Despite a lot of talk, this nation has done little to restrain global warming, either in terms of mitigating carbon emissions or adapting to the climate changes that will come.
Some nations around the world -- wealthy nations such as Australia and the Netherlands -- are beginning to adapt, while poorer nations -- such as Malawi and India -- can't afford to.
In a superb piece of reporting last month in The New York Times, four writers reported on "the climate divide," elegantly laying out the issue. Andrew Revkin followed up this week with a look at an ensuing dispute over what to do about it -- a debate between rich and poor nations at the U.N. Revkin quietly watches the delegates debate over cheesecake with raspberry sauce. It's an emblematic image, and a must read.
Chuck Norris on Copenhagen
Lawsuit accuses Virginia power company of poisoning Dominican community with toxic coal ash
Comments
View as Flat
Ian Milliss Posted 1:01 am
12 May 2007
Ian Milliss
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 3:51 pm
12 May 2007
And at the U.N., they debate the issues while eating cheesecake with raspberry sauce. Thanks for bringing it all back home...I think.
-- Posted by Kit Stolz"
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
Billhook Posted 7:21 pm
12 May 2007
voiced so plainly here on Grist.
It might have helped the reader make a fair judgement to have made clear that the meeting the author attended was of the UN Sustainable Development Commission,
which attempts to address the full spectrum of sustainability issues.
If he really wanted to report on the UN's commitment to resolving GW,
he should try attending meetings of the UN "Framework Convention on Climate Change."
As for what is on the menu for pudding at the UN, it seems a matter wholly irrelevant to the issue but quite useful as a cheap & nasty smear,
unless maybe one is convinced that cheesecake is for CEOs, while public servants should have only gruel ?
It seems worth noting that the author shares his contempt for the UN with the likes of Cheyney, Rove, Bolton & Bush,
who are not only trying as usual to gut the current G8 declaration,
but are even trying to excise its affirmation of the UN as the proper forum for addressing GW.
So, if we're questioning credibility here, perhaps we should ask to just what extent is the author in bed with Karl Rove ?
Regards,
Billhook
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 11:06 pm
12 May 2007
Meeting and talking over a meal can be very helpful, and presumably that was the intention of the Norwegians, who were the hosts of the luncheon. Speechifying can be a bit awkward, but at least in this case the senior Norwegian head of the WHO had some interesting and even provocative things to say, and the ministers from Botswana and Angola responded with things that needed to be heard.
Also, the luncheon was but one event in the course of this international meeting of environmental ministers. If Revkin was present to cover it, then presumably he was there as a guest of the Norwegians, like everyone else, and he ate the lunch too, including the cheese cake. Did he think that by his eating the cheese cake, his journalistic work there was inevitably rendered ineffective and foolish? Of course not.
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
SustainableGreen Posted 3:30 am
13 May 2007
I am always leery of offering comments after the perceptive and able Canis Candida, especially when I disagree with her. I do feel the contrast between the extremes in the article is a vaild point to focus on, especially in light of the headline.
I have long felt, and others have indicated precisely the same feeling, that there is a self-indulgent hypocrisy at work. One way in which we should, and perhaps must, seek to restrain AGW is for ALL of us (that is ALL of us, not just some) to reduce our environmental, ecological footprint. On the face of it, cheesecake and raspberry sauce is highly self-indulgent ostentatious on the part of the providers and maybe an unthinking bit of elitist narcissism.
On the other hand it would be very interesting to learn about the embodied energy in the meal that was served. Where did it come from? A local small-business organic farmer/baker/confectioner? Or a huge mega-business with chemicalized ersatz materials from halfway around the world? (Were all the participants told they had to eat their vegetables before they got dessert?) Knowing these things and others would help to put the meal in a more revealing context, and provide a valuable lesson on how to eat well more cheaply and responsibly.
To answer the question, bringing such practices up on a continuing basis is valid. But the final answer is wrapped up in subtle details of lifestyle and habits for all of us. And these two are related because the first enables the reality of the second.
David
Sustainability For Life
Messages done with sustainable energy, with Wind and Sun!
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 3:47 am
13 May 2007
The effort of the UN should be to see that they get those benefits -- they should not be in bed with the foes of Warming, who want to restrict us and charge us a Global Tax on something that is natural.
Of course the Powerful fear Global Warming -- because it reduces their stranglehold on the essential goods of life: land, food, heat.
Global Warming presents the same problem as an alien invasion, as described by the Brookings Institute's "Peaceful Uses Of Outer Space". The big losers are the current Powers-That-Be because people will be able to stop being enslaved by them, as a newer bigger force takes control.
Only in this case its the simple power of the Earth emerging from a very devastating cold snap.
John Bailo, The "Denier Guy"
You Read It Here First
Permalink
Andrew Dessler Posted 4:23 am
13 May 2007
In his recent book, Eugene Linden describes how climate change is a "serial killer of civilizations." Thus, while you suggest that future climate change will be good, history and common sense suggest otherwise. Particularly because today's climate change has the capacity to dwarf previous episodes.
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 4:31 am
13 May 2007
Cold climate is the killer.
Warm climate is when civilization grows.
John Bailo, The "Denier Guy"
You Read It Here First
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 4:43 am
13 May 2007
In this case, though, I doubt any harm was done by serving the representative from Botswana a piece of cheese cake. And if Andrew Revkin was really making a dig at the hypocrisy of the participants at this event, it was done a bit too subtly for me to pick up on.
Chickens are our cousins!
So are other sensitive animals!
Enough is enough!
No more factory farms!
Permalink
MarkUK Posted 5:00 am
13 May 2007
The other thing to keep in mind is that large parts of the world today live on a knife edge. Even in today's climate peopl eonly just manage to grow enough food. A change either way could send those regions over the edge.
Permalink
SustainableGreen Posted 5:03 am
13 May 2007
To keep things on-topic and get past the constant ignorant petulant desperate drivel, another answer to the question of the headline is for everyone to simply support the economy of sustainability. This is in keeping with 'being the change' we wish to see. We do this by taking real steps to reduce our footprint. Ask yourself when engaging in an activity 'does this contribute to sustainability?' When the answer is 'no' the solution is to find sources or habits that are. When we do this we support the sustainable economy. We find stores or other outlets whose products or services have less embodied energy ("emergy") or nonsustainable resources in them. This can apply to the often-overlooked "Reduce-Reuse-Recycle" practice. There is a huge range of activities that can be changed with this approach. The result is a smaller footprint, perhaps by small increments.
Kit: By "nation" I gather you mean the political leadership of the U.S. I personally think that virtually nothing will happen among the so-called "leadership", especially what passes for it in Washington, DC, until Jan 2009. That is still a pig in a poke. The better approach is for everyday people to change, and not wait on politicians, whose daily bread comes from the corporate oligarchy.
David
Sustainability For Life
Messages done with sustainable energy, with Wind and Sun!
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 5:48 am
13 May 2007
Here's my blueprint for sustainability:
Invest part of my salary in a 401k.
In three years time, I will have enough to buy a Chevy Volt, when it's in production in 2010.
I will then be using 1/5 of the fuel that the best compacts use today because the Volt gets 150 mpg.
John Bailo, The "Denier Guy"
You Read It Here First
Permalink