A climate policy agreement that won't hurt the economies of those who burn most of the fossil fuels... Burn baby burn....

From the ABC
Labor slams $100m green fund
The Federal Opposition has described the Government's $100 million commitment to a new regional climate partnership as a 'drop in the ocean'.

The Asia-Pacific climate summit has wrapped up in Sydney, affirming the central role of fossil fuels in regional development and announcing a plan for reducing emissions.

Prime Minister John Howard pledged a $100 million contribution, with $5 million to support the Asia-Pacific partnership on clean development and $95 million for collaborative projects with Australian involvement.

The money will be spent over five years.

Acting Opposition Leader Jenny Macklin says the Government has its priorities completely wrong.
"This is $100 million over five years - in other words only $20 million next year," she said.

"Compare that to the $55 million of taxpayers money that the Government has just wasted on its industrial relations advertising.

"They should be spending that money on making sure we have technology that really does clean up our emissions and reduce greenhouse gas."

---------------------------------
Gusspruik...
Your democracy was on the case quite a while back (late July, last year...). We knew Australia, the US, China, etc... were going to buy an expensive bucket for a drop in the ocean... while still setting the world on fire.... Nothing new here.

From the BBC

Booming nations 'threaten Earth'

Earth lacks the water, energy and agricultural land to allow China and India to attain Western living standards, a US think-tank has warned.

The Worldwatch Institute said the booming economies of China and India are "planetary powers that are shaping the global biosphere".

Its State of the World 2006 report said the two countries' high economic growth hid a reality of severe pollution.

It said the planet's resources could not keep pace with such growth.

Important choices
"The world's ecological capacity is simply insufficient to satisfy the ambitions of China, India, Japan, Europe and the United States as well as the aspirations of the rest of the world in a sustainable way," the report added

_________________________

Gusthinktank
This is quite a strange economic problem... The complexity of climate and dangers of aggressive behaviour are huge, including the hypocrisy of the Western nations (mostly through the gigantic US trade deficit with China) in helping China by buying its "cheap" produced goods, while facing the peril of borrowing more than we can repay unless we cheat massively on exchange rates.

But on the other hand, We have to acknowledge that the huge production is harming the planet (chemical spill, gigantic pollution problems, CO2 production increase, etc, all with no end in sight). Doing so some westerners are resenting the Chinese improvement in standard of living that soon could be better than in the west...

Promoting the betterment of the people of China by buying goods has been a "necessary" diplomatic way to contain a second revolution/ expansion of that country. But imagine China, present population of 1.4 billion (about five times that of the US population) reaching the same standard of living as the US. (presently burning 20 to 25 per cent of all the world's energy).. we are looking at a massive increase of CO2 despite all the containment we can think of... This standard of living feat of course, the Chinese are most likely to do within 15 years. By then containment of CO2 will have massively failed despite investments in "clean coal" technologies... the world will be burning by then the equivalent of 40,000 years of solar plant-making energy (the time to create coal and oil original woods) every single year.

Please note the figures released some time ago on this site in regard to electricity... Electricity represents only 10 per cent of the total energy consumption in the world. Cars, planes, steel making and many other human activities release most of the CO2. The focus on electricity and Nuclear Energy is thus a bogus furphy too. (see earlier blogs here to this effect with elaboration on the hidden dangers of nuclear "wastes"...). So, when the only major solution is to deflate our energy expenditure, we increase it while fiddling the books... and buying a bucket..

The UN has to come up with a firm plan... and the US will have to come to the table... un-seasonal nature might make sure of that....