...it seems like only certain people want to listen.

What the hell is wrong with the Conservatives, and the American politicians and media? This was a major story around the world yesterday, however it didn't even show up on the radar screen of American media. I honestly think Americans are convinced they are completely insulated from the effects of global climate change. More of those isolationist feelings, to be sure. They've believed that the entire world is against them and that everyone is wrong except for them. It is really disheartening to see this when you have doubts that humanity is smart enough to solve the biggest challenges our species has faced in thousands of years. It is further evidence that humans have neither the foresight or intelligence to be the rightful custodians of the planet. I'm ashamed to be human sometimes.

Blair calls for 'bold' action after stark climate change warning
Last Updated: Monday, October 30, 2006 | 12:56 PM ET
CBC News
Calling for "bold and decisive action," British Prime Minister Tony Blair has endorsed a new report that warns failure to act on climate change could trigger a worldwide economic slowdown along the same level as the Great Depression.

Written by former World Bank economist Sir Nicholas Stern at Blair's request, the 700-page report was released on Monday.

Speaking about the Stern review into climate change at the Royal Society in London, British Prime Minister Tony Blair called for bold and decisive action.
(CBC) "Our actions over the coming decades could create risks of major disruption to economic and social activity later in this century and in the next, on a scale similar to those associated with the great wars and the economic depression of the first half of the 20th century," says the report.

Blair quickly endorsed the report, saying the consequences of ignoring climate change would be disastrous.

"And this disaster is not set to happen in some science fiction future many years ahead, but in our lifetime," he said.

The report warns that unless the issue of climate change is immediately addressed, global economic growth could shrink by 20 per cent and cost the world economy close to $7 trillion US.

The report suggests other effects could include:

200 million new refugees as people are displaced by severe flooding or droughts.
Water shortages for one in six people.
A spike in world temperatures of up to 5 C.
Melting glaciers that could lead to water shortages.
The extinction of 20 to 40 per cent of wildlife species.
The international community must spend one per cent of global gross domestic product (GDP) to address the issue of climate change within 10 to 15 years, said Stern.

"Action is urgent since stocks of greenhouse gases are rapidly approaching dangerous levels," said the report.

Many environmentalists believe capping greenhouse gas emissions is key to tackling climate change.

Among the measures Stern advises are stabilizing greenhouse gas levels by decarbonizing the power sector by as much as 70 per cent through new energy sources, eliminating deforestation and cutting transportation emissions, especially from aircraft.

Stephen Smith, an economic professor at University College London, said the report is a "solid review of the range of things that could happen" if climate change is left unchecked.

"I think it's a very serious and … thoroughly argued report with … very detailed and serious evidence," said Smith. "I think it will have a big impact on thinking in Europe and elsewhere."

The report is expected to increase pressure on the Bush administration — which never approved the Kyoto Protocol climate change accord — to step up its efforts to fight global warming. Washington says it can't buy into a deal that hasn't been signed by two of the world's biggest polluters, India and China.

Kyoto targets call for a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions of 5.2 per cent from 1990 levels by 2012. Canada agreed to a slightly higher target of six per cent, a goal the federal government says it can't reach.

Blair, who will leave office within a year, called for "bold and decisive action" on the issue.

"The Stern review has done a crucial job. It has demolished the last remaining argument for inaction in the face of climate change," said Blair.

"We know now urgent action will prevent catastrophe and investment in preventing it now will pay us back many times."

Blair called for Europe to cut its carbon dioxide emissions by 30 per cent by 2020 and 60 per cent by 2050. The British government is considering new "green taxes" on cheap airline flights, fuel and high-emission vehicles.

Blair also said his government has enlisted the support of former U.S. vice-president Al Gore to promote the issue in North America. Gore recently produced An Inconvenient Truth, a documentary on climate change.

The report comes days before United Nations talks on climate change in Nairobi on Nov. 6, which are aimed at finding a successor to Kyoto.

I am impressed that Tony Blair - despite all of his bad decisions - and the British people have taken the initiative on this and are forerunners in meeting their Kyoto obligations. Quite a bit different take on things than the American and Canadian governments. Wow - the appearance of attempting to make an effort. Amazing.

UK calls for bold environmental reforms

Raising the stakes in the global-warming dispute with the US and China, Britain called yesterday for “bold and decisive action” to cut carbon emissions after issuing a sweeping report warning that the Earth faces a calamity unless something is done urgently. The British government also hired former US vp Al Gore, who has emerged as a powerful environmental spokesman, to advise it on climate change - a clear indication of Prime Minister Tony Blair's growing dissatisfaction with US environmental policy. The 700-page report argues that environmentalism and economic growth can go hand in hand in the battle against global warming. Prepared by Sir Nicholas Stern, a senior government economist, it represents a huge contrast to the US government's policies.

On a local level, Richmond upon Thames, one of the prettiest and greenest of London's boroughs has a less honourable distinction: It is one of London's highest carbon-emitting areas. Town authorities blame the long rows of gleaming SUVs parallel-parked in front of nearly every house. In the first scheme of its kind in Britain, municipal leaders have announced plans for what is effectively a carbon tax on residents who drive gas-guzzling vehicles by charging them hefty prices to park outside their own homes. Someone who used to pay about $200 for a single car now faces fees up to $620 a year, while those who own a second high-emissions car would pay a total of $1,500 annually. Serge Lourie, leader of the Richmond upon Thames Council, said the plans are designed to encourage people to buy fuel-efficient cars, which won't be charged as much. “What we're hoping is it will make people think seriously about what they are driving,” Mr. Lourie said. “When they come to renew their permits, hopefully they will think about how much it costs and they will move to more efficient cars which burn less.”
(Globe and Mail 061031)

...and the smugness of some Canadian groups is appalling. They think Canada is pulling its weight because our carbon emissions are negative according to the Kyoto protocol's accounting? The only reason we appear to have a negative environmental burden in Canada is because we're sparsely populated on a huge landmass with a plethora of natural resources. It's not because we are more conservative in our energy use or consumption than any other developed nation -- it's only because of a 'natural accident' that we are in this situation. Americans surpassed us on consumption of energy per capita only a few years ago - probably around the time Hummers became the new soccer-mom vehicle. This smug attitude is embarrassing and destructive.

WWF report wrong about Canada's 'print'

Opinion -- Canada is one of the worst environmental nations of the world. And also one of the best. Those are among the mixed messages that can be taken from last week's report from the World Wildlife Fund. According to the Living Planet Report 2006, Canadians' per capita ecological footprint is the fourth-highest in the world. The document states that the planet's resources are being used faster than they can be renewed -- by about 25%. One of the predominant features of the report (and the WWF press release) is a list of worst-offender countries ranked by size of their per capita ecological footprints. Seven of the top 10 are Western nations: the US, Finland, Canada, Australia, Sweden, New Zealand and Norway. (The others are the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Estonia.) This list easily confirms the prevailing world view of the international environmental intelligentsia that the world's environmental problems are the fault of Western industrialized countries, each of which owes a debt to developing nations. This idea has found its way into a multitude of international programs and instruments (including the Kyoto Protocol, which places the initial burden of reducing greenhouse gases solely upon the shoulders of the developed world), and has become so well-established that it is now accepted as self-evident.

But it isn't true. On a careful reading of the report, Canada is one of a minority of countries that lives within its biological capacity. In fact, the same can be said for six of the seven Western nations in the list above (the US is the exception). In other words, even given the large amount of environmental resources consumed by each of their citizens, the total ecological load in these countries is still smaller than what their natural resources are able to provide. These are not the nations imposing massive environmental externalities on the rest of the world. The US is in ecological deficit, but so are China, India and the oil-producing countries of the Middle East. These nations create significant environmental burdens upon the globe because their impacts exceed the capacity of their own ecosystems.

Canada's membership in the club of ecological "creditors" should not be misconstrued as having achieved a good environmental record. Canada's environmental laws are incomplete, poorly enforced, provide an extraordinary degree of political discretion and subject the Canadian population to a multitude of hazards. The country conserves its resources poorly and subsidizes environmentally detrimental industries. It is in ecological credit not because of superior environmental governance or resource management skills, but because it has a small population in a large, resource-rich territory. That's an accident of history. But Canada and these other developed countries are not the main culprits for global environmental problems. The findings described in the WWF report should lead to the conclusion that the conflict between ecosystem capacity and human civilization is a profound and vexing problem that requires imagination and principled thinking. The international blame game does not help with this task -- especially when it's wrong.
(National Post 061031)