President to Copenhagen Climate Talks with Contingent of Cabinet and Council

[bigtree]

from the White House: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-attend-copenhagen-climate-talks


November 25, 2009

The White House announced today that President Obama will travel to Copenhagen on Dec. 9 to participate in the United Nations Climate Change Conference, where he is eager to work with the international community to drive progress toward a comprehensive and operational Copenhagen accord. The President has worked steadily on behalf of a positive outcome in Copenhagen throughout the year. Based on the President’s work on climate change over the past 10 months – in the Major Economies Forum, the G20, bilateral discussions and multilateral consultations – and based on progress made in recent, constructive discussions with China and India’s Leaders, the President believes it is possible to reach a meaningful agreement in Copenhagen. The President’s decision to go is a sign of his continuing commitment and leadership to find a global solution to the global threat of climate change, and to lay the foundation for a new, sustainable and prosperous clean energy future.

The White House also announced that, in the context of an overall deal in Copenhagen that includes robust mitigation contributions from China and the other emerging economies, the President is prepared to put on the table a U.S. emissions reduction target in the range of 17% below 2005 levels in 2020 and ultimately in line with final U.S. energy and climate legislation. In light of the President’s goal to reduce emissions 83% by 2050, the expected pathway set forth in this pending legislation would entail a 30% reduction below 2005 levels in 2025 and a 42% reduction below 2005 in 2030. This provisional target is in line with current legislation in both chambers of Congress and demonstrates a significant contribution to a problem that the U.S. has neglected for too long. With less than two weeks to go until the beginning of the Copenhagen conference, it is essential that the countries of the world, led by the major economies, do what it takes to produce a strong, operational agreement that will both launch us on a concerted effort to combat climate change and serve as a stepping stone to a legally binding treaty. The President is working closely with Congress to pass energy and climate legislation as soon as possible.

Underscoring President Obama’s commitment to American leadership on clean energy and combating climate change, the White House also announced today that a host of Cabinet secretaries and other top officials from across the Administration will travel to Copenhagen for the conference. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson are all scheduled to attend, along with Council on Environmental Quality Chair Nancy Sutley, Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Holdren, and Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change Carol Browner.

For the first time, the U.S. delegation will have a U.S. Center at the conference, providing a unique and interactive forum to share our story with the world. In addition to working with other countries to advance American interests, U.S. delegates will keynote a series of events highlighting actions by the Obama Administration to provide domestic and global leadership in the transition to a clean energy economy. Topics will range from energy efficiency investments and global commitments to renewables policy and clean energy jobs . . .

agenda, administration advances, schedule of speakers and topics: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-attend-copenhagen-climate-talks


Gore lauds Obama on global warming

WASHINGTON - Barack Obama is leading a "significant" change in US policy towards global warming, former vice-president Al Gore said yesterday, days ahead of the US President's trip to the global climate summit in Copenhagen.

Mr Obama "took an important step" by announcing he would attend the talks in Copenhagen, said Mr Gore, the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize winner for his work on climate change.

"This action is another example of the significant change in policy on the climate crisis," Mr Gore said.

"Those who feared that the US had abdicated its global responsibility should take hope from these actions and work towards completing a strong operational agreement next month in Copenhagen and guidelines for negotiators to complete their work next year on a comprehensive treaty," he said.

Mr Gore said he hoped the US Senate would support Mr Obama "and move quickly to pass climate and energy legislation early next year".

read: http://www.examiner.com.au/news/local/news/today/gore-lauds-obama-on-warming/1689440.aspx

[endless october]

1. i think cap and trade is the wrong plan.

if we're serious about cutting CO2, let's build the nuclear, wind, and solar infrastructure that we need. build it with money saved from stopping the war.

cap and trade schemes won't work.

[bigtree]

2. mebbe

. . . there's and opportunity in the senate bill for focus on renewables and alternatives.

I'm interested in your view of why cap and trade won't work. I've read enough of the republican argument - those who are blocking it in committee arguing about 'taxes' and costs.

[endless october]

3. because remaining manufacturing jobs will go to cheating job markets.

like China.

anyone who thinks they will start tearing down their brand new coal plants is fooling themselves.

meanwhile, we'll be paying other countries so that we can make electricity instead of just using the money to build new nuclear facilities.

it boils down to this : we can't afford a war and a massive new infrastructure program. choose one.

i pick new, non-CO2 producing energy infrastructure. it will put people to work, and we'll build more than we need in anticipation of future demand.

new energy infrastructure should be a top priority. cap and trade should not even be considered.

*edit for typo

[bigtree]

4. I'm no fan of the proposal either

The more they try and 'fix' it, the worse it gets. It's an issue, like health care, in which support falls along party lines, but it doesn't really feel like a progressive initiative, the way its structured. The cap part is weak and the trade part is dubious. Thanks for your view.