Comments on: The Obama Factor

By: Some good news â€” Hot Topic

Some good news â€” Hot Topic — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 21:37:38 +0000

[...] earlier posts on the Obama Administration’s position here and here, and on wind generation in New Zealand here and [...]

By: Geoengineering on the table â€” Hot Topic

Geoengineering on the table â€” Hot Topic — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 00:07:23 +0000

[...] its acknowledgment that desperate measures may have to be considered. Scientific reality has been admitted to the White House, but it is not yet clear to what extent Congress has put out the welcome mat. If [...]

By: Stern talking (but not Nick) â€” Hot Topic

Stern talking (but not Nick) â€” Hot Topic — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 20:16:39 +0000

[...] theÂ role the US will be playing in the time ahead.Â It is an extraordinary transformation. The hopes raised by Obama still look [...]

By: Bryan Walker

Bryan Walker — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 20:44:36 +0000

Thanks Cindy. I suspect it’s taking the reporting media a while to catch up on the possibility that the Obama administration means what it says about tackling climate change.

By: cindy

cindy — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 20:26:15 +0000

FYI Clinton's speech to the Asia Society in NYC before she left the US where she clearly flagged climate as being high on the agenda of her China visit.

By: Bryan Walker

Bryan Walker — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 19:14:35 +0000

An update on Clinton’s China visit. The radio news this morning confirmed that climate change has in fact been part of their talks about cooperation. I heard a BBC reporter in China confidently predicting a day or two ago that climate change wouldn’t get a look in because of the urgency of the economic crisis. He was wrong. Clinton herself spoke of the two countries working together in the transition to low-carbon economies. Sounds like further evidence that the Obama administration really is serious about the issue.

By: Bryan Walker

Bryan Walker — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 00:49:56 +0000

For an update on whether Obama's words are being translated into action it is worth taking a look at Joseph Romm's recent post on his Climate Progress Blog. He sees the first month in office as having already produced "nothing less than an unprecedented reversal of decades of unsustainable national policy", and he enumerates nine steps within the US which substantiate this evaluation. Towards the end he adds as a further notable accomplishment the fact that Clinton made China and climate a core component of her first foreign trip.

By: cindy

cindy — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 20:43:29 +0000

more for you Ayrdale
just to get this right – the US isn’t responsible for 30% of emissions today – it’s an HISTORIC figure – the US is responsible for 30% of climate change we are already seeing today.

In terms of financing the developing world to move to a low-carbon economy, to stop deforestation and adapt to climate change impacts, one calculation I’ve seen is that the money needed is around US$ 140 billion a year, from Annex 1 (industrialised – and some rapidly industrialising) countries to developing countries. This should be spent on three different areas: adaptation ($50 bn) , stopping tropical deforestation ($40 bn) and mitigation ($50bn – mostly energy efficiency and renewables).

By: cindy

cindy — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 19:54:46 +0000

Ayrdale Here's the coal reference - it was in a 2007 Pew Centre briefing. Cheers Andrew for the wind turbine reference - same calculation as I'd done. You might also want to look at a Tyndall Centre paper about the west exporting emissions to China. In 2004 net exports from China accounted for 23% of its emissions. The west is exporting its manufacturing sector to China (including NZ) and then turns round and points the finger. Can't have it both ways! sorry for the lack of proper links i'm a bit rusty at it [cleaned up: GR]

By: Bryan Walker

Bryan Walker — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 19:12:38 +0000

Ayrdale, I’ve tried to track down this subsidy you talk about, but can’t find anything on the Herald website. Would you care to be more specific?

But that apart, you seem to miss the point of my column, which is that Obama has anounced a new readiness on the part of the US to take climate science seriously and respond appropriately. To the quote I offered in the column he went on to add the words: “Delay is no longer an option. Denial is no longer an acceptable response. The stakes are too high. The consequences, too serious.”

I don’t think he would share your complacency about how well America has been performing.

Gareth points out that China and India were part of the Kyoto protocol. Under that agreement many developing countries were excused from any requirement to reduce their emissions at this stage because it seemed reasonable that the developed countries should take the first steps. But that didn’t mean they weren’t part of the agreement or that their exemption would necessarily continue into subsequent international arrangements. As I said in the column the US is alone in not signing up to Kyoto. Obama doesn’t seem to share your opinion that this was sensible of them. His clear statement that America will be a positive participant in negotiations for the successor to Kyoto indicates a very different stance from that which has obtained over the past eight years.