Sunday, December 27, 2009

Copenhagen Summit on Climate Change

It's taken me a while to figure out my reaction to the train-wreck that was the Copenhagen Summit on Climate Change, but what finally got me to the point where I can write something was this story (via Chris Samuel's blog in Oz) about China being the force behind the failure of Copenhagen.

Now I'm caught between "I can't believe China could act so terribly" and "Huh, now they've found their scapegoat." This does make we wonder why the 'western powers' didn't make it clearer at the time that China was the source of the problems and either shame them into proper action (a strategy unlikely to succeed due to the lack of the need for the Chinese leadership to respond to any kind of democratic process), or simply to exclude China and set the world on a path to economic exclusion of the country too - I'm sure there are other countries that would be very willing to take up the manufacturer industries currently supplied by China.

There is an interesting kicker in Chris's blog post, and that's from his wife - Donna, who commented on the post thus:
If China railroaded Copenhagen then isn’t it time those of us in Western nations stopped filling our Christmas stockings with cheap Chinese goodies whilst ignoring its those very actions that drive China to want to exhaust its ‘fair share’ of the ‘Industrial Revolution’. We may not have power over our leaders or Copenhagen, but Western buyers do have pocket power without which they can let China know what they think about ethics. Think about that next time you reach for your credit card for that latest gadget. Which regime are you supporting.
I guess this is the small-scale, personal approach to implementing the strategy I suggested above.


  1. CFC Theory Casts Doubt On CO2 Warming
    Thursday, 24 December 2009 08:00 Dr. David Whitehouse

  2. I've certainly never suggested that CO2 is the only green-house gas with which we need to be concerned.

    CFCs were commonly used as refrigerants and aerosol propellants until they were banned in the US and Europe in the 1990s. Presumably they're still being used in other nations, but are being phased out under the Montreal Protocol. I've no doubt they're contributing to global climate change because of their influence on stratospheric chemistry, but at least that's one area where global change is happening.

    And both the US and China have signed up to Montreal, so you're pretty much preaching to the choir there, mate.... unless you wish to actually engage in the debate, rather than simply spamming my blog to get more hits for your site.