Categories

Latest News

designer shop online

designer shop online ?Snowden responds to critics well, this is one of the options thats always been open to, to go to the unhcr and register as a refugee here. this place was rife with rumors all this afternoon g designer shop online oing round legal circles saying that he

online stores for women

online stores for women ?The Free Dictionary Language Forums But I dont think I must. And, at the same time, both corporations pay their Russian employees less than their US and EU colleagues. I can imagine plenty of businesses finding a gold mine in Russia and not bothering about fair

shopping outlet online

shopping outlet online ?Microsoft launches new Office SEATTLE launched its new Office software on Tuesday, featuring constantly updated, online access to documents from a range of devices as the world largest software company attempts to tailor its most profitable product to a mobile generation. The new Office suite of applications desktop

womens online store

womens online store ?Europe credit ratings slashed Standard Poors swept debtridden Europe with punishing credit downgrades yesterday, stripping France of its coveted AAA status and dropping Italy even lower. Germany retain womens online store ed its topnotch rating, but Portugals debt was consigned to junk. In all, S which last year

designer clothes online shopping

designer clothes online shopping ?stocks falls as investors await European Central Bank meeting stocks fell, after the Standard Poor 500 Index jumped the most in a month, as investors awaited a European Central Bank policy meeting tomorrow, offsetting corporate earnings that beat analysts estimates. a yoyo market, Tom Wirth, who helps

online shopping stores

online shopping stores ?Asia stocks jump as US budget deal appears near lawmakers edged toward a deal to stop hundreds of billions of dollars in automatic tax increases and spending cuts from taking effect that could throw the world biggest economy off a socalled fiscal cliff. Senate passed an emergency

bench outlet

bench outlet ?Euro zone deal lifts stocks Twentysix of the 27 European Union leaders on Friday agreed to pursue stricter budget rules for the single currency area and also to have euro zone states and others provide up to 200 billion euros in bilateral loans to bench outlet the

online shopping india

online shopping india ?Eric Raskin stocks dipped on Wednesday on worries about the outlook for corporate results despite strong earnings from aluminum company Alcoa Inc. NYSE:AA News ADVERTISEMENT The decline threatened to halt the D online shopping india ow industrials string of eight straight sessions of positive finishes. Citigroup Inc.s NYSE:C

outlet metzingen

outlet metzingen ?Tanzania building collapse death toll rises to 30 The death toll from the collapse last week of a building in Tanzanias largest city rose to 30 early today, according to a government agency statement. Rescue workers have given up hope of finding more survivors after the 16storey building in

cheapest online shopping

cheapest online shopping ?Molina Healthcare Selected to Preliminary Russell 3000 Index Molina Healthcare, Inc. NYSE NYSE See: New York Stock Exchange : MOH See modem on hold. announced today that it has been selected to be included in the preliminary list of companies that will join the Russell 3000R Index.


News Archiv

fashion online

Published: Thursday 10 October, 2013

fashion online fashion online ?Copenhagen climate change conference



On December 7, 2009, 56 newspapers in 45 countries took the unprecedented step of speaking with one voice through a common editorial. This because humanity faces a profound emergency.



Unless we combine to take decisive action, climate change will ravage our planet, and with it our prosperity and security. The dangers have been becoming apparent for a generation. Now the facts have started to speak: 11 of the past 14 years have been the warmest on record, the Arctic icecap is melting and last years inflamed oil and food prices provide a foretaste of future havoc. In scientific journals the question is no longer whether humans are to blame, but how little time we have got left to limit the damage. Yet so far the worlds response has been feeble and halfhearted.



How the Copenhagen global leader came about Write your own editorial The papers that carried the Copenhagen editorial In pictures: How newspapers around the world ran the editorial



Climate change has been caused over centuries, has consequences that will endure for all time and our prospects of taming it will be determined in the next 14 days. We call on the representatives of the 192 countries gathered in Copenhagen not to hesitate, not to fall into dispute, not to blame each other but to seize opportunity from the greatest modern failure of politics. This should not be a fight between the rich world and the poor world, or between east and west. Climate change affects everyone, and must be solved by everyone.



The science is complex but the facts are clear. The world needs to take steps to limit temperature rises to 2C, an aim that will require global emissions to peak and begin falling within the next 510 years. A bigger rise of 34C the smallest increase we can prudently expect to follow inaction would parch continents, turning farmland into desert. Half of all species could become extinct, untold millions of people would be displaced, whole nations drowned by the sea. The controversy over emails by British researchers that suggest they tried to suppress inconvenient data has muddied the waters but failed to dent the mass of evidence on which these predictions are based.



Few believe that Copenhagen can any longer produce a fully polished treaty; real progress towards one could only begin with the arrival of President Obama in the White House and the reversal of years of US obstructionism. Even now the world finds itself at the mercy of American domestic politics, for the president cannot fully commit to the action required until the US Congress has done so.



But the politicians in Copenhagen can and must agree the essential elements of a fair and effective deal and, crucially, a firm timetable for turning it into a treaty. Next Junes UN climat fashion online e meeting in Bonn should be their deadline. As one negotiator put it: We can go into extra time but we cant afford a replay.



At the deals heart must be a settlement between the rich world and the developing world covering how the burden of fighting climate change will be divided and how we will share a newly precious resource: the trillion or so tonne fashion online s of carbon that we can emit before the mercury rises to dangerous levels.



Rich nations like to point to the arithmetic truth that there can be no solution until developing giants such as China take more radical steps than they have so far. But the rich world is responsible for most of the accumulated carbon in the atmosphere threequarters of all carbon dioxide emitted since 1850. It must now take a lead, and every developed country must commit to deep cuts which will reduce their emissions within a decade to very substantially less than their 1990 level.



Developing countries can point out they did not cause the bulk of the problem, and also that the poorest regions of the world will fashion online be hardest hit. But they will increasingly contribute to warming, and must thus pledge meaningful and quantifiable action of their own. Though both fell short of what some had hoped for, the recent commitments to emissions targets by the worlds biggest polluters, the United States and China, were important steps in the right direction.



Social justice demands that the industrialised world digs deep into its pockets and pledges cash to help poorer countries adapt to climate change, and clean technologies to enable them to grow economically without growing their emissions. The architecture of a future treaty must also be pinned down with rigorous multilateral monitoring, fair rewards for protecting forests, and the credible assessment of exported emissions so that the burden can eventually be more equitably shared between those who produce polluting products and those who consume them. And fairness requires that the burden placed on individual developed countries should take into account their ability to bear it; for instance newer EU members, often much poorer than old Europe, must not suffer more than their richer partners.



The transformation will be costly, but many times less than the bill for bailing out global finance and far less costly than the consequences of doing nothing.



Many of us, particularly in the developed world, will have to change our lifestyles. The era of flights that cost less than the taxi ride to the airport is drawing to a close. We will have to shop, eat and travel more intelligently. We will have to pay more for our energy, and use less of it.



But the shift to a lowcarbon society holds out the prospect of more opportunity than sacrifice. Already some countries have recognized that embracing the transformation can bring growth, jobs and better quality lives. The flow of capital tells its own story: last year for the first time more was invested in renewable forms of energy than producing electricity from fossil fuels.



Kicking our carbon habit within a few short decades will require a feat of engineering and innovation to match anything in our history. But whereas putting a man on the moon or splitting the atom were born of conflict and competition, the coming carbon race must be driven by a collaborative effort to achieve collective salvation.



Overcoming climate change will take a triumph of optimism over pessimism, of vision over shortsightedness, of what Abraham Lincoln called the better angels of our nature.



It is in that spirit that 56 newspapers from around the world have united behind this editorial. If we, with such different national and political perspectives, can agree on what must be done then surely our leaders can too.



The politicians in Copenhagen have the power to shape historys judgment on this generation: one that saw a challenge and rose to it, or one so stupid that we saw calamity coming but did nothing to avert it. We implore them to make the right choice.



This editorial was published on December 7, 2009, by 56 newspapers around the world in 20 languages including Chinese, Arabic and Russian. The text was drafted by a Guardian team during more than a month of consultations with editors from more than 20 of the papers involved. Like the Guardian most of the newspapers have taken the unusual step of featuring the editorial on their front page.



This editorial is free to reproduce under Creative Commons This Creative Commons license is valid until December 18, 2009. So they completely deny there is a problem in the first place. That is comparable to an alcoholic saying he cannot afford to go into treatment. Like the alcoholic, who seems oblivious to the fact that his job is in jeopardy, cynics ignore the costs of not addressing climate change. As the editorial says, the shift to a lowcarbon society holds out the prospect of more opportunity than sacrifice. Already some countries have recognized that embracing the transformation can bring growth, jobs and better quality lives. The flow of capital tells its own story: last year for the first time more was invested in renewable forms of energy than producing electricity from fossil fuels.I have posted for some time Amory Lovins position that climate solutions are profitable not costly. It seems that understanding is gaining ground in Copenhagen.



Its ironic that it is the biggest free marketeers that are adverse to making a profit off innovation.Maybe, not so ironic, after all:I would like to see the president do something very transideological, cutting across party lines and perceptions in both political camps of what ought to be done. I dont think very many progressive politicians understand that what we most need in energy policy is a dose of conservative economic principles, that is we ought to let always to save or produce energy, compete fairly at honest prices regardless of which kind they are savings or supply, what technology they use, where they are, how big they are or who owns them. Lets see whos not in favor of that. Whos not in favor of that will be all the free marketeers in outward appearance, but actually they are corporate socialists in freemarketeers clothing. It is very curious to me that many who profess to be political conservatives are the biggest subsidizers of their favorite technologies and the most opposed to real competition. Conversely, many liberals try to subsidize their favorite technologies as much as the other technologies are getting subsidized. Why are we paying so much of our energy bill through our tax bill? Lets pay it at the pump or at the meter so we know how much it costs. Then well know how much is enough. Amory Lovins fashion online

Back