next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
<a href="../201512/43246.html">previous message in archiv
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org=
/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"><html xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/1999/xht=
ml"><head>
<meta content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUTF-8" http-equiv=3D"Content-Type=
"/>
=20
</head><body style=3D"">
=20
<div>
<span style=3D"font-size: 12pt;">Not to worry Paul</span>
</div>=20
<div>
<span style=3D"font-size: 12pt;">Only thing better than 2 weeks in Paris=
at tax payers expense is<br/></span>
</div>=20
<div>
<span style=3D"font-size: 12pt;">another 2 weeks in 2020! Wouldn't w=
ant to spoil the fun!<br/></span>
</div>=20
<div>
<span style=3D"font-size: 12pt;">Enjoy the late fall<br/></span>
</div>=20
<div>
<span style=3D"font-size: 12pt;">Paul<br/></span>
</div>=20
<div>
<span style=3D"font-size: 12pt;"> </span>
</div>=20
<div>
<span style=3D"font-size: 12pt;"> </span>
</div>=20
<div>
<br/>> On December 16, 2015 at 9:04 AM Paul Ruggles <cpruggles@e=
astlink.ca> wrote:
<br/>>=20
<br/>>=20
<br/>> I'm afraid Steve that, tragically, we have waited too lon=
g to address the problem. I believe that it is now - virtually impossible t=
o stop this ecological disaster.=20
<br/>> I suppose "Better Late Than Never".
<br/>> Paul.
<br/>>=20
<br/>> On 2015-12-15, at 10:37 PM, Stephen Shaw wrote:
<br/>>=20
<br/>> > Thanks Paul,
<br/>> > Nicely written, optimistic, Paris is probably a necessa=
ry first step. As one TV critic pointed out, though, it may be 'legally=
binding' but there's no enforcement mechanism so it may go the way=
Kyoto eventually went.
<br/>> > May seems to be emphasizing that 1.5° was the agre=
ed future goal but the TV reports said it was 2°, with 1.5° the p=
ious hope. Let's hope it comes to something.=20
<br/>> > Thanks, a nice summary nonetheless.
<br/>> > Steve=20
<br/>> >=20
<br/>> > ________________________________________
<br/>> > From: Paul Ruggles [cpruggles@eastlink.ca]
<br/>> > Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 9:23 PM
<br/>> > To: Stephen Shaw
<br/>> > Subject: Re: May's report
<br/>> >=20
<br/>> > Here you go Steve - Paul
<br/>> >=20
<br/>> >=20
<br/>> > Elizabeth May's Report on the Paris Climate Agreeme=
nt
<br/>> >=20
<br/>> >=20
<br/>> > "The morning after 13 days - 3 all nighters=E2=80=
=A6And the Paris Agreement is accepted. The COP21 decision is agreed. What =
does it all mean?
<br/>> >=20
<br/>> > I have been working on climate for the last 29 years. I=
n that time I have seen lip service from most politicians, courage from a f=
ew politicians, venality from some corporations (Exxon come to mind), leade=
rship from others. I have witnessed opportunity after opportunity squandere=
d for political expediency. Agreements signed and then ignored. Overall we =
have procrastinated and lost decades when we could have averted the climate=
crisis nearly entirely.
<br/>> >=20
<br/>> > Now we are in it. With loss of life and devastating dro=
ughts and heat waves, extreme weather events, sea level rise and loss of Ar=
ctic ice and permafrost. No longer are we arguing about a future problem. W=
e have already changed the climate, so the debate of 2015 is =E2=80=9Ccan w=
e avoid the very worst of the climate crisis? Can we ensure the survival of=
human civilization? Can we save millions of species?=E2=80=9D To do so req=
uires transitioning off fossil fuels.
<br/>> >=20
<br/>> > You will undoubtedly hear some denounce the Paris Agree=
ment for what it does not do. It does not respond with sufficient urgency. =
It does not use the levers available to governments to craft a treaty that =
is enforceable with trade sanctions to add some teeth. Those criticisms are=
fair. As trade lawyer Steven Shrybman said more than a decade ago =E2=80=
=9CIf governments cared as much about climate as they do about protecting i=
ntellectual property rights, we would have laws that require carbon reducti=
on in every country on earth.=E2=80=9D
<br/>> >=20
<br/>> > Nevertheless, the Paris Agreement is an historic and po=
tentially life-saving agreement. It does more than many of us expected when=
the conference opened on November 30. It will be legally binding. It sets =
a long term temperature goal of no more than 1.5 degrees as far safer than =
the (also hard to achieve) goal of no more than 2 degrees. In doing so, it =
may save the lives of millions. It may lead to the survival of many small n=
ations close to sea level. It may give our grandchildren a far more stable =
climate and thus a more prosperous and healthy society. It clearly means th=
e world has accepted that most known reserves of fossil fuels must stay in =
the ground.
<br/>> >=20
<br/>> > It is absolutely true that Canada announcing support fo=
r 1.5 degrees mid-way through the conference made a huge difference in keep=
ing that target in the treaty. I heard that from friends and contacts aroun=
d the world.
<br/>> >=20
<br/>> > To avoid 1.5 requires immediate action. Unfortunately, =
the treaty is only to take effect in 2020 (after it is ratified by 55 count=
ries, collectively representing 55% of world GHG emissions). We have built =
into the treaty mandato