Is Copenhagen Dead? Podesta Replies

| Sat Sep. 26, 2009 3:47 PM PDT

John Podesta posted a response to my article on a statement he co-wrote that I characterized as a signal the Obama administration has concluded that producing a comprehensive global warming treaty at the upcoming Copenhagen summit will not be possible and that alternative measures must be pursued. Here is Podesta's reply in full:

While Mother Jones’ David Corn is an excellent reporter, he is a lousy tealeaf reader. Mr. Corn misread a recent article by Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, the chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Nobel Peace Prize winner, and myself in advance of the G20 summit, incorrectly concluding our purpose was to downplay expectations on behalf of the Administration. Mr. Corn’s interpretation of our piece is inaccurate. Dr. Pachauri, one of the world’s foremost advocates for strong global action on climate change, and I both recognize that significant challenges remain in advance of the U.N. summit in December. But we are confident that the international community is poised to make substantial progress on climate change in Copenhagen, and that the U.S. is now in a position to exercise renewed leadership in pursuit of a best-case climate scenario.

The purpose of our September 23 piece was to emphasize the importance of climate change in advance of the G20 meetings and encourage the world’s top emitters to seize an important opportunity to take concrete steps to move forward in advance of December’s summit. It is not news that the divide between the unwieldy groups of developed and developing countries have stalled climate talks in the past and that they are drifting again. It is, however, noteworthy that major emitters have recently utilized new channels — the Administration’s Major Economies Forum, for example, as well as the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue — to lay the groundwork for a new climate agreement in Copenhagen. We think this is an important development and should be pursued whenever opportunities, like this week’s summit, arise. Our piece urged leaders at the G20 to pursue concrete actions prior to Copenhagen on issues such as financing arrangements, technology cooperation, and deforestation prevention to increase the chances of success in December.

Even in the midst of global economic crisis, climate change has remained at the top of the agenda both in the United States and in key countries around the world. There is broad consensus that the effects of climate change are not only real, but will be devastating to developed and developing countries alike if the international community fails to agree on a global emissions reduction strategy soon. The road ahead is not without obstacles, which our piece pointed out. But the fate of Copenhagen is far from sealed — and it is my strong belief that the Obama Administration is committed to doing all it can to lead the world into a low-carbon, clean energy future.

It still seems to me that by declaring that the pre-Copenhagen talks are at an "impasse" and that the prospects of reaching a treaty is "grim"—possibly realistic assessments—Podesta and Pachauri, two champions of countering climate change, are assuming that the climate summit will fall short of what's been the perceived public goal (a comprehensive global accord that leads to a serious reduction in emissions) and are now pushing for alternative mulitlateral actions and decisions that would mark real progress in redressing climate change (though perhaps not as much progress as a full-fledged and tough treaty). This might be a reasonable approach—maybe the only option—given the well-known conflicts in the pre-Copenahgen negotiations and the US Senate's inability to produce climate change legislation prior to the gathering. But if the Obama administration—which Podesta helped set up—has reached a similar conclusion, that would indeed be noteworthy and represent something of a shift (even if a necessary one) in its efforts to address global warming.

Advertisement

Advertisement

David Corn is Mother Jones' Washington bureau chief. For more of his stories, click here. He's also on Twitter.

Get Mother Jones by Email - Free. Like what you're reading? Get the best of MoJo three times a week.

Comments

Copenhagen May Be Our Last Chance To Achieve 350 Or Bust

Yes, Copenhagen is most certainly “Dead” until we implement Sir John Maddox’s advice to put together a small army of scientists that is required to remove persisting uncertainties, devise effective strategies and implement fast track solutions for the avoidance of calamity.

The most successful small army of scientists in history was the Manhattan Project that ended WWII even though they created a weapon to achieve that goal.

Today we already have the Manhattan Project's criminally negligent monster child, UC National Labs that is dedicated to maintaining hydrogen bombs even though they can only be used to destroy humanity.

The Copenhagen conference can only be truly successful if they restore the dedication of the Manhattan Project focused on saving Humanity from climate changes by turning hydrogen into energy with controlled fusion to achieve Edward Teller’s dream at last.

The greatest scientific failure today is the waste of scientific talent at UC National Labs that Freeman Dyson characterized as a welfare program for scientists and engineers that is detached from the mundane needs of humanity.

We must do better than that if we are to survive, by redirecting UC National Labs to focus on saving humanity from climate changes.

Copenhagen may be our last chance to turn back the Keeling Curve.

Oh, Calm Down!

Haven't you heard? "Global Warming" is dead. Despite efforts to hide the facts, those nasty little things have intruded into the debate. The actual DATA shows that the earth's temperature is cooling, not warming. That's why Al Gore and Friends have had to change the semantics and start talking about "Climate Change". So, carbon dioxide is not the culprit for all the weird weather we have been observing.

Enter the Department of Defense and the HAARP Project. This outgrowth of the Star Wars initiative uses radio waves to burn holes in the Ionosphere and lift whole portions of it ---imagine taking a blanket, slashing it with knives, and then shaking it above the bed? What happens? You lose warmth (exactly what the data shows) and you create weird wind patterns (exactly what has happened to the jet stream).
And that is what HAARP does to our atmosphere and by messing with that, to global climate. One of the uses of HAARP as admitted by its inventor is "climatological warfare".

Read the book ANGELS DON"T PLAY THIS HARP by Dr. Nick Begich, the brother of Alaska's US Senator Mark Begich. Alaska and California have ongoing HAARP stations that are fully functional.

Post new comment

Alternately, you may login to or register an account
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <ul> <ol> <li> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback

We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.

Photo Essays

The chaos and humanity of war.
The craftspeople and musicians of Appalachia.
A selection of '70s ads depicting African-Americans.
As climate change melts the permafrost, native villages slip into the sea, taking a way of life with them.