The European Union is trying to reach an agreement at least with the US on a timetable for continuing the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol, without success
Last time, in Copenhagen, it was the Climategate lies that prevented an agreement on reducing emissions. This time too there are problems that will prevent the warming from stopping. This is when the USA, India and China, the three countries that emit the largest amounts of carbon, oppose any setting of a timetable for the next agreement on global warming and in fact cause humanity to remain without any agreement to limit carbon emissions after the expiration of the Kyoto agreement.
The representatives of the European Union failed to get the backing of other industrialized countries to sign a road map to achieve the next climate agreement. The EU's climate commissioner, Connie Hedggard, said that China and India remained in the bloc against the agreement, and that the US was still undecided.
At the heart of the climate change response system is the need to reduce emissions. In 2010, governments agreed that emissions should be reduced so that the rise in global temperatures is stopped at 2 degrees Celsius more than in 1990.
on the conference website It is written that the goals of the conference and all the legal instruments that will derive from it is to stabilize the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at a level that will prevent harm to humanity. Such a level should be reached within a reasonable time frame to allow the ecosystem to adapt naturally to climate change, ensure that food production will not be affected and allow for sustainable economic development.
Christina Pigouacs, Secretary of the UN Framework Conference on Climate Change in Durban, says that the results of the conference should ensure that there is clarity regarding the existence of a second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol, and that the gap in the implementation of these commitments is reduced. Also, after the conference, there must be transparency regarding achieving twinning and structured and rule-based ways to meet the challenges of warming, and there must be clarity regarding the funding method that will gradually increase from now until 2020.
4 תגובות
I am not responsible for what commenters write.
In any case, the scientist who changed his mind received money from the denier organizations and therefore said what he said and like all the other deniers manipulated the data. The last decade is the hottest in history, and in fact all of the last 15 years are the hottest 15 years in history.
The hottest year so far was 2009. And of course there are natural changes, even after we have gone up a notch in the degree of heat of the earth. However, compared to the years before 1995, every year is warmer.
Thank you, father, you updated me... I did not know this story.
But the article you brought and the commenter Dotan's response say exactly the opposite... that Climategate exposed lies in publications on the side of warming. I don't understand something here? It is said that since 1995 there has been no warming and the IPCC hid the data, so their CEO resigned...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html
I appreciate that an assessment is made according to the data of production, transportation, deforestation, etc., and of course we know which energy source is used, therefore according to the percentage of the source of the total energy uses were gas, oil, etc. and based on this the carbon amounts are calculated. Much of this data is found in current government statistics.
Climategate lies - the lie that the word hacks revealed a conspiracy among scientists to change the data to show warming. The only truth was that they were tired of the harassers and they tried simply not to answer them or provide the information, and for that they were reprimanded. As you've seen in the responses so far, the deniers don't really understand the data and don't know how to read it properly but rather manipulate it and that's exactly what the scientists were afraid of.
Several committees looked into the issue and found no manipulation of the data.
But the deniers keep repeating the lie as if the scientists lied on purpose in the scientific field.
https://www.hayadan.org.il/ipcc-got-lessons-from-climategate-3005114/
https://www.hayadan.org.il/exposing-the-dirty-money-behind-fake-climate-science-0104107/
hi father
Do you have any idea how it was determined that the USA "emits carbon" more than Russia? What are the sources of "carbon emissions" anyway?
What "Climategate lies" did you write about in your article?