DOCSLIB.ORG

Climate Change As a Knowledge Controversy: Investigating Debates Over Science and Policy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Climate Change As a Knowledge Controversy: Investigating Debates Over Science and Policy Climate change as a knowledge controversy: Investigating debates over science and policy Amelia Sharman A thesis submitted to the Department of Geography and Environment of the London School of Economics and Political Science for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, September 2015 Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of the author. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 77,072 words. Statement of conjoint work I confirm that Chapters 4 and 5 were jointly co-authored with Dr Candice Howarth and I contributed 50% of this work. I confirm that Chapter 7 was jointly co-authored with Dr Richard Perkins and I contributed 50% of this work. 2 Abstract Understanding climate change as a knowledge controversy, this thesis provides new insights into the form, value and impact of the climate change debate on science and policy processes. Based on 99 interviews in New Zealand and the United Kingdom as well as social network analysis, it provides an original contribution to knowledge by identifying previously unknown sites of knowledge contestation within the climate change debate, in addition to contributory factors, and potential solutions to, debate polarisation. It also addresses a fundamental gap in the literature regarding the impact of controversy on the production of scientific knowledge and policy decision-making. This thesis comprises five standalone papers (Chapters 2-6) which together explore climate change as a knowledge controversy using frameworks from science and technology studies, sociology and geography. Chapter 2 finds that the most central blogs within the climate sceptical blogosphere predominantly focus on the scientific element of the climate debate. It argues that by acting as an alternative public site of expertise, the blogosphere may be playing a central role in perpetuating doubt regarding the scientific basis for climate change policymaking. Chapter 3 suggests that the binary and dualistic format of labels used within the climate debate such as “denier” or “alarmist” contribute towards polarisation by reducing possibilities for constructive dialogue. Chapter 4 investigates rationales for debate participation and argues that identifying and emphasising commonalities between previously polarised individuals may serve to reduce antagonism within the climate change debate. Chapter 5 investigates the impact of controversy on the production of scientific knowledge and finds that climate scientists identify substantial impacts on their agency as scientists, but not on scientific practice. It argues that this distinction indicates that boundary- making may be understood as a more active and explicit process under conditions of controversy. Finally, Chapter 6 introduces the concept of post-decisional logics of inaction, emphasising the role of place in determining the influence of controversial knowledge claims on climate change policymaking. These findings make explicit the underlying politics of knowledge inherent within the climate change debate, and emphasise the need for a more attentive consideration of the role of knowledge, place and performativity in contested science and policy environments. 3 Acknowledgements This thesis would not exist without my excellent supervisor Richard Perkins, who has been incredibly supportive, both academically and personally, throughout the entire PhD process—I could not have asked for a better supervisor. I am tremendously and sincerely grateful for all the effort you put into me and my work. Thank you also to Michael Mason, my review supervisor, and the other staff members from the Department of Geography and Environment and the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment (GRI) for your insightful questions, advice and comments on my research. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank my viva examiners, Professor David Demeritt and Professor Reiner Grundmann, for their helpful comments and suggestions. Thank you to Candice Howarth—while wrestling our papers into submission took some time, it was invaluable to learn exactly what it means to co-author and it has done my planning and project management skills no end of good. Hopefully there will be many more such occasions in the future. I am extremely thankful to all those who participated in this research, either as interviewees or those who helped me access relevant resources and information, as without their generous donations of time and willingness to talk, much of this research would not have been possible. The insightful comments and suggestions from the anonymous reviewers who generously gave their time to improve the papers submitted for external peer review as part of this thesis are also very gratefully acknowledged. The changes were invariably for the better and were extremely useful in honing my writing over the course of the PhD. Thank you to LSE for granting me an LSE PhD Scholarship, without which I would not have been able to carry out this research. Financial and other support from the Department of Geography and Environment, GRI, and the Research and Development Management Association is also very gratefully acknowledged. To all my fellow GRI PhD students and staff—there could not have been a lovelier group of people with whom to spend four years. I have made some true friendships and will always look back on my time at GRI with real affection. Thank you for being academically encouraging, but also bringing such a sense of fun and camaraderie to work every day. 4 Thank you to the wonderful people involved with LSE Bees. Caring for our bees was the perfect antidote to any stressful PhD moments and along with everything I have learned academically while at LSE, learning the value of, and how to care for bees is something I will take with me forever. I am eternally thankful to my parents, Christine and Geoff. Your unwavering support for my education has been invaluable for getting me to where I am today and there is no way I could have achieved this goal without your love and guidance. Finally, and most especially, thank you to my husband Adrian. Your constant encouragement and love has been fundamental to making this PhD a reality. You cracked the whip and kept me on the straight and narrow (who knows what I could achieve with an nth of your self-discipline!) but were also so supportive and I knew that you were there with me every step of the way. Any remaining errors remain solely and entirely my own. 5 Table of contents Abstract .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Table of contents ............................................................................................................................................ 6 List of tables ................................................................................................................................................... 10 List of figures ................................................................................................................................................. 10 List of frequently used abbreviations ................................................................................................. 12 Chapter 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 13 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 13 1.1.1 Research motivation ..................................................................................................... 15 1.2 Research aims and thesis structure.................................................................................. 17 1.2.1 Research location ........................................................................................................... 23 1.3 Notes on thesis format ........................................................................................................... 25 1.4 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 25 1.5 Notes .............................................................................................................................................. 26 1.6 References ................................................................................................................................... 27 Chapter 2. Mapping the climate sceptical blogosphere .............................................................. 34 2.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nico Stehr Address
    CURRICULUM VITAE PERSONAL DATA Name: Nico Stehr Address: Karl Mannheim Professor for Cultural Studies Zeppelin University Am Seemooser Horn 20 D-88045 Friedrichshafen I Lake Constance Germany Telephone office (+) 49 7541 6009-1341 Fax Office (+) 49 7541 6009-1199 Tel priv. 49-7522-3773 Fax priv. 49-7522-914822 E-mail: [email protected] EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND 1962 Abitur: Pestalozzischule II, Bremerhaven, Germany 1962-1967 Universität zu Köln: Economics, Sociology, Law, Social Policy, Fiscal Theory and Policy 1967 Diplom-Volkswirt (sozialwissenschaftlicher Richtung) Universität zu Köln (Gesamtnote: Sehr gut) 1967 University of Oregon, USA: Graduate Study in Sociology 1970 Ph.D. (Sociology): University of Oregon CURRENT POSITION Karl Mannheim Professor for Cultural Studies, Zeppelin University, Germany (and) Fellow, Center for Advanced Cultural Studies, Essen, Germany TEACHING EXPERIENCE 2002-2003 Paul F. Lazarsfeld Professor, Human- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät, Universität Wien, Austria 2001 Alcatel Professor, TH Darmstadt, Germany 2 1977-2000 Visiting Professorships: Universität Wien, Universität Zürich, Universität Konstanz, Universität Augsburg, Universität Duisburg. 1984-1985 Eric-Voegelin-Professor, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany 1979-1997 Professor of Sociology, Department of Sociology, The University of Alberta, Canada 1974-1979 Associate Professor of Sociology, Department of Sociology, The University of Alberta 1970-1974 Assistant Professor of Sociology, Department of Sociology, The University of
    [Show full text]
  • The Heartland Institute Under Attack Global Warming Fever Drives Scientists to Desperation
    GREEN WATCH BANNER TO BE INSERTED HERE The Heartland Institute Under Attack Global Warming Fever Drives Scientists to Desperation By Matt Patterson Summary: It was Valentine’s Day, but it was no love letter. On February 14, 2012, renowned environmental scientist Peter Gleick transmitted to a group of liberal bloggers and journalists documents that he obtained from the Heartland Institute, a Chicago-based think-tank specializing in environmental policy. Gleick’s goal: destroy Heartland, a group that has mobilized scien- tists who are skeptical about global warm- ing. Gleick faked his identity and pretended to be a Heartland board member to obtain some of the documents. One of the docu- Dr. Peter Gleick - Thief ments that Gleick sent was a fake, created Yale and received his Ph.D. in Energy and social equity.” In 2010 the Pacifi c by Gleick or parties unknown to prove what and Resources from the University of Institute received more than $2.2 million wasn’t true. Gleick’s reckless, unethical and, California, Berkeley in 1986. He is in grants and contributions from a mix of most likely, criminal action shows just how currently president of the Pacifi c Institute foundations (e.g. Hewlett, Packard, Robert desperate green activists are to prop up their for Studies in Development, Environment, Wood Johnson, Rockefeller Brothers, overblown claims about global warming. and Security, which he co-founded in Rockefeller) and government agencies r. Peter Gleick was a trusted 1987. (e.g. Sacramento County and the Florida and respected scientist, with a Dcareer studded with honors and The Oakland, California-based research May 2012 awards.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of the United States
    No. 18-1451 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- NATIONAL REVIEW, INC., Petitioner, v. MICHAEL E. MANN, Respondent. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The District Of Columbia Court Of Appeals --------------------------------- --------------------------------- MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE AND BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE SOUTHEASTERN LEGAL FOUNDATION IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER --------------------------------- --------------------------------- KIMBERLY S. HERMANN HARRY W. MACDOUGALD SOUTHEASTERN LEGAL Counsel of Record FOUNDATION CALDWELL, PROPST & 560 W. Crossville Rd., Ste. 104 DELOACH, LLP Roswell, GA 30075 Two Ravinia Dr., Ste. 1600 Atlanta, GA 30346 (404) 843-1956 hmacdougald@ cpdlawyers.com Counsel for Amicus Curiae June 2019 ================================================================ COCKLE LEGAL BRIEFS (800) 225-6964 WWW.COCKLELEGALBRIEFS.COM 1 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 37.2, Southeast- ern Legal Foundation (SLF) respectfully moves for leave to file the accompanying amicus curiae brief in support of the Petition. Petitioner has consented to the filing of this amicus curiae brief. Respondent Michael Mann has withheld consent to the filing of this amicus curiae brief. Accordingly, this motion for leave to file is necessary. SLF is a nonprofit, public interest law firm and policy center founded in 1976 and organized under the laws of the State of Georgia. SLF is dedicated to bring- ing before the courts issues vital to the preservation of private property rights, individual liberties, limited government, and the free enterprise system. SLF regularly appears as amicus curiae before this and other federal courts to defend the U.S. Consti- tution and the individual right to the freedom of speech on political and public interest issues.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hartwell Paper a New Direction for Climate Policy After the Crash of 2009
    The Hartwell Paper A new direction for climate policy after the crash of 2009 Hartwell House, Buckinghamshire, where the co-authors conceived this paper, 2-4 February 2010 May 2010 22th April 2010 THE HARTWELL PAPER: FINAL TEXT EMBARGOED UNTIL 11 MAY 2010 0600 BST The co-authors Professor Gwyn Prins, Mackinder Programme for the Study of Long Wave Events, London School of Economics & Political Science, England Isabel Galiana, Department of Economics & GEC3, McGill University, Canada Professor Christopher Green, Department of Economics, McGill University, Canada Dr Reiner Grundmann, School of Languages & Social Sciences, Aston University, England Professor Mike Hulme, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, England Professor Atte Korhola, Department of Environmental Sciences/ Division of Environmental Change and Policy, University of Helsinki, Finland Professor Frank Laird, Josef Korbel School of International Studies, University of Denver, USA Ted Nordhaus, The Breakthrough Institute, Oakland, California, USA Professor Roger Pielke Jnr, Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Colorado, USA Professor Steve Rayner, Institute for Science, Innovation and Society, University of Oxford, England Professor Daniel Sarewitz, Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes, Arizona State University, USA Michael Shellenberger, The Breakthrough Institute, Oakland, California, USA Professor Nico Stehr, Karl Mannheim Chair for Cultural Studies, Zeppelin University, Germany Hiroyuki Tezuka , General Manager, Climate
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Storms & Droughts
    BEYOND STORMS & DROUGHTS: The Psychological Impacts of Climate Change JUNE 2014 2 Beyond Storms & Droughts: The Psychological Impacts of Climate Change ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Authors Susan Clayton Whitmore-Williams Professor of Psychology College of Wooster Christie Manning Visiting Assistant Professor, Environmental Studies Macalester College Caroline Hodge Associate Manager, Communications & Research ecoAmerica Reviewers ecoAmerica & the American Psychological Association thank the following reviewers who provided valuable feedback on drafts of this report: Elke Weber, Janet Swim, & Sascha Petersen. Partners The American Psychological Association, in Washington, D.C., is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States. APA's membership includes more than 130,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 54 subfields of psychology and affiliations with 60 state, territorial and Canadian provincial associations, APA works to advance the creation, communication and application of psychological knowl- edge to benefit society and improve people's lives. ecoAmerica grows the base of popular support for climate solutions in America with research-driven marketing, partnerships, and national programs that connect with Americans' core values to shift personal and civic choices and behaviors. MomentUs is ecoAmerica's newest initiative. MomentUs is a strategic organizing initiative designed to build a critical mass of institutional leadership, public support, political will, and collective action for climate solutions in the United States. MomentUs is working to develop and support a network of trusted leaders and institutions who will lead by example and engage their stakeholders to do the same, leading to a shift in society that will put America on an irrefutable path to a clean energy, ultimately leading toward a more sustainable and just future.
    [Show full text]
  • Meet the Man Who Has Exposed the Great Climate Change Con Trick
    Meet the man who has exposed the great climate change con trick JAMES DELINGPOLE SPECTATOR.CO.UK 11 JULY 2009 James Delingpole talks to Professor Ian Plimer, the Australian geologist, whose new book shows that ‘anthropogenic global warming’ is a dangerous, ruinously expensive fiction, a ‘first-world luxury’ with no basis in scientific fact. Shame on the publishers who rejected the book. Imagine how wonderful the world would be if man-made global warming were just a figment of Al Gore’s imagination. No more ugly wind farms to darken our sunlit uplands. No more whopping electricity bills, artificially inflated by EU-imposed carbon taxes. No longer any need to treat each warm, sunny day as though it were some terrible harbinger of ecological doom. And definitely no need for the $7.4 trillion cap and trade (carbon-trading) bill — the largest tax in American history — which President Obama and his cohorts are so assiduously trying to impose on the US economy. Imagine no more, for your fairy godmother is here. His name is Ian Plimer, Professor of Mining Geology at Adelaide University, and he has recently published the landmark book Heaven And Earth, which is going to change forever the way we think about climate change. ‘The hypothesis that human activity can create global warming is extraordinary because it is contrary to validated knowledge from solar physics, astronomy, history, archaeology and geology,’ says Plimer, and while his thesis is not new, you’re unlikely to have heard it expressed with quite such vigour, certitude or wide-ranging scientific authority.
    [Show full text]
  • A Conservative Approach to Environmental Law: Be Data Driven
    Florida State University College of Law Scholarship Repository Scholarly Publications Spring 2013 A Conservative Approach to Environmental Law: Be Data Driven Shi-Ling Hsu Florida State University College of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/articles Part of the Environmental Law Commons, and the Law and Politics Commons Recommended Citation Shi-Ling Hsu, A Conservative Approach to Environmental Law: Be Data Driven, 23 DUKE ENVTL. L. & POL'Y F. 281 (2013), Available at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/articles/494 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scholarly Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A CONSERVATIVE APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: BE DATA DRIVEN SHI-LING HSU† Why is it that if you characterize yourself as “very conservative,” you are twenty times more likely to be dismissive of the threat of climate change than if you consider yourself “very liberal”?1 Or that if you are a Republican, you are four-and-a-half times more likely to be dismissive about climate change than alarmed, and if you are a Democrat, you are seven times more likely to be alarmed than dismissive?2 How is it that political beliefs are so strongly predictive of beliefs about a purely scientific issue? Climate change does not touch upon closely held theological views, like evolution, and climate change is not an ultimately unresolvable moral issue, like reproductive rights. Simply put, either we are changing the Earth’s climate, or we are not.
    [Show full text]
  • NOT for GREENS 2 Not for Greens 3
    1 NOT FOR GREENS 2 Not For Greens 3 NOT FOR GREENS He who sups with the Devil should have a long spoon Ian Plimer Foreword by Dr Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace Connor Court Publishing 4 Not For Greens Connor Court Publishing Pty Ltd Copyright © Ian Plimer 2014 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. This book contains material protected under International and Federal Copyright Laws and Treaties. Any unauthorised reprint or use of this material is prohibited. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system without express written permission from the publisher. PO Box 224W Ballarat VIC 3350 [email protected] www.connorcourt.com ISBN: 978....... (pbk.) Cover design by ... Printed in Australia 5 CONTENTS 1: INTRODUCTION (This book is deliberately offensive) 1 Carbon dioxide and climate change 10 Earth history 10 • Life 11 • Mass extinctions 12 • Today’s ice age 14 • The future climate 16 Climate change 18 • Climate cycles 18 • Oceans 18 • Galactic cycles 19 • Super volcanoes 19 • The Sun 21 • Deniers 22 Planetary degassing and carbon dioxide 23 • Volcanic venting of carbon dioxide 23 • Carbon dioxide venting from depth 25 • Human emissions of carbon dioxide 26 • Laws of physics 27 • Recent events 28 • Pick your own climate 31 • How were measurements made? 32 • Hiding embarrassing data 33 • Antarctic and Arctic adventures 36 • Wild weather 38 • Ocean acidification 39 • Sea levels 40 • Computer climate
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Participation in a Techno-Scientific Controversy
    PARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE AND INSTITUTIONAL INNOVATION Participatory Governance and Institutional Innovation [PAGANINI] Contract No. CIT2-CT-2004-505791 . Deliverable Number 16 Work Package 6 _ GM Food THE ROLE OF PARTICIPATION IN A TECHNO-SCIENTIFIC CONTROVERSY Larry Reynolds and Bronislaw Szerszynski with Maria Kousis and Yannis Volakakis 6th EU Framework Programme for Research and Technology Participatory Governance and Institutional Innovation [PAGANINI] Contract No. CIT2-CT-2004-505791 . Deliverable Number 16 WORK PACKAGE 6 _ GM FOOD THE ROLE OF PARTICIPATION IN A TECHNO-SCIENTIFIC CONTROVERSY Larry Reynolds and Bronislaw Szerszynski with Maria Kousis and Yannis Volakakis 1 The Paganini Project Focussing on selected key areas of the 6th EU Framework Programme for Research and Technology, PAGANINI investigates the ways in which participatory practices contribute to problem solving in a number of highly contentious fields of EU governance. PAGANINI looks at a particular dynamic cluster of policy areas concerned with what we call “the politics of life”: medicine, health, food, energy, and environment. Under “politics of life” we refer to dimensions of life that are only to a limited extent under human control - or where the public has good reasons to suspect that there are serious limitations to socio-political control and steering. At the same time, “politics of life” areas are strongly connected to normative, moral and value-based factors, such as a sense of responsibility towards the non-human nature, future generations and/or one‟s
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change and Its Causes a Discussion About Some Key Issues
    Climate Change and Its Causes A Discussion About Some Key Issues Nicola Scafetta 1;2 1Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitor (ACRIM) Lab, Coronado, CA 92118, USA 2Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA. Abstract This article discusses the limits of the Anthropogenic Global Warming Theory advocated by the Intergov- ernmental Panel on Climate Change. A phenomenological theory of climate change based on the physical properties of the data themselves is proposed. At least 60% of the warming of the Earth observed since 1970 appears to be induced by natural cycles which are present in the solar system. A climatic stabilization or cooling until 2030-2040 is forecast by the phenomenological model. *************************************************************************************** This work is made of • An translation into English of the paper: Scafetta N., “Climate Change and Its causes: A Discussion about Some Key Issues,” La Chimica e l’Industria 1, p. 70-75 (2010); • Several additional supporting notes are added to the paper; • An extended appendix section part is added to cover several thematic issues to support particular topics addressed in the main paper. (not in this preprint) This work covers most topics presented by Scafetta at a seminar at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, DC USA, February 26, 2009. A video of the seminar is here: http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/vwpsw/360796B06E48EA0485257601005982A1#video Cite as: arXiv:1003.1554v1 [physics.geo-ph] 8 Mar 2010 Scafetta N., “Climate Change
    [Show full text]
  • Rhetoric for Becoming Otherwise
    The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School College of the Liberal Arts RHETORIC FOR BECOMING OTHERWISE: LIFE, LITERATURE, GENEALOGY, FLIGHT A Dissertation in English by Abram D. Anders © 2009 Abram D. Anders Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2009 ii The dissertation of Abram D. Anders was reviewed and approved* by the following: Richard M. Doyle Professor of English and Science, Technology and Society Dissertation Advisor Chair of Committee Jeffrey T. Nealon Liberal Arts Research Professor of English Xiaoye You Assistant Professor of English and Asian Studies Robert A. Yarber, Jr. Distinguished Professor of Art Robert R. Edwards Edwin Erle Sparks Professor of English and Comparative Literature Department of English Graduate Director *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School. iii ABSTRACT Rhetoric for Becoming Otherwise begins with the Isocratean premise that thought, speech, writing are best understood as bridges between the already said of language and the emerging circumstances that are the occasions for their production. This argument is rehearsed across a variety of domains and instances following Isocrates exhortation that the rhetorician or practitioner of philosophia can only model the movement of discourse without expecting to provide any “true knowledge” or “absolute theory” for how to encounter the problematics of an endlessly deferred present. As a matter of rhetoric, becoming otherwise is the continually renewed task of creating something new from the resources of language and for the demands of an ever deferred present—Presocratics versus Classicists (Chapter 1). As a matter of health, becoming otherwise is the necessity of overcoming limitation and suffering in order to achieve new norms of health and pursue the ever changing opportunities of a self‐developing capacity for producing new capacities—Normativity versus Normalization (Chapter 2).
    [Show full text]
  • Albert Jacobs
    Climate Science Newsletters By: Albert Jacobs ___________________________________________________________________________ CliSci # 82 2011-12-21 Four Sceptic Scientists testify before the Canadian Senate Committee. The Senate Energy & Environment Committee Hearing with Drs. Ross McKitrick, Ian Clark, Jan Veizer and Tim Patterson took place on December 15th 2011. The video is now on YouTube at: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW19pPFfIyg#t=65> ------------------------------ The COP 17 aftermath The conclusions of COP 17 are found on <http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011//eng/l04.pdf> In the words of Kumi Naidoo, Greenpeace International Executive Director: “The grim news is that the blockers lead by the US have succeeded in inserting a vital get- out clause that could easily prevent the next big climate deal being legally binding. If that loophole is exploited it could be a disaster. And the deal is due to be implemented ‘from 2020′ leaving almost no room for increasing the depth of carbon cuts in this decade when scientists say we need emissions to peak,” “Right now the global climate regime amounts to nothing more than a voluntary deal that’s put off for a decade. This could take us over the two degree threshold where we pass from danger to potential catastrophe.” And on December 12th: <http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/12/12/canada-formally-withdrawig-from- kyoto-protocol/> Canada put a full stop after Jean Chrétien’s folly. We do not quote DeSmogBlog very often, but they seem to have blown their top: " Canada's decision to turn its back on its international obligations confirms yet again that Stephen Harper and his carbon cronies are securing a hellish future for generations to come.
    [Show full text]