Copenhagen – Money And Power

Posted on Mon 12/14/2009 by



During the election campaign, then Senator Obama never came out and directly said that he would be ratifying the Kyoto protocol of 1997, but the suggestion from reading between the lines was that this was what was going to happen, when Senator Obama said that he would be getting the U.S. back into the Climate Change debate after what he said was so many years of neglect under the Bush Administration. After Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd ratified this protocol following his election in 2007, that only left the U.S. as the only Country not to ratify this Protocol, out of the 192 Countries (now) to have signed and then ratified the Protocol, introduced by the United Nations as part of its UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. (UNFCCC)

What was always played down that at the time this Kyoto Protocol was ratified, was that it was President Clinton and his VP Al Gore who did not ratify it, and in fact did not even send it to the Senate after it voted 95 – 0 that it should not be ratified. The emphasis has since been on President Bush taking all the fault for this, as the Democrats blame shift everything onto the Bush Administration. Bush only did what Clinton before him did.

Since the election, President Obama still has not ratified this Protocol, and in this lead up to Copenhagen, that has been somewhat lost in all the hype that surrounds this COP15 Conference at Copenhagen.

However, this original Kyoto Protocol is what everything hinges around.

Without that U.S. signature to ratify this, the Protocol will expire in 2011. Because the U.S. has not provided this second signature ratifying the protocol, then the U.S. cannot be subject to what it states as the requirements of the Protocol.

This is now why there is all the trouble at the Conference in Copenhagen.

This original Kyoto Protocol is the only legally binding document there is, and if it expires without a ‘doable’ replacement coming out of Copenhagen, then it’s virtually back to square one.

Kyoto effectively split those 192 Countries into two groups, those of already Developed Countries (Annex 1 – 40 Countries in all) and the remaining 152 Countries classified by the UNFCCC as still Developing.

In a complex structure all round, those 40 Annex 1 Countries had to implement mechanisms to cut back on their emissions, and to also introduce mechanisms to impose either Cap and Trade of those emissions, or just to tax them outright.

Those 152 Developing Countries only had to report their emissions and do nothing else.

From those 40 Annex 1 Countries, a second group was culled, these called Annex 2 Countries, and there are 23 of them. Here’s where the crunch comes in, and from this you can see why there is trouble brewing at Copenhagen. Those 23 Countries then had to pay ALL the costs for those remaining 152 Countries. That’s costs of trying to reduce their emissions, as well as costs for introducing new technologies and costs for making those technologies freely available to those still Developing Countries.

Now, why Copenhagen is now throwing up the problems it is, is because this Kyoto Protocol is the only legally binding document that they have. Those 152 Developing Countries are watching as their cash cow the provisions of that Kyoto Protocol look like being eroded away, and they see this as those rich Countries getting their own way in an effort to cut back on those original provisions.

The original Protocol said that they need do NOTHING, other than report their emissions. Those 40 Annex 1 Countries were required to reduce their emissions to a level 5% lower than they were in 1990. Now, virtually every Country on the Planet has increased their emissions since the Protocol was proposed in 1997, and now, in 2009, those emissions levels are now an awful lot further away in percentage terms than they were in 1997. Incidentally, while all those 40 Countries were asked to cut back to 5% lower than 1990 levels, the U.S. was specially singled out and required to reduce their emissions to a level 7% lower than for 1990 levels.

So, now, when President Obama says that the U.S. will be aiming for a 17% reduction on 2007 levels, this is wildly less than what the original Protocol required. The U.S. emissions have increased on average 2.5% each year. When you add that 2.5% each year from the stated starting point of 1990, and then add the 2.5% to that, each time compounding on top of the new total, the levels now are 60% higher than 1990 and they were required to be a further 7% lower than that, so Kyoto calls for the U.S. to reduce emissions now by 67%, two thirds, and that’s as of right now. President Obama’s call for a 17% reduction on 2007 levels, and to be implemented by 2020 is laughably out of context with what Kyoto calls for, far far lower than the original reduction, and he’s claiming that this new target will be a hard thing to achieve. That being the case, then just imagine trying to implement the original Kyoto Protocol now.

Yet, that original Kyoto Protocol is currently the only LEGALLY BINDING document they have.

That is why those already developed Countries are striving so hard for a new replacement, because the original Kyoto will be impossible to try and implement now, and after taking in the full meaning of what it actually binds them to, it has scared them into finding something weaker as a new replacement, and then spinning it so that it makes it ‘seem’ more important, and something that needs to be done for the environment.

Also, that’s why those 152 Developing Countries are screaming so loudly about any new one, fearing that they will be left out in the cold, so to speak. Any new document they will only see as replacing something that benefitted them considerably, and also said that they had to do nothing other than report their emissions.

That is why China is screaming so loudly that they will not agree to anything new. That is why India has said they will agree to nothing that changes their ability to try and bring themselves up to our existing standard of development. These two Countries alone are the most populous Countries on Earth, and currently are constructing coal fired power plants at the rate of a new large plant actually delivering power to the grids for those Countries at the rate of one every seven days in China, and every ten to fourteen days in India. They are not doing this out of a perceived vandalism towards the environment, but to desperately try and bring electrical power to vast sections of that populace who have no power at a residential level whatsoever, in fact almost one billion people each in both of those Countries, again something inconveniently not mentioned in this whole debate.

Meanwhile, The European clique has gathered and said that they will commit to a start up fund of $10 Billion. Developing Countries have laughed this off as woefully inadequate and a fraction of what they expected, and South Africa’s Archbishop Desmond Tutu even laughed hysterically at the expectation of those Rich Countries not having to pay.

Those Developing Countries are moving inexorably away from ANY new commitment, because under the original, they were so much better off.

Developing Countries, and keep in mind there are 152 of them see themselves being sidelined in all of this, as the most powerful Countries get all the press, have all the power, and have the ‘push’ to work any new binding agreement on them. The thing they have going in their favor is that 152 votes that they have. They will desperately resist anything that sees them as coming out worse off than they already are.

That is where the sticking point will be. The emphasis will be on the cuts in emissions, and not on the most important thing, that of the money.

As to the power side of things, here’s where possibly the most draconian parts of this COP15 Conference will be discussed, and not in the public eye either.

The UN will be seeking to impose this power on all of those rich Developed Countries, the U.S. included, and the U.S. will be looked upon as the largest contributor to any monetary fund.

Emissions will be controlled by the UN. They will actually be sending in UN inspectors to monitor all emissions. You may think that any reductions will be under the sole control of the home Country, but the UN will override that completely. They, the UN, will tell you what your emissions level must be. They will tell you how much you need to cut back. They will be keeping the records to see that you comply. They will be introducing draconian fines if you do not keep to the levels they require. They will tell you what you need to do to cut back those emissions. They will require you to commit to a cost on the emissions you already have. They will impose further costs if you exceed the levels they decree. They will control how much you pay to provide the technologies to implement measures in Developing Countries. They will require which of those technologies you must provide to those other Countries, and provide at either a reduced cost or no cost. In effect, everything to do with this, the UN will control.

Now can you see why those already Developed Countries are fighting tooth and nail for a newer, and in their eyes, watered down replacement for the Kyoto Protocol, and why those Developing Countries are fighting tooth and nail to keep any existing benefits in place. In the middle is the UN, and whichever way it goes, they are the winners. They will have that control no matter which way it goes.

The remainder of this week will be when those Heads Of State arrive to grandstand on the World Stage in the eyes of an adoring MSM who are blissfully unaware of all this, but only because they have not even bothered to go and find out about it. Those powerful First World leaders will be coercing the best decision they can get for them, and then spinning it to say that this will be for the benefit of the environment and the whole World. Those 152 Developing Countries will have next to no say at all, but the thing they have in their favour is the voting power of those 152 votes to keep what they already perceive they have in place.

Now you tell me how you think the vote is going to go on that front.

Keep in mind that the original Kyoto Protocol is the only legally binding document in existence with regard to this matter at the moment.

Maybe we should actually be thankful that Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama did not ratify it.

So, this week, when President Obama struts this platform, be fully aware that no matter what the result, the U.S. will be the big loser in all this and the UN wins whichever way it goes.

There will be more spin than in the eye of Hurricane Katrina this week. Fingers will be pointed, hundreds of billions of dollars committed, while in the streets of Copenhagen, rioters looking for a free pass to create havoc will be distracting the World’s media from what is really going on in secret discussions behind closed doors.

Copenhagen is all about Money and Power, and it’s all in favour of the UN.

PS. Don’t even bother going to the two Wikipedia sites that detail both the Kyoto Protocol and the UNFCCC, because the sections that used to be specifically highlighted, detailing those 23 Countries having to pay all the costs for the other 152 Countries have, er, mysteriously been deleted. That text used to be in the section immediately below the list of 23 Countries at Annex 2. It has now been added as a short 9 words in brackets and not highlighted, as an added  afterthought elsewhere, hidden within other text, almost hiding it in plain sight.

So much for an open debate.