COPENHAGEN: Countdown to Copenhagen

On Wednesday, President Obama pledged to cut U.S. carbon emissions “in the range of” 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. Obama also confirmed that he will attend the international climate conference in Copenhagen next month, as Aaron Wiener notes for the Washington Independent. But here’s the catch: It’s a one-day deal. Obama is only planning to stop by Copenhagen on Dec. 9 before flying to Oslo to accept his Nobel Peace Prize. The climate talks, on the other hand, span Dec. 7 to Dec. 18.

Still, Steve Benen of the Washington Monthly writes that “Obama’s in-person lobbying efforts will give the talks a boost, and signal to the world that the United States intends to lead.”

Obama also announced plans to send a large delegation to Copenhagen, including his “Green Cabinet,” notes Talking Point Memo’s Christina Bellatoni. Former Vice President and global warming expert Al Gore will also attend the conference. Gore wrote that “[Obama's attendance] is another example of the significant change in policy on the climate crisis…Those who feared that the United States had abdicated its global responsibility should take hope from these actions and work towards completing a strong operational agreement next month in Copenhagen and guidelines for negotiators to complete their work next year on a comprehensive treaty.”

Meanwhile, climate skeptics had a field day last Friday after hundreds of private emails from prominent climate scientist Phil Jones were leaked. Naysayers claim that the emails suggest that climate scientists have overstated how much humans impact climate change. In the video below, the Real News reports that Jones stands by the data but admits that his emails were poorly worded.

Finally, in Mother Jones, Tristram Stuart suggests how we can be less wasteful this Thanksgiving. According to Stuart, about 50% of all food in the U.S. is wasted, which is “enough to feed all the hungry people in the world three times over.” Yikes! Although the biggest food wasters are farms, restaurants, supermarkets and warehouses, there are ways that the average consumer can conserve more. When looking at expiration dates, it is key to know the difference between “sell by,” “best before” and “use by” dates. Stuart writes that “sell by” dates should be completely ignored by consumers, “best” dates are simply a suggestion and “use” indicates when the food will start to spoil and is no longer safe to eat. And to make some foods last longer, Stuart suggests keeping your house cool, which has the added benefit of reducing your energy use and cutting your heating bill.

This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the environment by members of The Media Consortium. It is free to reprint. Visit the Mulch for a complete list of articles on environmental issues, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, health care and immigration issues, check out The Audit, The Pulse and The Diaspora. This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets.

Read more: climate conference, copenhagen, global warming

By Raquel Brown, Media Consortium

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Charles T.

10:03AM PST on Dec 4, 2009

Given the Presidents current rate of support in the country and Senate, any policy attempts on this subject are likely dead in the water.

He's forgotten his first job is president of the US. Adding more job killing regulations on our economy is not going to fare well in an election year. His own party is stiffing him in the Senate on tax and trade, how do any of you think he'll make any headway despite his empty promises?

send a green star

Krystl J.

1:28AM PST on Dec 4, 2009

It is a good thing that the comprehensive treaty about the environment and the bad food. But if the issues from the conference in Copenhagen will use in our cities and our in the country. If the issues got among people and of their problems. By JarKry

Past Member .

2:01PM PST on Dec 2, 2009

Every nation must pull together before it is too late to remedy anything

Mark G.

8:18AM PST on Dec 1, 2009

Shanti, That ignores the history and documents of intent of the UN.
Yes we should beware of pollution. No, we should not follow alleged scientists who refuse to operate in objective science and who corrupt the entire process with political and procedural whammy. Just because you want to follow deceivers does not inspire me to do the same.

Catman P.

3:13AM PST on Dec 1, 2009

Well said Shanti.

Shanti K.

4:42PM PST on Nov 30, 2009

I don't understand why so many people don't believe in global warming & can't see the changes in the weather. There will always be naysayers, but most of the scientists agree. But I guess that's how some can choose to ignore the facts so they don't feel guilty about their actions which contribute to the problem instead of the solution.
As far as the world government fears, Copenhagen is no more an attempt at a world government than any other agreement asking all nations sharing this planet to work together. The UN is more of an attempt at world cooperation and in all of its years has not proven to be a world government.
We al share the planet & we are all responsible for trying to sustain its resources so it can continue to sustain human life as well as the plants & animals.

Gordon W.

2:11PM PST on Nov 30, 2009

Even if global warming is not caused or infuenced by human activity, and I believe it is, global pollution and deforestation definitely is, and will result in the end of life on this planet.
Gordon Wirth

6:50PM PST on Nov 29, 2009

Alisha E. said, "Also, so what if the point of all this is to bring about 'new Global Governance' -do you think the world is headed in the right direction at present?"

How dare you attempt to destroy our representative form of government! Have you read the treaty? ...noticed how it discusses creating global level government?... but never says a thing about representative government? Is that what you want? Is that what we deserve? ...like in the European Union where 90% of laws are forced on the populations with no say at all, no representation?

And all this based on lies. I challenge your 98-2% figures. The Jones camp have clearly skewed the data and hijacked the peer-review process. They are criminals. And if you intend on destroying my protected rights, you are too.
Lay down with dogs, get up with fleas.

Alisha E.

5:46PM PST on Nov 29, 2009

In response to Wowsux S.'s comment, 98% of scientists agree that climate change is caused by humans, and 2% disagree. However, because the media is obligated to give both sides equal weighting, it appears as though there is much less consensus on the issue than there is.
Also consider, science is inherently open-ended. The reason there is so much debate is because of this, and despite the fact that there is difficulty in determining exact amounts of allowed carbon emissions before the world's climate tips to the point of no return mark, the fact is that 98% of scientists agree this is happening on some level. For me, this is enough information to think that action is needed.
Also, so what if the point of all this is to bring about 'new Global Governance' -do you think the world is headed in the right direction at present?

Genevieve H.

5:44PM PST on Nov 29, 2009

"signal to the world that the United States intends to lead.â€ ???
Is this a farce ? It's more like the United States are dragging their feet, they're not leading at all. Sadly.