Norway Breaks Impasse at Bangkok Climate Talks

What a difference a day makes.

After filing a rather dismal story yesterday on the progress here in Bangkok at the United Nation's summit on climate change, there has been a significant development today with Norway set to announce that it is committing to a 40% reduction in their greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. This target is based on 1990 levels, which is a significant deal.

Why is this significant?

Because Norway is the first developed nation to make any solid commitment on this front and it has the potential to break through a major impasse. Up until this point developed nations - like the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, France and Japan - have been unwilling to bring anything to the table on this point.

Bard Lahn from Friends of the Earth Norway offers a brief explanation:

Norway's announcement today puts Canada, one of the largest per-capita emitters of greenhouse gas in the world and the largest exporter of oil to the United States, in a difficult position as they have avoided any commitments with the excuse that Northern regions are in a much tougher spot when it comes to GHG reductions.

Dale Marshall from the Suzuki Foundation - a large Canadian environmental organization - explains:

Keep up on everything going on at the Bangkok talks and the upcoming meetings in Barcelona and Copenhagen on the International Climate Action Network's Eco Digital blog.

Here's a video interview with Norway's Chief Negotiator produced by a group of intrepid youth from the Adopt a Negotiator program:

Follow Kevin Grandia on Twitter: www.twitter.com/kgrandia

Comments

[scottyknows]

04:50 PM on 10/09/2009

Well, they pledged, did they? With actual words? No action, but intent?

That merits a Nobel Peace Prize, in these parts.

[realtorgal]

06:51 PM on 10/08/2009

http://www.planetware.com/picture/usa-rabbit-peak-skilift-stop-at-las-vegas-resort-us-nvlv428.htm

This ski resort opened up early and for what it is worth is not a snow job but the real deal. The Inconvenient Truth is that Mother Nature does not always cooperate with politicans with anti-capitalistic agendas!

[realtorgal]

06:36 PM on 10/08/2009

The climate is freezing earlier than it has in 40 years . Ski resorts in Colorado are opening up early. An utumnal storm in Idaho forced "public option " schools to shut down.

The owners of ski resorts failed to recognize the climatological chaos that is causing the melting of snow and ice that is in turn setting off an avalanche of impending worldwide doom.

Look at Vegas. The Las Vegas Ski and Snowboard Resort is open for business earlier than ever before and business is booming. http://www.planetware.com/picture/usa-rabbit-peak-skilift-stop-at-las-vegas-resort-us-nvlv428.htm

The stark realities of FREEZING TEMPS at Rabbit Peak, Nevada!

Check out the pile of white freezing froth at Arapahoe Basin and Loveland Colorado. Looks like Mother Nature threw a snowball of facts this autumn at the Inconvenient Truth!

While we wait for the caps and swell the levels of the oceans, we might as well head out West and ski.

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/donna-joseph/it-isnt-easy-being-green_b_309954.html

[Javani]

03:46 PM on 10/08/2009

Whatever.

Agreements on carbon cuts, in percentages, are bets pricing carbon credits in the future. The Norway government has likely invested its petrodollars heavily in carbon derivatives.

[sethdayal]

02:37 PM on 10/08/2009

Canada could "green" up the Tar Sands quite a bit by using nuclear steam instead of natural gas for producing the oil - about 12 gigawatts of reactors to do the trick. Would be a great start to a GHG free Canadian nuclear industry and energy market.

The freed up natural gas would be used to fuel Canadian vehicles inexpensively following Utah's example. The entire cost would be covered by ending Canada's use of crude oil as transportation fuel

For various reasons Canada's PM loves global warming and he certainly doesn't want it to stop. Obama is simply misinformed on how to do it.

India has already committed to 450 gigawatts and China to 120 of nukes and are now the front of the fight against global warming.

Canada would need 150 gigawatts of nukes and the United States 2000 to eliminate GHG production. The Republicans in the Senate are holding out for a miniscule 100 gigawatts in the climate bill, but its a start.

The US needs to stop being a millstone dragging down China and India's global warming efforts, show some pride in something other than its war machine, and get on track.

[whatbox]

01:46 PM on 10/08/2009

Well done Norway! It's good to see someone demonstrating some leadership by making the first move. Hopefully more countries will follow.

Unfortunately Canada has a conservative government right now (which is a bit ironic considering that a majority of Canadians are progressive), which means that Harper (like Bush) is unlikely to agree to any meaningful emissions cuts. Harper has close ties to the oil & gas industry and will most likely serve their short-term interests rather than the long-term interests of Canadians and everyone else.

[Richard2]

12:38 PM on 10/08/2009

Impressive proposal from Norway. Especially as Norway doesn't appear to be threatened by any sea level rise from global warming. The long term mean sea level data from the harbor at Oslo is a 1.5 feet per 100 year decline in sea level. No signs of global warming at the harbor in Oslo.

[realpolitic]

09:13 PM on 10/08/2009

But scientists In Norway and anywhere well tell you that Norwegian waters have risen 8 inches in the last 120 years, as the rest of the earth's waters have. So where did your analysis go wrong?

[Richard2]

11:19 PM on 10/08/2009

My analysis isn't wrong. My information came from NOAA's tides and currents website. It has tide data from its many stations around the U.S., plus additional data from other countries around the world. http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends.html

The tide station for Oslo indicates a long term decline at a rate of 1.5 feet per century. The tide station at Stockholm also shows a long term decline. The tide station in Copenhagen, Denmark, has a long term uptrend which equates to only 2 inches of increase over 100 years. A 2 inch increase over 100 years isn't a threat to anyone.

[realpolitic]

02:41 AM on 10/09/2009

Well, sea levels have risen 10 to 25 cm over the last 120 years. This range equals 5 to 10 inches. Arctic waters have warmed the most on earth and due to thermal expansion alone would contribute to Norway sea level rise.

But being a non-scientist I guess you have no idea. How did you cancel out for the effects of glacial rebound when considering tide station data since land mass is rising here more than anywhere else with the retreat of the glaciers. If the land has risen 15 feet behind the glacial retreat like it has in many parts of Alaska, would good is tide station data? Can you get past your cherrypicked generaliizations?

[Kevin Grandia]

08:54 AM on 10/08/2009

I really think the story in Copenhagen will be Canada - with Bush out, they're the only hold-outs in the room. Would suggest watching for their stance on the baseline year for cuts - everyone is pushing for 1990 levels as the baseline year, while Canada is holding out for 2005.

[vlm1948]

08:33 AM on 10/08/2009

Good for Norway, they are very progressive.

[pinkibus]

03:49 AM on 10/08/2009

Go Norway. Hopefully Canada will get a kick where it hurts the most and give up its outrageously irresponsible Athabasca Tar Sands development where it takes 1.5 BTUs to produce one BTU of oil. It makes one sick to even think of the immorality and the stupidity of the whole project. but then Harper is a lot like Bush.