EXCLUSIVE-Danish draft urges 50 pct global emission cut by 2050

[Ichingcarpenter]

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - The world should cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent by 2050 from 1990 levels with the bulk of the reduction coming from rich countries, according to a draft proposal by Denmark, host of Dec 7-18 U.N. climate talks.
The draft, a copy of which was seen by Reuters, said rich countries should account for 80 percent of the global emission cuts by 2050.

The draft, which could become the basis of a political agreement at the end of the climate talks in Copenhagen, suggested the world adopt 2020 as the year when global emissions will peak. It did not specify any mid-term emission target for developed countries, a key demand from poorer countries.

The draft also suggested efforts be made to keep the rise in global average temperatures to within two degrees Celsius. "Parties should work together constructively to strengthen the world's ability to combat climate change," the draft says.


Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen says he wants a 5-8 page "politically binding" agreement, with annexes outlining each country's obligations such as cuts in emissions by 2020 by developed nations. He also wants also a deadline in 2010 by when the deal has to be translated into a legal treaty text.

Read more: http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/SP255438.htm

[Why Syzygy]

1. OMG

The draft also suggested efforts be made to keep the rise in global average temperatures to within two degrees Celsius.


What morons.

[NecklyTyler]

3. We have already seen 1.5 degrees in 150 years

Allowing another 2 degree rise will be a disaster

[Why Syzygy]

4. Post that chart, please. nt

[Spider Jerusalem]

5. Temperature anomaly of around one degree C over the past century or so

If you don't know anything about the science involved, and the hard evidence for climate change as a result of human activity, you have no right to an opinion on the matter.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Why Syzygy]

11. And you can join my Ignore list with the rest of the losers.. nt

[Psephos]

12. You posted the now-discredited grafted hockey stick as science? lol

Do you understand that the tree ring data shows NO warming signal after 1982, for reasons that no one can explain?

That means there's no blade on the hockey stick. THERE'S NO THERE, THERE.

The "scientists" decided to bury that by arbitrarily grafting the terrestrial met station temps onto the tree-ring and other paleo reconstruction trend-lines. Without, umm, telling anyone their methodology. Because that showed that the temps were doing what they wanted them to do. (And now we learn that there has been NO accommodation made for the urban met station temps, despite obvious and demonstrated distortions caused by urban heat island effects.)

There is nothing, nada, nowhere, that explains why this arbitrary "synthetic" reconstruction is legitimate, except for the huffed-up assurances of the "scientists" whose reputations depend on it. THEY SAID "TRUST ME" and everyone went along with it until the truth finally came out about the grafting. And now even THEY have backed off it.

Which leaves you holding the bag.

If this graph was printed on toilet paper, I wouldn't wipe my butt with it for fear of soiling myself.

Yet you have the balls to try lording it over Why Syzygy? That's not surprising. The nastiest are almost always the least-informed. Nasty is easy. It's critical thinking that's hard.

[Spider Jerusalem]

14. ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/01/science/01tier.html

Most of the graph was based on analyses of tree rings and other “proxy” records like ice cores and lake sediments. These indirect measurements indicated that temperatures declined in the middle of the millennium and then rose in the first half of the 20th century, which jibes with other records. But the tree-ring analyses don’t reveal a sharp warming in the late 20th century — in fact, they show a decline in temperatures, contradicting what has been directly measured with thermometers.

Because they considered that recent decline to be spurious, Dr. Jones and his colleagues removed it from part of the graph and used direct thermometer readings instead.

Global temperature averages based on temperature measurements? Still increasing since 1960.

See also here: http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/11/28/norwich-we-still-have-a-problem/

[Why Syzygy]

15. How refreshing

to see someone who GETS IT! Thank you :toast: (I was feeling a bit of despair about DU)

[NecklyTyler]

16. 1.5F

1.5 degrees F = 0.9 degrees C

[Uncle Joe]

17. One thing that jumps out at me regarding those graphs are the peaks that hit

around the times of World Wars I & II, I imagine there was a lot of carbon being burned.

[karynnj]

7. That is considered the tipping point and these goals are beyond

anything yet proposed by a government or international organization. The fact is it will be very difficult to get to this. The people behind it are not morons, but people working very hard to avoid catastrophe.

[Birthmark]

2. I guess it's something.

I'm not optimistic about its implementation or probable (imo) outcome. But it's better than nothing.

[Kingofalldems]

6. Oh no! What will the DU hoaxers say?

[FarCenter]

8. Will 2 degrees get us back to the Medieval Optimum?

When wine was made in England, and the Vikings raised sheep and cows in Greenland?

[dysfunctional press]

13. it's not enough, and it still won't be achieved.

:rofl: :rofl: civilization is SO fucked. :rofl: :rofl: