GW
said
The voting public is interested mostly in the short term goals and until Climate Change actually starts adversely affecting them, noting drastic will change.
Al from Calgary
said
Great post, unfortunately you will now be labeled a denier, but what the heck its all the right wing zealots and enviromental zealots who are in denial and have no concrete ideas. If Harper and Bush were to announce that they will cut out all emmissions they would be screaming that its impossible and the economy would suffer and we shouldn't do it. Its more about anti Bush and anti Harper with these people than it is about the climate and it doesn't matter what they do they will never be happy and still whine.
bert
said
Of all the leaders, only Stephen Harper - the talented but curiously neglected Canadian prime minister - is able to point to a popular and successful record in office.
Some will regard it as alarming that, in current times, world leadership should rest with Canada. But the Canadian Tories are a model of how to behave during a downturn.
They have kept spending in check and reduced taxes. They are playing their full role in world affairs, notably in Afghanistan.
Rather than canting about saving the world (Mr Harper, in his quiet and courteous way, is a Kyoto-sceptic) they have addressed themselves to curing remediable ills and, above all, to putting their own affairs in order.
If the rest of the world had comported itself with similar modesty and prudence, we might not be in this mess.
AGAIN great job PM Harper
Roadrobber
said
AK in Wpg
said
I don't care who is in power, the Libs, Cons, Green or NDP. If we believe there is a problem to solve, then we elected you to solve it. If you don't believe there is a problem to solve then tell us that so that we can either move on to other issues or elect someone else.
Dave
said
Pathetic
said
Harper and Bush don't care about the environment. They care about oil, war, oh - and of course, heartwarming Christian family values.
North America (and for that matter, the world) is screwed until these right wingers are booted out of power...
Yo Harper - you SUCK.
Adrian E
said
RWD
said
Most, if not all of them will we feeding the worms in 2050.
On a lighter note, a pool party will he held sometime in August in the vicinity of the north pole.Bring along your family and friends.
Rocket
said
Wake Up Call
said
The pretentious attitudes of Liberals and Environmentalists in relation to Developed versus Developing or Emerging Economies is ridiculous. If these buffoons truly want a reduction in CO2 and other Carbon related Greenhouse Gasses, then ignoring China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa's emissions is ludicrous. Canada's percentage of emissions has been declining for the last decade as China and India alone have had yearly increases that together are higher than Canada's entire output. None of these Developing and Emerging Countries have the Cold Climate issues Canada does, nor are they significant energy exporters.
Having Canada and the EU convincing the USA and Russia to sign on is no small feat either, as they are both energy producers and have large industries as well. Russia also has similar climate and population distributions as Canada.
It may be lost on Liberals and Environmentalists, that shutting down Canada's Fossil Fuel Industries would destroy the entire Canadian economy. They are also showing their diminutive intellect in thinking that Factories, Transportation and Commuters have alternate sources of energy that could replace Petroleum and allow Carbon Free emissions at costs that would allow any Manufacturing to remain in Canada.
There is a term I use for a Liberal Economists, it is Marxists. I don't think there is a term that can be used for an Environmental Economist other than Misguided Idealist. Reality seems to be wasted on both of these types of faux Economists.
Independent economists have resoundingly declared that all Major Polluters must be involved in any emission reduction talks and that Climatic Conditions and Energy Production must be factored into the equation determining how much emissions should be cut, not the GDP of the Country or Economic Status alone.
Turning Canada into an Economic waste land will not improve the Economic status of developing Countries. Another policaly sensitive factor that is supported by most Independent Economists is that the world population either has exceeded or will soon exceed the ability of our planet to provide all the heat, shelter, food and waste produced to support it.
In some regions of Canada it is Possible to survive without a car, central heating or electricity but for most of the country that is not possible with our current population density.
billg
said
Martin
said
David fm NS
said
MRC
said
Doug
said
While most of us agree this is an issue that must be dealt with,I don't see any consensus on HOW to deal with it any time soon.
Any fool can point to a problem.What the world is short of is people with solutions.I see very few REAL ideas to replace fossil fuels "right now".These changes will be an evolution,rather than a revolution.
Sadly,if,as is expected,the global poulation reaches 9 billion by 2050,even if global GHG's are no longer an issue,we'll be starving and fighting over the last of a lot of other resources.
Real reductions by all is a plan.Paying in lieu of real reductions is not an option.Unless we impose massive import duties on products from countries that don't make real reductions.
ICE CORES
said
Exactly WHERE are you getting your CO2 data for the last million years. If it is from ice cores, then you are being saddly misinformed. If you had not noticed the polar ice is melting during this current period of warming and the ice record for this particular period of natural warming will be lost forever just like it has been for ALL the previous warming periods. In geological terms it's called a depositional unconformity and it is not recognizable in any ice cores because of the melting. Any one that tells you that ice cores can be used to determine past CO2 concentrations is full of crap and should be charged with misleading the public. The second crime here is selective sampling of present CO2 levels in the middle of the pacific supposedly away from all human influence. Did someone forget to mention that the warm Pacific in the center of the ring of fire is the single greatest natural source of CO2 in the world. I think it is time for ALL you fanatics to get your facts straight and start thinking for your selves instead of jumping on every band wagon out there. The case for CO2 actually causing global warming is so full of holes it is pathetic.
Paul C.
said
Roger T
said
All this amounts to bigger problems itself than helping anyone or any cause!
It's more like a vacation with Hollywood scripts and fake smile for the public.
DWB
said
Targets are irrelevant since the political posturing by all politicians is over a non-existent problem created by followers of the new secular religion called environmentalism.
kate
said
glen gaffney
said
Max
said
When China and India commit to capping and reducing their carbon emissions, THEN we'll have something to celebrate.
At least this portion of the G8 Summit is serving to educate folks about the fact that without China and India reducing their carbon footprints, the "issue" will never be dealt with.
So far, environuts and left-wing politicos have been frantic to convince the rest of us that we can save the world by using different light bulbs and driving hybrids...which is amusing foolishness.
At least now the truth is working its way around, and the "issue" can be addressed with intelligence.
Fear is a killer
said
The IPCC (The prime pushers of GW) resently put global warming on "hold" for the next 10~15 years: How arrogant!...How can a "man made disaster" suddently stop being constant without said culprit doing anything different, in fact accelerating the emissions of C02?
Our world leaders are starting to wake up to this sham and are reacting with less alarmism: THAT'S ALL.
Grow up people and put some courage in your guts. Your forefathers would be ashamed of how cowardly and defeatist you have become. The poor little kids being exposed to all this negativity is so depressing not to mention immoral. What a death cult we have become!
lisa pryce
said
The sun is having a growth spurt like no one (alive) has seen before.
The whole concept that we (human's) are affecting the 'warming' to the 'degree,' that some would have us believe, is over the top. An 11 year old could work that out...
What we should be focussing on is how to deal with it, NOT how to 'stop' it. When will be get that we are not bigger than Nature?
For example, it is obvious that we need to consider mass migration as a probable strategy.
NM
said
What happen to the days where Canada set an example for other nations???? I used to be proud to be part of that country. Now I am ashamed that we are one of the nations making the world a worse place to live.
Nik
said
M. Bernadette
said
Jan Visser
said
That is what the Liberals did. And now we are in a mess.
Zircon
said
The single largest greenhouse gas by volume and percent in our atmosphere is water vapour. And one of the largest factors in cloud formation are cosmic rays. I DEMAND that the G8 do something now, about these things before it's too late for our children and all hunanity!
Down with water! Down with cosmic rays! Stephane Dion save us and impose an H2O/Stellar radiation credit!!!!!
Frank Smith
said
Ashamed Canadian
said
42 years is awfully long and why not now?
42 YEARS? I am going to be 65 year old by that time.
I'm so ashamed of Canada and USA right now.
I am not proud and I don't know if I want to bring my child into this world where I know they will suffer?
Take action now people and your bloodline will live on as planet live on.
Raj
said
Hank.B
said
Canada is responsible for only 2% of global emissions.
Why don't we shut down our economy and save the 2%?
If the world is going to end , it's going to end.
Canada is not a power player on the world stage and never has been.
This whole climate change issue is nothing more than left wing Canadians trying to pretend we are actually a player in the world.
Canada could die off tomorrow and the world will still be spewing 98% emissions.
Grow up, live for now, don't worry about things Canadians can't control.
We are irrelevant.
Kevin
said
"The challenge I have for any one out there is to give me a alternative to carbon. What alternative is there that is affordable, and viable?"
There are MANY alternatives which do NOT generate CO2 and we need to use all of them - wind, solar, geothermal, hydro, nuclear. These are all viable (they do have their pros and cons) and as to their affordability one must look at things economically over many decades. Our current fuel currency is rapidly becoming unaffordable and nonviable.
In terms of fuel currencies, we need to start using hydrogen (emits only water via a fuel cell) and switch away from fossil fuels in order to solve our transportation needs.
reece
said
What more could anybody expect by sending neo-cons to some junket...they pushed the snooze button on critical enviornmental issues. But really, even while they showed us and uninspiring side; with China and India thumbing their noses at the envioronment, there isn't much anyone can do but press the snooze button. I'm not even going to recycle anymore because what we do here will have zero impact globally. I saw the north polar caps recently - it was blackened! It's us vs 2 billion people...it's game over.
Sonny
said
The G8 countries have the technology to reduce their emmissions today. Their cities are designed for cars, especially North America. Living arrangements need to change.
In CANADA, the tax on almost everything is the GST. It was introduced by the Conservatives...
Willie
said
if China and India are not brought into the fray then any reduction we have (Canada or anyone else for that matter) will make NO difference among the world.
CO2 doesn't stop at international borders.
and the earth is just warming, we just came out of a friggin Ice Age, what do ya expect?
Lillian
said
Yo... Bush!!
said
Al from Calgary
said
Yes the reporters ask hard questions which they have of Mr Dion and his GST2 tax, and he was vague and evassive on the answers to his own platform, and the cons are scared of hard questions
Jim F
said
Despite double digit polling numbers in between elections when people will say anything, when actual elections occur, they have never come close to winning a seat anywhere.
My rule of thumb when I read polls is that if I see the Green Party in double digits, it's a throwaway irrelevant poll.
GaryinWpg
said
Umm, let us see something here.
There's just over one million tons of CO2 over one square mile.
Earth's surface area (land and water) is about 196 million square miles. Which means there is around 196 million tons of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Considering CO2 only makes up some .035% of the earths atmosphere, you are basically saying mankind is spewing out some 153 times as much CO2 than there is naturally? Mankind is raising CO2 levels to 5%?
Wow considering water vapour can be up to 4% (ever notice how hot it is on a humid day?) of the earth's atmosphere somehow there is a stretch somewhere....
Oh, a square inch of atmosphere is 14.7 pounds....
Al from Calgary
said
MartinofNS
said
Sure Canada can set an example, but to what cost of our economy? Which is hanging in the balance right now.
I am happy with what the conservative government is doing, they are not denying there is a problem with global warming but also realize that Canada is a drop in the bucket when it comes to total GHG emissions.
Peter
said
Allan Eizinas
said
This new agreement might cut greenhouse gases by 2050 when Stephen Harper is 91 years old.
What a breakthrough !?!
Phil
said
Steve
said
MB
said
Proof is in the pudding.
What will we have left by 2050?
steve I. C.
said
Mike Webster
said
Dean
said
James
said
Andrew
said
Paul
said
I really wonder IF the world will even reach 2050 given the polutants and GHG's
Mario
said
I gues by your comments you also steadfastly believe that the world is flat and that the St.Lawrence leads to China.
Also, economic prosperity is nothing if we are all dead. Tough decisions have to be made in tough times. Do you think that cod fishermen were happy with the moratorium?
Earl Robert
said
Geoff Bickerton
said
DD
said
If it were, we'd already be cooling down. We're not. CO2 ranges from 180ppm (ice age) to 300ppm (peak warming) in the "natural" cycle. That has been PROVEN the case for the last million years (and likely extended by tens of millions before that).
We are CURRENTLY at 387 ppm and increasing at almost 3ppm PER YEAR and accelerating. FACT.
In a NATURAL cycle, it would take a thousand years to increase the CO2 by 30 ppm. FACT.
We've done that in less than 20 years. FACT.
In the 70s, when we approached the 300 ppm level, scientists thought we would naturally tip over into the cooling part of the cycle. It didn't happen because mankind is spewing 30 BILLION tons of CO2 into the atmosphere PER YEAR. (By comparison, volancos emit only up to 200 MILLION tons). Make no mistake, we ARE changing the planet.
And to those that think mankind can't change the environment...take a peek back a couple decades...when the use of CFCs damaged the Ozone.
We can adversely affect the environment. The facts are out there...for those that WANT to see them.
Educate yourselves!! The world that your children live in is at stake!!
And Baird's ability to convince the G8 to put off massive change for FORTY years is not a victory. It's shameful. He has passed the buck to the next generation. Shameful.
JPF
said
Kevin P.
said
The world is a big ship to steer with 150 leaders trying to decide the direction. Nothing happens over night, so this is promising!
A. Conda
said
Boring
said
Northerner
said
Garry in NS
said
ET
said
Davis
said
James T.
said
James
said
MRM
said
Bravo to the PM for his ethical and determined approach to this important issue!