 |
 |
President Obama Delivers Speech on Climate Change from Copenhagen, Denmark, December 18, 2009 |
| THE
WHITE HOUSE
REMARKS
BY THE PRESIDENT 10:30
P.M. CET Today we've made meaningful and unprecedented -- made a meaningful and unprecedented breakthrough here in Copenhagen. For the first time in history all major economies have come together to accept their responsibility to take action to confront the threat of climate change. Let me first recount what our approach was throughout the year and coming into this conference. To begin with, we've reaffirmed America's commitment to transform our energy economy at home. We've made historic investments in renewable energy that have already put people back to work. We've raised our fuel efficiency standards. And we have renewed American leadership in international climate negotiations. Most importantly, we remain committed to comprehensive legislation that will create millions of new American jobs, power new industry, and enhance our national security by reducing our dependence on foreign oil. That effort at home serves as a foundation for our leadership around the world. Because of the actions we're taking we came here to Copenhagen with an ambitious target to reduce our emissions. We agreed to join an international effort to provide financing to help developing countries, particularly the poorest and most vulnerable, adapt to climate change. And we reaffirmed the necessity of listing our national actions and commitments in a transparent way. These three components -- transparency, mitigation and finance -- form the basis of the common approach that the United States and our partners embraced here in Copenhagen. Throughout the day we worked with many countries to establish a new consensus around these three points, a consensus that will serve as a foundation for global action to confront the threat of climate change for years to come. This success would have not been possible without the hard work of many countries and many leaders -- and I have to add that because of weather constraints in Washington I am leaving before the final vote, but we feel confident that we are moving in the direction of a significant accord. In addition to our close allies who did so much to advance this effort, I worked throughout the day with Prime Minister Meles of Ethiopia, who was representing Africa, as well as Premier Wen of China, Prime Minister Singh of India, President Lula of Brazil, and President Zuma of South Africa, to achieve what I believe will be an important milestone. Earlier this evening I had a meeting with the last four leaders I mentioned -- from China, India, Brazil, and South Africa. And that's where we agreed to list our national actions and commitments, to provide information on the implementation of these actions through national communications, with international consultations and analysis under clearly defined guidelines. We agreed to set a mitigation target to limit warming to no more than 2 degrees Celsius, and importantly, to take action to meet this objective consistent with science. Taken together these actions will help us begin to meet our responsibilities to leave our children and our grandchildren a cleaner and safer planet. Now, this progress did not come easily, and we know that this progress alone is not enough. Going forward, we're going to have to build on the momentum that we've established here in Copenhagen to ensure that international action to significantly reduce emissions is sustained and sufficient over time. We've come a long way, but we have much further to go. To continue moving forward we must draw on the effort that allowed us to succeed here today -- engagement among nations that represent a baseline of mutual interest and mutual respect. Climate change threatens us all; therefore, we must bridge old divides and build new partnerships to meet this great challenge of our time. That's what we've begun to do here today. For energy holds out not just the perils of a warming climate, but also the promise of a more peaceful and prosperous tomorrow. If America leads in developing clean energy, we will lead in growing our economy, in putting our people back to work, and in leaving a stronger and more secure country to our children. And around the world, energy is an issue that demands our leadership. The time has come for us to get off the sidelines and to shape the future that we seek. That's why I came to Copenhagen today, and that's why I'm committed to working in common effort with countries from around the globe. That's also why I believe what we have achieved in Copenhagen will not be the end but rather the beginning, the beginning of a new era of international action. So with that, let me just take a couple of questions, and I'm going to start with Jeff Mason. Q Thank you, Mr. President. Can you give a little bit more detail about how the transparency issue will work, how countries will show or prove that they're doing what they say they'll do on emissions curbs? And can you speak also more specifically about cutting emissions? There's no mention of that in your statement or in what we've heard so far, specifically about the agreement. THE PRESIDENT: Well, on the second question first, the way this agreement is structured, each nation will be putting concrete commitments into an appendix to the document, and so will lay out very specifically what each country's intentions are. Those commitments will then be subject to a international consultation and analysis, similar to, for example, what takes place when the WTO is examining progress or lack of progress that countries are making on various commitments. It will not be legally binding, but what it will do is allow for each country to show to the world what they're doing, and there will be a sense on the part of each country that we're in this together, and we'll know who is meeting and who's not meeting the mutual obligations that have been set forth. With respect to the emissions targets that are going to be set, we know that they will not be by themselves sufficient to get to where we need to get by 2050. So that's why I say that this is going to be a first step. And there are going to be those who are going to -- who are going to look at the national commitments, tally them up and say, you know, the science dictates that even more needs to be done. The challenge here was that for a lot of countries, particularly those emerging countries that are still in different stages of development, this is going to be the first time in which even voluntarily they offered up mitigation targets. And I think that it was important to essentially get that shift in orientation moving, that's what I think will end up being most significant about this accord. From the perspective of the United States, I've set forth goals that are reflected in legislation that came out of the House that are being discussed on a bipartisan basis in the Senate. And although we will not be legally bound by anything that took place here today, we will I think have reaffirmed our commitment to meet those targets. And we're going to meet those targets, as I said before, not simply because the science demands it, but also because I think it offers us enormous economic opportunity down the road. Q And the first part of the question, about the transparency issue? THE PRESIDENT: Well, as I said, there is a specific -- Q (Inaudible.) THE PRESIDENT: Exactly. There is the annexing combined with a process where essentially they are presenting to the world -- subject to international consultation and then analysis -- exactly what are these steps. So if I make a claim that I'm reducing greenhouse gases because I've changed mileage standards on cars, there will be a process whereby people will be able to take a look and say, is that in fact in effect? Jennifer Loven. Q Thank you, sir. You've talked to, in your remarks earlier today, about other nations needing to accept less than perfect in their view. Can you talk about what you gave up and where you might have shifted the U.S. position to get to this point? And also, if this was so hard to get to, just what you have today, how do you feel confident about getting to a legally binding agreement in a year? THE PRESIDENT: I think it is going to be very hard and it's going to take some time. Let me sort of provide the context for what I saw when I arrived. And I think it's important to be able to stand in the shoes of all the different parties involved here. In some ways the United States was coming with a somewhat clean slate, because we had been on the sidelines in many of these negotiations over several years. Essentially you have a situation where the Kyoto Protocol and some of the subsequent accords called on the developed countries who were signatories to engage in some significant mitigation actions and also to help developing countries. And there were very few, if any, obligations on the part of the developing countries. Now, in some cases, for countries that are extremely poor, still agrarian and so forth, they're just not significant contributors to greenhouse gases. But what's happened obviously since 1992 is that you've got emerging countries like China and India and Brazil that have seen enormous economic growth and industrialization. So we know that moving forward it's going to be necessary if we're going to meet those targets for some changes to take place among those countries. It's not enough just for the developed countries to make changes. Those countries are going to have to make some changes, as well -- not of the same pace, not in the same way, but they're going to have to do something to assure that whatever carbon we're taking out of the environment is not just simply dumped in by other parties. On the other hand, from the perspective of the developing countries like China and India, they're saying to themselves, per capita our carbon footprint remains very small, and we have hundreds of millions of people who don't even have electricity yet, so for us to get bound by a set of legal obligations could potentially curtail our ability to develop, and that's not fair. So I think that you have a fundamental deadlock in perspectives that were brought to the discussions during the course of this week. And both sides have legitimate points. My view was that if we could begin to acknowledge that the emerging countries are going to have some responsibilities, but that those responsibilities are not exactly the same as the developed countries, and if we could set up a financing mechanism to help those countries that are most vulnerable, like Bangladesh, then we would be at least starting to reorient ourselves in a way that allows us to be effective in the future. But it is still going to require more work and more confidence-building and greater trust between emerging countries, the least developed countries, and the developed countries before I think you are going to see another legally binding treaty signed. I actually think that it's necessary for us ultimately to get to such a treaty, and I am supportive of such efforts. But this is a classic example of a situation where if we just waited for that, then we would not make any progress. And in fact I think there might be such frustration and cynicism that rather than taking one step forward, we ended up taking two steps back. But I want to be very clear that ultimately this issue is going to be dictated by the science, and the science indicates that we're going to have to take more aggressive steps in the future. Our hope is that by investing in clean energy, in research, in development, in innovation, that in the same way that the Clean Air Act ended up spurring all kinds of innovations that solved the acid rain problem at a much cheaper and much more rapid pace than we expected, that by beginning to make progress and getting the wheels of innovation moving, that we are in fact going to be in a position to solve this problem. But we're going to need technological breakthroughs to get to the goals that we're looking for. In the meantime, we've got to be able to take the steps that are in our grasp right now, like for example energy efficiency, something I emphasized last week. All right. Helene Cooper. I'm sorry. Q What about the compromise shift question? THE PRESIDENT: I have to say that, quietly, we did some pretty good ground work during the course of this year, so that our position was relatively clear. I think that the one principle that I brought to this is that whatever commitments we make, I want to be able to be sure that they're actually commitments that we can keep. So we tried to be modest in what we thought we could accomplish. I think there was interest on the part of some to, for example, increase our mitigation targets. Although when you look out in the years 2025 or 2030, our goals are actually entirely comparable with Europe's. On the front end they appear to be less, because frankly, they've had a head start over the last several years in doing things like energy efficiency that we care about. What I said to the other people in the room is, is that I want to make sure that whatever it is that we promise we can actually deliver on, and that it would be unrealistic for us to think that we can turn on a dime and that suddenly a clean-energy economy is going to emerge overnight, given the fact that it's going to require significant effort. And companies and industries are going to be wanting to make changes -- we're already seeing those changes, but they haven't all borne fruit yet. And we want to make sure that we're not getting too far ahead of ourselves in terms of targets, even as I understand that the science compels us to move as rapidly as we can. All right. Helene Cooper. Q Thank you. I wanted to ask you about this listing of the -- in the appendix. Going forward do you think that's going to continue to be sufficient, or do you think verification is going to remain a source of friction between the U.S. and China? And also on cap and trade, are you able to -- were you able to assure the leaders here that you'll make that a legislative priority next year? THE PRESIDENT: With respect to the appendix, these countries have set forth for the first time some very significant mitigation efforts, and I want to give them credit for that. I mean, if you look at a country like India, as I said, they've got hundreds of millions of people who don't have electricity, hundreds of millions of people who, by any standard, are still living in dire poverty. For them, even voluntarily to say, we are going to reduce carbon emissions relative to our current ways of doing business by X percent is an important step. And we applaud them for that. The problem actually is not going to be verification in the sense that this international consultation and analysis mechanism will actually tell us a lot of what we need to know. And the truth is that we can actually monitor a lot of what takes place through satellite imagery and so forth. So I think we're going to have a pretty good sense of what countries are doing. What I think that some people are going to legitimately ask is, well, if it's not legally binding what prevents us from, 10 years from now, looking and saying, you know, everybody fell short of these goals and there's no consequences to it? My response is that, A, that's why I think we should still drive towards something that is more binding than it is. But that was not achievable at this conference. And the second point that I'd make is that Kyoto was legally binding and everybody still fell short anyway. And so I think that it's important for us, instead of setting up a bunch of goals that end up just being words on a page and are not met, that we get moving -- everybody is taking as aggressive a set of actions as they can; that there is a sense of mutual obligation and information sharing so that people can see who's serious and who's not; that we strive for more binding agreements over time; and that we just keep moving forward. That's been the main goal that I tried to pursue today. And I think that as people step back, I guarantee you there are going to be a lot of people who immediately say, the science says you got to do X, Y, Z; in the absence of some sort of legal enforcement, it's not going to happen. Well, we don't have international government, and even treaties, as we saw in Kyoto, are only as strong as the countries' commitments to participate. Because of the differing views between developing countries and developed countries, in terms of future obligations, the most important thing I think we can do at this point -- and that we began to accomplish but are not finished with -- is to build some trust between the developing and the developed countries to break down some of the logjams that have to do with people looking backwards and saying, well, Kyoto said this, or Bali said that, or you guys need to do something but we don't need to do something; getting out of that mindset and moving towards a position where everybody recognizes we all have to move together. If we start from that position, then I think we're going to be able to make progress in the future. But this is going to be hard. This is hard within countries; it's going to be even harder between countries. And one of the things that I've felt very strongly about during the course of this year is that hard stuff requires not paralysis, but it requires going ahead and making the best of the situation that you're in at this point, and then continually trying to improve and make progress from there. Okay, thank you very much everybody. We'll see some of you on the plane. Q Mr. President, who will sign the agreement -- since you're leaving, who here has the power to sign it? THE PRESIDENT: We've got our negotiators who are here. I'm not going to be the only leader who I think leaves before it's finally presented, but they are empowered to sign off -- given at this point that most of the text has been completely worked out. Q Does it require signing, is it that kind of agreement? THE PRESIDENT: You know, it raises an interesting question as to whether technically there's actually a signature -- since, as I said, it's not a legally binding agreement, I don't know what the protocols are. But I do think that this is a commitment that we, as the United States, are making and that we think is very important. All right. Thanks, guys. END 10:53 P.M. CET ------------------------------------------------- Sources: White House CNN Youtube
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Copenhagen Climate Change meeting continues more serious........on December 18th, 2009 |
|
According to the Copenhagen Climate Change report dated December 18th, 2009, After statements by the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, a number of key players have agreed on a draft text that will be discussed on the UN conference's last day. Morten Andersen 18/12/2009 09:20 Statements Thursday by Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State brought new energy to stalled negotiations in Copenhagen. The US Secretary of State assured that the US supports 100 billion US dollars to be provided annually for climate change measures in the developing world by 2020, and that the US is ready to pay its share. The US has been taking the climate change very seriously which Demonstrated a commitment to lead by example, President Obama signed an Executive Order in October 5th, 2009 that sets sustainability goals for Federal agencies and focuses on making improvements in their environmental, energy and economic performance. The Executive Order requires Federal agencies to set a 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target within 90 days; increase energy efficiency; reduce fleet petroleum consumption; conserve water; reduce waste; support sustainable communities; and leverage Federal purchasing power to promote environmentally-responsible products and technologies. Click to see more detail. Greenhouse Gas Emissions In the U.S: The U.S. energy-related activities account for three-quarters of the human-generated greenhouse gas emissions, mostly in the form of carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels. More than half the energy-related emissions come from large stationary sources such as power plants, while about a third comes from transportation. Industrial processes (such as the production of cement, steel, and aluminum), agriculture, forestry, other land use, and waste management are also important sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. The U.S considers seriously about the Health and Environmental Effects Climate change affects people, plants, and animals. Scientists are working to better understand future climate change and how the effects will vary by region and over time. The U.S. Climate Change report shows that the United States scientists believe that most areas will to continue to warm, although some will likely warm more than others. It remains very difficult to predict which parts of the country will become wetter or drier, but scientists generally expect increased precipitation and evaporation, and drier soil in the middle parts of the country. Northern regions such as Alaska is expected to experience the most warming. In fact, The report shows that the Alaska has been experiencing significant changes in climate in recent years that may be at least partly related to human caused global climate change.Human health can be affected directly and indirectly by climate change in part through extreme periods of heat and cold, storms, and climate-sensitive diseases such as malaria, and smog episodes. Click to see the Climate Change - Health and Environmental Effects via U.S. website. Photo
of Alaska - Ice glacier melting twice as fast.... in August 18th, 2009
The U.S report shows that The range reflects uncertainty about global temperature projections and how rapidly ice sheets will melt or slide into the ocean in response to the warmer temperatures. Rising sea levels inundate wetlands and other low-lying lands, erode beaches, intensify flooding, and increase the salinity of rivers, bays, and groundwater tables. Some of these effects may be further compounded by other effects of a changing climate. Additionally, measures that people take to protect private property from rising sea level may have adverse effects on the environment and on public uses of beaches and waterways. Some property owners and state and local governments are already starting to take measures to prepare for the consequences of rising sea level. You can see the Coastal Zones and Sea Level Rise on Climate Change. According to For island-nesting bird species, the loss of wetland islands to flooding and erosion is a serious problem. A shift to mainland marshes is generally not an option for these species because of predators present in those marshes. Numerous species of special concern, including the piping plover, nest in the protected back-dune areas of barrier islands. Loss of these habitats could have a serious effect on such rare species. To the extent that estuarine and riverine beaches, particularly on islands, survive better than barrier islands, shorebirds like oystercatchers might be able to migrate to these shores. The following is an example table which gives a general description of vulnerable coastal habitats and potential ecological consequences of sea level rise and shoreline armoring in the U.S. mid-Atlantic region from Virginia to New York which is authored by Ann Shellenbarger Jones, Industrial Economics Inc.
U.S. has the prevention system to prevent the savior areas: The following is the flash flood warning to prevent:
The US Building the Carbon Markets to Improve Forest Management Report shows that Markets for carbon emissions, normally measured in metric tons of CO2 emissions or their equivalent in other gases, are created when companies are required to, or voluntarily agree to, limit their emissions. Emitters buy carbon allowances when it is cheaper for them to so than it is to reduce their emissions. Emitters sell allowances when they can reduce their emissions more cheaply than what the allowances are worth. Allowing trading in carbon allowances spurs creativity and reduces the overall cost of reducing atmospheric greenhouse gases. The benefits to forests could be achieved either through offset projects, or by using the proceeds from the sale of carbon allowances (essentially permits to emit carbon) to support programs which promote keeping forests as forests and forest management which sequesters additional carbon when compared with business-as-usual management. The bottom line is that different forms of forest management can indeed influence atmospheric greenhouse gas levels, and that management regimes which simultaneously produce wood to meet society’s needs while maintaining as intact a crown canopy as possible, will, over the next 100 years, maximize reductions to atmospheric greenhouse gas levels. Therefore the Maine Forest Service was asked by the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative to develop recommendations for what should be included in the category of eligible forestry offset projects under RGGI.
Weyerhaeuser releases the potential in trees to solve important problems for people and the planet. Washington State, Weyerhaeuser is uniquely qualified to meet these needs for the world. The global markets for carbon allowances are expected to be worth more than $100 billion by the end of the year. Speaking of the climate changes on a greenhouse gases, the Boeing Solar airplane is one of the green affect by reducing emissions for industrialized nations. The HB-SIA is the first prototype of the Switzerland-based Solar Impulse project. Its mission is to demonstrate the feasibility of a complete day-night-day flight cycle propelled solely by solar energy – and using no fuel. The airplane recently completed a test run near Zurich Switzerland in which it taxied down the runway power by its own engines. The HB-SIA is a totally unprecedented aircraft, with a 63-meter wingspan (comparable to a Boeing 747-400) and the weight of an average family car. Never before has such a large craft been built with such low weight. Over 12,000 solar cells mounted onto the wing supply renewable energy to the four electric motors with a maximum power of 10 HP each. During the day the cells also charge the lithium-polymer batteries, which will permit the HB-SIA to fly through the night. After four years of research, studies, calculations and simulations by the 70-person team, the HB-SIA represents the beginning of a new, more concrete, phase.The Boeing continues to improve the environmental performance of their products, services and operations also supports the global aviation industry's commitment to carbon-neutral growth through the Air Transport Action Group's Climate Change Declaration. The world is becoming more familiar about the Climate change which is a global problem that requires a serious global response in order to embrace the needs and interests of all countries around the world. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which came into effect in 1994, and its Kyoto Protocol that came into effect in 2005 –it is concentrations of greenhouse gases – enable such a global response to climate change continues via United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Washington State is one of the example of reducing greenhouse gas via New Climate Change Actions. On February 1, 2009, Executive Sims published Washington, King County's annual Climate Report. The report provides an update on the activities and accomplishments in 2008, indicates planned actions for 2009 and highlights some of King County's emerging issues in the areas of climate change mitigation and adaptation. Here, we all sure do proudly say that Indian Prime Minister has had the first National Action Plan Climate Change.
Relating reducing the greenhouse gass by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's Action, EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) news report Released: WASHINGTON: 12/03/2009 that The international Methane to Markets (M2M) Partnership is publishing its first comprehensive report detailing the achievements of its 31 partner governments. Methane capture and use projects supported by the partnership since its creation in 2004 are currently reducing emissions by more than 27.3 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent annually – equivalent to the annual emissions from 5 million passenger vehicles. The M2M Partnership reduces greenhouse gas emissions by promoting the cost-effective, near-term recovery and use of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, while providing clean energy to markets around the world. “The Methane to Markets Partnership is a true success story in the fight against climate change and the transition to a clean energy economy” said Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and current chair of the Methane to Markets steering committee. “Methane to Markets is helping countries mitigate climate change, develop new sources of clean energy, and protect their local environments.”. The M2M Partnership is sponsoring an international expo March 2-5, 2010 in New Delhi, India. The expo will showcase current projects; opportunities for potential project partners and financiers; technical, policy and financial issues; and the latest technologies and services related to methane recovery and use. see more about the Methane. Meanwhile, the Copenhagen meeting Heads of state and governments from around the globe are waiting and waiting at the Bella Center, where the big plenary session has been postponed indefinitely. According to the plan, the plenary session. The meeting schedued at 10:00 AM, but delayed with the serious discussion on December 18th, 2009 due to a meeting behind closed doors with President Obama, Danish Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and 29 state leaders - especially from the EU - drags on, the Danish daily Berlingske reports. Although there are other activities as the follow:
Click
to see Overview schedule
via their website.
Sources: The U.S. Climate Change Website Yahoo Youtube MID-ATLANTIC
COASTAL HABITATS AND ENVIRONMENTAL Building the Carbon Markets to Improve Forest Management Indian Prime Minister: the first National Action Plan Climate Change. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Briefing the media on the second last day of the conference, Yvo de Boer welcomed the statement of support by the United States for a USD 100 billion global annual climate protection fund | A look at the extent of polar ice melt and former Vice President Al Gore speaking at the 'Live Earth' campaign to raise awareness about climate change, global warming, the impact on the environment... |
| World leaders are due to arrive in Copenhagen for the final crucial days of the climate change summit. Barack Obama, the US president, who is set to arrive in the Danish capital on Friday, has sai... World leaders are due to arrive in Copenhagen for the final crucial days of the climate change summit. Barack Obama, the US president, who is set to arrive in the Danish capital on Friday, has said he is confident a deal can be reached. But so far negotiators and celebrities alike have struggled to achieve any firm commitments. Al Jazeera's Alan Fisher reports from Copenhagen. Category: News & Politics Tags: denmark copenhagen climate change deal world leaders alan fisher aljazeera | At a joint press briefing at the halfway stage in the conference, UNFCCC Executive Secretary Yvo de Boer and COP 15 President Connie Hedegaard stressed that while there is strong political will for an agreed outcome in Copenhagen, there is now a need for good intentions to be replaced by solutions. Ms. Hedegaard praised the work of the Chairs of the working groups under the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol in preparing the latest draft texts that allow consultations to be more specific Regarding the nature of the outcome, Mr. de Boer said that if Copenhagen can deliver a set of political decisions that launch immediate action and that formulate ambitious industrialized country targets as well as broad engagement by developing countries with financial support, this is something we can be proud of. ..... |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
iisd
reporting services releases Scientific Synthesis of
Ocean Acidification Impacts on Marine Biodiversity
on December 14th, 2009.
Which has direct links with
The Climate Change,
Ocean Health and Human Well-being.
|
|
|
14 December 2009: The Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has released a publication entitled “Scientific Synthesis of the Impacts of Ocean Acidification on Marine Biodiversity,” which highlights the direct link between climate change, ocean health and human well-being see below for more detail. Prepared in collaboration with the UN Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC), and launched to mark Oceans Day during the Copenhagen climate change negotiations, the study is based on the analysis of over 300 scientific papers. According to the study, the absorption of atmospheric carbon dioxide has resulted in changes to the chemical balance of the oceans, causing them to become more acidic. It is predicted that by 2050, ocean acidity could increase by 150%. This dramatic increase is 100 times faster than any change in acidity experienced in the marine environment over the last 20 million years, giving little time for evolutionary adaptation within biological systems. Among other findings, the study shows that increasing ocean acidification will mean that by 2100 some 70% of cold water corals, a key refuge and feeding ground for commercial fish species, will be exposed to corrosive waters. In addition, given the current emission rates, it is predicted that the surface water of the Arctic Ocean will become under-saturated with respect to essential carbonate minerals by the year 2032, and the Southern Ocean by 2050 with disruptions to large components of the marine food source. Mean while, iisd held the In a joint press conference on a same day, in Copenhagen, Denmark, the UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UN/ISDR), the UN Development Programme (UNDP). |
|
Preliminary
2009 disaster figures
|
 |
|
Here
are the Preliminary 2009 disaster figures: See the Statistics: Natural Disasters in 2009 (January to November):
Here is a Disaster figures for 2000 - 2009 (% contribution of climate related to natural disasters).
To access the EM-DAT database, visit http://www.emdat.be/Database/terms.html. On December 15th, 2009, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon noted the long road to this “defining moment” and said that “we are here today to write a different future.” He called for a fair, ambitious and comprehensive agreement, specifying that this means: more ambitious mid-term mitigation targets from industrialized countries; more action by developing countries to limit emissions growth below “business as usual;” an adaptation framework for all countries; financing and technology support; and transparent and equitable governance. He stressed financing as a key, welcoming the emerging consensus among developed countries to provide approximately US$10 billion annually for the next three years to the Copenhagen Launch Fund. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon underlined that the goal is to lay the foundation for a legally-binding climate treaty as early as possible in 2010, and said that until such an agreement is reached “the Kyoto Protocol remains the only legally-binding instrument that captures reduction commitments” and that “as such it must be maintained.” . Speaking of flooding disaster, The King county in Washington State has a great example to see like First Response Water Damage & Emergency Services: which Water Damage and Other Emergency Services 206-902-6736 *24 HOUR EMERGENCY SERVICE 365 DAYS A YEAR. You can see more detail the link is provided. You can also vew the evacuation systems. Climate Change meeting is continue to proceeding as the following (click the images to view larger size that you can view):
|
Other
Opinions: Related Links
Flash Back
-----------------------------------------------------------
|
REMARKS
BY TO
THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY |
-
 |
|
President
Barack Obama charts new world order at the UN
64TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY
- 23 Sep 09 "We
mobilized resources that helped prevent the crisis from spreading further
to developing countries." |
UN
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon outlines his expectations for the "crucially
important"
for the sessions about the climate change, the food crisis, the H1N1
pandemic, and most importantly, the international financial and economic
crisis.
|
| THE
WHITE HOUSE
REMARKS
BY THE PRESIDENT 10:10
A.M. EDT I have been in office for just nine months -- though some days it seems a lot longer. I am well aware of the expectations that accompany my presidency around the world. These expectations are not about me. Rather, they are rooted, I believe, in a discontent with a status quo that has allowed us to be increasingly defined by our differences, and outpaced by our problems. But they are also rooted in hope -- the hope that real change is possible, and the hope that America will be a leader in bringing about such change. I took office at a time when many around the world had come to view America with skepticism and distrust. Part of this was due to misperceptions and misinformation about my country. Part of this was due to opposition to specific policies, and a belief that on certain critical issues, America has acted unilaterally, without regard for the interests of others. And this has fed an almost reflexive anti-Americanism, which too often has served as an excuse for collective inaction. Now, like all of you, my responsibility is to act in the interest of my nation and my people, and I will never apologize for defending those interests. But it is my deeply held belief that in the year 2009 -- more than at any point in human history -- the interests of nations and peoples are shared. The religious convictions that we hold in our hearts can forge new bonds among people, or they can tear us apart. The technology we harness can light the path to peace, or forever darken it. The energy we use can sustain our planet, or destroy it. What happens to the hope of a single child -- anywhere -- can enrich our world, or impoverish it. In this hall, we come from many places, but we share a common future. No longer do we have the luxury of indulging our differences to the exclusion of the work that we must do together. I have carried this message from London to Ankara; from Port of Spain to Moscow; from Accra to Cairo; and it is what I will speak about today -- because the time has come for the world to move in a new direction. We must embrace a new era of engagement based on mutual interest and mutual respect, and our work must begin now. We know the future will be forged by deeds and not simply words. Speeches alone will not solve our problems -- it will take persistent action. For those who question the character and cause of my nation, I ask you to look at the concrete actions we have taken in just nine months. On my first day in office, I prohibited -- without exception or equivocation -- the use of torture by the United States of America. (Applause.) I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed, and we are doing the hard work of forging a framework to combat extremism within the rule of law. Every nation must know: America will live its values, and we will lead by example. We have set a clear and focused goal: to work with all members of this body to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda and its extremist allies -- a network that has killed thousands of people of many faiths and nations, and that plotted to blow up this very building. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, we and many nations here are helping these governments develop the capacity to take the lead in this effort, while working to advance opportunity and security for their people. In Iraq, we are responsibly ending a war. We have removed American combat brigades from Iraqi cities, and set a deadline of next August to remove all our combat brigades from Iraqi territory. And I have made clear that we will help Iraqis transition to full responsibility for their future, and keep our commitment to remove all American troops by the end of 2011. I have outlined a comprehensive agenda to seek the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. In Moscow, the United States and Russia announced that we would pursue substantial reductions in our strategic warheads and launchers. At the Conference on Disarmament, we agreed on a work plan to negotiate an end to the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons. And this week, my Secretary of State will become the first senior American representative to the annual Members Conference of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Upon taking office, I appointed a Special Envoy for Middle East Peace, and America has worked steadily and aggressively to advance the cause of two states -- Israel and Palestine -- in which peace and security take root, and the rights of both Israelis and Palestinians are respected. To confront climate change, we have invested $80 billion in clean energy. We have substantially increased our fuel-efficiency standards. We have provided new incentives for conservation, launched an energy partnership across the Americas, and moved from a bystander to a leader in international climate negotiations. To overcome an economic crisis that touches every corner of the world, we worked with the G20 nations to forge a coordinated international response of over $2 trillion in stimulus to bring the global economy back from the brink. We mobilized resources that helped prevent the crisis from spreading further to developing countries. And we joined with others to launch a $20 billion global food security initiative that will lend a hand to those who need it most, and help them build their own capacity. We've also re-engaged the United Nations. We have paid our bills. We have joined the Human Rights Council. (Applause.) We have signed the Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. We have fully embraced the Millennium Development Goals. And we address our priorities here, in this institution -- for instance, through the Security Council meeting that I will chair tomorrow on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, and through the issues that I will discuss today. This is what we have already done. But this is just a beginning. Some of our actions have yielded progress. Some have laid the groundwork for progress in the future. But make no mistake: This cannot solely be America's endeavor. Those who used to chastise America for acting alone in the world cannot now stand by and wait for America to solve the world's problems alone. We have sought -- in word and deed -- a new era of engagement with the world. And now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges. Now, if we are honest with ourselves, we need to admit that we are not living up to that responsibility. Consider the course that we're on if we fail to confront the status quo: Extremists sowing terror in pockets of the world; protracted conflicts that grind on and on; genocide; mass atrocities; more nations with nuclear weapons; melting ice caps and ravaged populations; persistent poverty and pandemic disease. I say this not to sow fear, but to state a fact: The magnitude of our challenges has yet to be met by the measure of our actions. This body was founded on the belief that the nations of the world could solve their problems together. Franklin Roosevelt, who died before he could see his vision for this institution become a reality, put it this way -- and I quote: "The structure of world peace cannot be the work of one man, or one party, or one nation…. It cannot be a peace of large nations -- or of small nations. It must be a peace which rests on the cooperative effort of the whole world." The cooperative effort of the whole world. Those words ring even more true today, when it is not simply peace, but our very health and prosperity that we hold in common. Yet we also know that this body is made up of sovereign states. And sadly, but not surprisingly, this body has often become a forum for sowing discord instead of forging common ground; a venue for playing politics and exploiting grievances rather than solving problems. After all, it is easy to walk up to this podium and point figures -- point fingers and stoke divisions. Nothing is easier than blaming others for our troubles, and absolving ourselves of responsibility for our choices and our actions. Anybody can do that. Responsibility and leadership in the 21st century demand more. In an era when our destiny is shared, power is no longer a zero-sum game. No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation. No world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will succeed. No balance of power among nations will hold. The traditional divisions between nations of the South and the North make no sense in an interconnected world; nor do alignments of nations rooted in the cleavages of a long-gone Cold War. The time has come to realize that the old habits, the old arguments, are irrelevant to the challenges faced by our people. They lead nations to act in opposition to the very goals that they claim to pursue -- and to vote, often in this body, against the interests of their own people. They build up walls between us and the future that our people seek, and the time has come for those walls to come down. Together, we must build new coalitions that bridge old divides -- coalitions of different faiths and creeds; of north and south, east, west, black, white, and brown. The choice is ours. We can be remembered as a generation that chose to drag the arguments of the 20th century into the 21st; that put off hard choices, refused to look ahead, failed to keep pace because we defined ourselves by what we were against instead of what we were for. Or we can be a generation that chooses to see the shoreline beyond the rough waters ahead; that comes together to serve the common interests of human beings, and finally gives meaning to the promise embedded in the name given to this institution: the United Nations. That is the future America wants -- a future of peace and prosperity that we can only reach if we recognize that all nations have rights, but all nations have responsibilities as well. That is the bargain that makes this work. That must be the guiding principle of international cooperation. Today, let me put forward four pillars that I believe are fundamental to the future that we want for our children: non-proliferation and disarmament; the promotion of peace and security; the preservation of our planet; and a global economy that advances opportunity for all people. First, we must stop the spread of nuclear weapons, and seek the goal of a world without them. This institution was founded at the dawn of the atomic age, in part because man's capacity to kill had to be contained. For decades, we averted disaster, even under the shadow of a superpower stand-off. But today, the threat of proliferation is growing in scope and complexity. If we fail to act, we will invite nuclear arms races in every region, and the prospect of wars and acts of terror on a scale that we can hardly imagine. A fragile consensus stands in the way of this frightening outcome, and that is the basic bargain that shapes the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It says that all nations have the right to peaceful nuclear energy; that nations with nuclear weapons have a responsibility to move toward disarmament; and those without them have the responsibility to forsake them. The next 12 months could be pivotal in determining whether this compact will be strengthened or will slowly dissolve. America intends to keep our end of the bargain. We will pursue a new agreement with Russia to substantially reduce our strategic warheads and launchers. We will move forward with ratification of the Test Ban Treaty, and work with others to bring the treaty into force so that nuclear testing is permanently prohibited. We will complete a Nuclear Posture Review that opens the door to deeper cuts and reduces the role of nuclear weapons. And we will call upon countries to begin negotiations in January on a treaty to end the production of fissile material for weapons. I will also host a summit next April that reaffirms each nation's responsibility to secure nuclear material on its territory, and to help those who can't -- because we must never allow a single nuclear device to fall into the hands of a violent extremist. And we will work to strengthen the institutions and initiatives that combat nuclear smuggling and theft. All of this must support efforts to strengthen the NPT. Those nations that refuse to live up to their obligations must face consequences. Let me be clear, this is not about singling out individual nations -- it is about standing up for the rights of all nations that do live up to their responsibilities. Because a world in which IAEA inspections are avoided and the United Nation's demands are ignored will leave all people less safe, and all nations less secure. In their actions to date, the governments of North Korea and Iran threaten to take us down this dangerous slope. We respect their rights as members of the community of nations. I've said before and I will repeat, I am committed to diplomacy that opens a path to greater prosperity and more secure peace for both nations if they live up to their obligations. But if the governments of Iran and North Korea choose to ignore international standards; if they put the pursuit of nuclear weapons ahead of regional stability and the security and opportunity of their own people; if they are oblivious to the dangers of escalating nuclear arms races in both East Asia and the Middle East -- then they must be held accountable. The world must stand together to demonstrate that international law is not an empty promise, and that treaties will be enforced. We must insist that the future does not belong to fear. That brings me to the second pillar for our future: the pursuit of peace. The United Nations was born of the belief that the people of the world can live their lives, raise their families, and resolve their differences peacefully. And yet we know that in too many parts of the world, this ideal remains an abstraction -- a distant dream. We can either accept that outcome as inevitable, and tolerate constant and crippling conflict, or we can recognize that the yearning for peace is universal, and reassert our resolve to end conflicts around the world. That effort must begin with an unshakeable determination that the murder of innocent men, women and children will never be tolerated. On this, no one can be -- there can be no dispute. The violent extremists who promote conflict by distorting faith have discredited and isolated themselves. They offer nothing but hatred and destruction. In confronting them, America will forge lasting partnerships to target terrorists, share intelligence, and coordinate law enforcement and protect our people. We will permit no safe haven for al Qaeda to launch attacks from Afghanistan or any other nation. We will stand by our friends on the front lines, as we and many nations will do in pledging support for the Pakistani people tomorrow. And we will pursue positive engagement that builds bridges among faiths, and new partnerships for opportunity. Our efforts to promote peace, however, cannot be limited to defeating violent extremists. For the most powerful weapon in our arsenal is the hope of human beings -- the belief that the future belongs to those who would build and not destroy; the confidence that conflicts can end and a new day can begin. And that is why we will support -- we will strengthen our support for effective peacekeeping, while energizing our efforts to prevent conflicts before they take hold. We will pursue a lasting peace in Sudan through support for the people of Darfur and the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement, so that we secure the peace that the Sudanese people deserve. (Applause.) And in countries ravaged by violence -- from Haiti to Congo to East Timor -- we will work with the U.N. and other partners to support an enduring peace. I will also continue to seek a just and lasting peace between Israel, Palestine, and the Arab world. (Applause.) We will continue to work on that issue. Yesterday, I had a constructive meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas. We have made some progress. Palestinians have strengthened their efforts on security. Israelis have facilitated greater freedom of movement for the Palestinians. As a result of these efforts on both sides, the economy in the West Bank has begun to grow. But more progress is needed. We continue to call on Palestinians to end incitement against Israel, and we continue to emphasize that America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. (Applause.) The time has come -- the time has come to re-launch negotiations without preconditions that address the permanent status issues: security for Israelis and Palestinians, borders, refugees, and Jerusalem. And the goal is clear: Two states living side by side in peace and security -- a Jewish state of Israel, with true security for all Israelis; and a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967, and realizes the potential of the Palestinian people. (Applause.) As we pursue this goal, we will also pursue peace between Israel and Lebanon, Israel and Syria, and a broader peace between Israel and its many neighbors. In pursuit of that goal, we will develop regional initiatives with multilateral participation, alongside bilateral negotiations. Now, I am not naïve. I know this will be difficult. But all of us -- not just the Israelis and the Palestinians, but all of us -- must decide whether we are serious about peace, or whether we will only lend it lip service. To break the old patterns, to break the cycle of insecurity and despair, all of us must say publicly what we would acknowledge in private. The United States does Israel no favors when we fail to couple an unwavering commitment to its security with an insistence that Israel respect the legitimate claims and rights of the Palestinians. (Applause.) And -- and nations within this body do the Palestinians no favors when they choose vitriolic attacks against Israel over constructive willingness to recognize Israel's legitimacy and its right to exist in peace and security. (Applause.) We must remember that the greatest price of this conflict is not paid by us. It's not paid by politicians. It's paid by the Israeli girl in Sderot who closes her eyes in fear that a rocket will take her life in the middle of the night. It's paid for by the Palestinian boy in Gaza who has no clean water and no country to call his own. These are all God's children. And after all the politics and all the posturing, this is about the right of every human being to live with dignity and security. That is a lesson embedded in the three great faiths that call one small slice of Earth the Holy Land. And that is why, even though there will be setbacks and false starts and tough days, I will not waver in my pursuit of peace. (Applause.) Third, we must recognize that in the 21st century, there will be no peace unless we take responsibility for the preservation of our planet. And I thank the Secretary General for hosting the subject of climate change yesterday. The danger posed by climate change cannot be denied. Our responsibility to meet it must not be deferred. If we continue down our current course, every member of this Assembly will see irreversible changes within their borders. Our efforts to end conflicts will be eclipsed by wars over refugees and resources. Development will be devastated by drought and famine. Land that human beings have lived on for millennia will disappear. Future generations will look back and wonder why we refused to act; why we failed to pass on -- why we failed to pass on an environment that was worthy of our inheritance. And that is why the days when America dragged its feet on this issue are over. We will move forward with investments to transform our energy economy, while providing incentives to make clean energy the profitable kind of energy. We will press ahead with deep cuts in emissions to reach the goals that we set for 2020, and eventually 2050. We will continue to promote renewable energy and efficiency, and share new technologies with countries around the world. And we will seize every opportunity for progress to address this threat in a cooperative effort with the entire world. And those wealthy nations that did so much damage to the environment in the 20th century must accept our obligation to lead. But responsibility does not end there. While we must acknowledge the need for differentiated responses, any effort to curb carbon emissions must include the fast-growing carbon emitters who can do more to reduce their air pollution without inhibiting growth. And any effort that fails to help the poorest nations both adapt to the problems that climate change have already wrought and help them travel a path of clean development simply will not work. It's hard to change something as fundamental as how we use energy. I know that. It's even harder to do so in the midst of a global recession. Certainly, it will be tempting to sit back and wait for others to move first. But we cannot make this journey unless we all move forward together. As we head into Copenhagen, let us resolve to focus on what each of us can do for the sake of our common future. And this leads me to the final pillar that must fortify our future: a global economy that advances opportunity for all people. The world is still recovering from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. In America, we see the engine of growth beginning to churn, and yet many still struggle to find a job or pay their bills. Across the globe, we find promising signs, but little certainty about what lies ahead. And far too many people in far too many places live through the daily crises that challenge our humanity -- the despair of an empty stomach; the thirst brought on by dwindling water supplies; the injustice of a child dying from a treatable disease; or a mother losing her life as she gives birth. In Pittsburgh, we will work with the world's largest economies to chart a course for growth that is balanced and sustained. That means vigilance to ensure that we do not let up until our people are back to work. That means taking steps to rekindle demand so that global recovery can be sustained. And that means setting new rules of the road and strengthening regulation for all financial centers, so that we put an end to the greed and the excess and the abuse that led us into this disaster, and prevent a crisis like this from ever happening again. At a time of such interdependence, we have a moral and pragmatic interest, however, in broader questions of development -- the questions of development that existed even before this crisis happened. And so America will continue our historic effort to help people feed themselves. We have set aside $63 billion to carry forward the fight against HIV/AIDS, to end deaths from tuberculosis and malaria, to eradicate polio, and to strengthen public health systems. We are joining with other countries to contribute H1N1 vaccines to the World Health Organization. We will integrate more economies into a system of global trade. We will support the Millennium Development Goals, and approach next year's summit with a global plan to make them a reality. And we will set our sights on the eradication of extreme poverty in our time. Now is the time for all of us to do our part. Growth will not be sustained or shared unless all nations embrace their responsibilities. And that means that wealthy nations must open their markets to more goods and extend a hand to those with less, while reforming international institutions to give more nations a greater voice. And developing nations must root out the corruption that is an obstacle to progress -- for opportunity cannot thrive where individuals are oppressed and business have to pay bribes. That is why we support honest police and independent judges; civil society and a vibrant private sector. Our goal is simple: a global economy in which growth is sustained, and opportunity is available to all. Now, the changes that I've spoken about today will not be easy to make. And they will not be realized simply by leaders like us coming together in forums like this, as useful as that may be. For as in any assembly of members, real change can only come through the people we represent. That is why we must do the hard work to lay the groundwork for progress in our own capitals. That's where we will build the consensus to end conflicts and to harness technology for peaceful purposes, to change the way we use energy, and to promote growth that can be sustained and shared. I believe that the people of the world want this future for their children. And that is why we must champion those principles which ensure that governments reflect the will of the people. These principles cannot be afterthoughts -- democracy and human rights are essential to achieving each of the goals that I've discussed today, because governments of the people and by the people are more likely to act in the broader interests of their own people, rather than narrow interests of those in power. The test of our leadership will not be the degree to which we feed the fears and old hatreds of our people. True leadership will not be measured by the ability to muzzle dissent, or to intimidate and harass political opponents at home. The people of the world want change. They will not long tolerate those who are on the wrong side of history. This Assembly's Charter commits each of us -- and I quote -- "to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women." Among those rights is the freedom to speak your mind and worship as you please; the promise of equality of the races, and the opportunity for women and girls to pursue their own potential; the ability of citizens to have a say in how you are governed, and to have confidence in the administration of justice. For just as no nation should be forced to accept the tyranny of another nation, no individual should be forced to accept the tyranny of their own people. (Applause.) As an African American, I will never forget that I would not be here today without the steady pursuit of a more perfect union in my country. And that guides my belief that no matter how dark the day may seem, transformative change can be forged by those who choose to side with justice. And I pledge that America will always stand with those who stand up for their dignity and their rights -- for the student who seeks to learn; the voter who demands to be heard; the innocent who longs to be free; the oppressed who yearns to be equal. Democracy cannot be imposed on any nation from the outside. Each society must search for its own path, and no path is perfect. Each country will pursue a path rooted in the culture of its people and in its past traditions. And I admit that America has too often been selective in its promotion of democracy. But that does not weaken our commitment; it only reinforces it. There are basic principles that are universal; there are certain truths which are self-evident -- and the United States of America will never waver in our efforts to stand up for the right of people everywhere to determine their own destiny. (Applause.) Sixty-five years ago, a weary Franklin Roosevelt spoke to the American people in his fourth and final inaugural address. After years of war, he sought to sum up the lessons that could be drawn from the terrible suffering, the enormous sacrifice that had taken place. "We have learned," he said, "to be citizens of the world, members of the human community." The United Nations was built by men and women like Roosevelt from every corner of the world -- from Africa and Asia, from Europe to the Americas. These architects of international cooperation had an idealism that was anything but naïve -- it was rooted in the hard-earned lessons of war; rooted in the wisdom that nations could advance their interests by acting together instead of splitting apart. Now it falls to us -- for this institution will be what we make of it. The United Nations does extraordinary good around the world -- feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, mending places that have been broken. But it also struggles to enforce its will, and to live up to the ideals of its founding. I believe that those imperfections are not a reason to walk away from this institution -- they are a calling to redouble our efforts. The United Nations can either be a place where we bicker about outdated grievances, or forge common ground; a place where we focus on what drives us apart, or what brings us together; a place where we indulge tyranny, or a source of moral authority. In short, the United Nations can be an institution that is disconnected from what matters in the lives of our citizens, or it can be an indispensable factor in advancing the interests of the people we serve. We have reached a pivotal moment. The United States stands ready to begin a new chapter of international cooperation -- one that recognizes the rights and responsibilities of all nations. And so, with confidence in our cause, and with a commitment to our values, we call on all nations to join us in building the future that our people so richly deserve. Thank you very much, everybody. (Applause.) END 10:48 A.M. EDT. Source: White House Youtube ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meanwhile, MaximsNewsNetwork, dated 15 September 2009,reported that important messages from UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and outlines his expectations for the "crucially important" 64th session of the General Assembly, opened on September 23rd, 2009. World leaders, including US President Barack Obama, are set to focus on climate change, nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation and other issues such as the Middle East during next week's high-level segment. It is reported that the 64th session of the UN General Assembly was formally opened today (15 September) by its new president, former Libyan foreign minister Ali Treki, before world leaders gather next week for the General Assemblys annual high-level segment. In an interview with UNTV, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon laid out his expectations ahead of a week packed with summits and meetings on various thematic issues. He stated that would be one of the most historic and crucially important sessions in the history of the United Nations, considering a string of global challenges facing the international community: climate change, the food crisis, the H1N1 pandemic, and most importantly, the international financial and economic crisis. Almost 130 heads of state or government attended in New York, including United States president Barack Obama who has taken the lead on a high-level meeting on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. On September 22nd, 2009, had the largest ever gathering of world leaders dedicated to preventing runaway climate change, protecting the vulnerable from its impacts, and catalyzing global green growth. UN report shows that The world's forests play a pivotal role in this equation. They store carbon. They also release it. Some estimates show that global deforestation has contributed up to one fifth of annual greenhouse gas emissions in the 1990s.
Forest management has proven to be an exceptionally difficult issue. It has far-reaching impacts and a wide constellation of actors. Over the years, negotiators have sought to emulate the progress achieved in establishing international frameworks in other key areas of sustainable development, such as climate change, biological diversity and desertification. Two years ago, a landmark was achieved: the first-ever non-legally binding agreement on forests, endorsed by the General Assembly. The new instrument addresses the full spectrum of issues, from complete protection to sustainable use, from people to the environment to economics. It provides a broad foundation upon which to sustainably manage forests around the world. REDD has an important role. It a model of innovative leadership and partnership. It can help us to protect and sustainably manage the world's major forests. And it can inspire success in Copenhagen. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the global leaders are look forward to the continued strengthening of these arrangements so that the world has a robust yet flexible forest regime. On nuclear disarmament, It is expected the high-level Security Council meeting on 24 September under the chairmanship of US President Obama to generate strong political momentum to address nuclear issues. It has been the world concern and the President Obama hopes that he and his team will be able to create a politically conducive atmosphere for Israel and Palestinians' peace and security. The high-level events will end the summit on September 30, 2009. ....................................................................... Speaking of green, It is recalling that THE WORLD LEADERS AT THE G8 SUMMIT 2008 in Toyako, Japan on the northern island of Hokkaido July 6th to July 9th, 2008. The world's major economies Leaders: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States One of the MAJOR DISCUSSION was about The World Climate Change Environment and Climate Change Development. Protecting Loss of ecosystems and species another important matter, as you all know already that the global temperatures would reach a high never seen for millions of years, and the rise would be much too fast for many species to adapt. A large fraction of species - some studies suggest up to one third of species - could be doomed for extinction already by the year 2050. Life in the oceans is not only threatened by climate change but by the equally serious problem of the ongoing global ocean acidification, which is a direct chemical result of our CO2 emissions.(2) Seattle, Washington is continue to pursue A “greenprint” for a climate-friendly Seattle, the plan calls for new climate protection investments, the formation of diverse and strategic partnerships -- like the Seattle Climate Partnership -- and action from businesses, government and citizens. Seattle Washington also cares about the Current forested habitats reflect historic logging patterns. Lower Watershed Upper Watershed History Related Links in order to keep healthier environment for the forests. Native forest soils also allow up to 35 percent of seattle Washington's annual rainfall to be detained and infiltrated into the groundwater. This reduces damaging peak storm flows in streams and providing more flow during the dry summer months. See this link for for restoring living soils with compost, other benefits of compost, and other issues. Here is an another great example to show about the green environment and protecting the forests: Boeing's 2008 Environment Report shows that the Boeing Company conitnues to improve Eco-Environment which reported how the company practices and it is essencial for the Company and for the Aerospace industries as well as for the global industries. The Boeing Frontier Magazine explains that the Boeing's High Power Team "How employees from disparate backgrounds came together to lead Boeing’s development of green alternatives to today’s jet fuels". Over the last 40 years the Boeing Company, airplane CO2 emissions have been reduced by around 70 percent and the noise footprint area has been reduced by approximately 90 percent. Currently, The Boeing company is certified Environmental support. Boeing Company has been studied and took the place to have the new air traffic management concept and applys regulations environmental laws include the company policies and procedures in order to cut the fuel consumption and CO2 emmisions. The Boeing is committed to promotes environmental stewardship. The Boeing will Prevent the pollution by conserving energy and resources, recycling, reducing waste and pursuing other source reduction strategies. Continually improve the environmental management system. (1) (2). REDD mechanisms use market/financial incentives to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases from deforestation and forest degradation. While initially excluded from the land use, land-use change and forestry sector within the UNFCCC Clean Development Mechanism, it is suspected to be part of the successor to the Kyoto Protocol. REDD credits offer the opportunity to utilise funding from developed countries to reduce deforestation in developing countries. Considering that approximately 17% of greenhouse gas emissions originate from deforestation and forest degradation, it is increasingly accepted that mitigation of climate change will not be achieved without the inclusion of forests in an international regime. The Boeing, Seattle, King County, Washington are continue to focus on improving fuel efficiency, and especially now the Boeing has the solution to changing the fuel itself for better green environment and all and helps forest grow better and preserving forests also provides other valuable benefits: protecting the world's forests is a good investment like what UN General Ban Ki-Moon says on September 23rd, 2009 at remarks at the high-level event on REDD (UN Collaborative Programme on Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation in Developing Countries).
Resources: United Nation Secretary-General 4) Seattle Climate Action Plan Boeing's 2008 Environment Report http://catch4all.com/positive/2009/WhiteHouse/Environment/. http://catch4all.com/positive/2008/TheWhiteHouse/G8Summit2008/
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
