REUTERS
G8 agreement on climate change a "disgrace": Al Gore Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:54PM EDT MILAN (Reuters) - Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore denounced a deal by world leaders on curbing greenhouse gases as "a disgrace disguised as an achievement," saying on Thursday the agreement struck last week was insufficient. The dedicated climate crusader, whose 2006 global warming documentary won an Oscar, said leaders at last week's G8 summit in Germany had not risen to the challenge to respond to what he calls a "planetary emergency." G8 leaders agreed to pursue "substantial" reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, stopping short of German Chancellor Angela Merkel's hopes for concrete numerical commitments on emission reductions, including her key aim to cut gases by 50 percent by 2050. They said they would negotiate a new global climate pact that would extend and broaden the Kyoto Protocol beyond 2012. "It was a disgrace disguised as an achievement," Gore said at an event in Milan, where he praised Merkel for her efforts. "The eight most powerful nations gathered and were unable to do anything except to say 'We had good conversations and we agreed that we will have more conversations, and we will even have conversations about the possibility of doing something in the future on a voluntary basis perhaps."' The former U.S. Democratic presidential candidate is spearheading efforts to get the world of pop music to back his crusade with the Live Earth concerts on July 7, which will be held in numerous cities around the world. Gore served as Democrat President Bill Clinton's vice president and narrowly lost the 2000 election to George W. Bush. Also FYI, a NYT editorial I just saw. NEW YORK TIMES June 10, 2007 Editorial The Democrats Lag on Warming When Americans elected a Democratic Congress last November, they were voting to end politics as usual and special interest legislation. On the vital issues of energy independence and global warming they are not only in danger of getting more of the same but also, unless Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders step forward, winding up in worse shape than they were under the Republicans. Exhibit A is a regressive bill drafted by John Dingell, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Rick Boucher, a Virginia Democrat. For starters, the bill would override the recent Supreme Court decision giving the Environmental Protection Agency authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles, a decision that even President Bush has reluctantly embraced. It would also effectively block efforts by California and 11 other states to regulate and reduce greenhouse gases from vehicles at a time when the states are far ahead of the federal government in dealing with climate change. The bill’s fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks are weaker than the president’s proposals and weaker still than standards the National Academy of Sciences says can be met using off-the-shelf technology. And the bill would open the door to a new generation of coal-to-liquid fuel plants favored by the coal lobby that could double the global warming gases of conventional gasoline. The prospects for useful energy legislation are better in the Senate, where the majority leader, Harry Reid, has cobbled together a package that, with strengthening amendments, could do much to increase efficiency, clean up power plants and enlarge the country’s stock of renewable fuels. Mr. Reid must guard against backsliding. But his task is easier than Ms. Pelosi’s. He starts with a half-decent bill. She has to play defense against a bad one whose resourceful architect, Mr. Dingell, while sound on most environmental issues, will do almost anything to protect his constituents in the automobile industry. We have some advice for Ms. Pelosi that may not work, but is worth a try. Rewind this movie to 1989, when President George H. W. Bush and a Democratic Congress decided to strengthen the Clean Air Act by clamping down harder on the tailpipe emissions that cause smog and acid rain. The automakers said it couldn’t be done, and Mr. Dingell — who had spent the entire decade trying to weaken the law — rose to their defense. Then something odd happened. Mr. Dingell’s colleagues reasoned with him. The technology existed to clean the air, they pointed out. People would breathe easier, trees wouldn’t die, the companies wouldn’t go broke. Mr. Dingell thought about it, and while he never became a convert, he stepped aside and let the forces of change roll on. Could it happen again? Mr. Dingell agrees that climate change is a big problem. The task now is to persuade him that having served history once, he can do so again. The alternative is further unnecessary delay in dealing with warming — which would be bad for the Democrats and bad for the world. ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. _______________________________________________ RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: [email protected] http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org
