Bonn cop21

<div></div><div>there are 2?</div><div>=<a href="https://theecologist.org/2018/oct/08/why-did-george-w-bush-pull-out-kyoto-protocol" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://theecologist.org/2018/oct/08/why-did-george-w-bush-pull-out-kyoto-protocol</a>Despite the huge amount of fossil fuel funding upon which <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W.Bush" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial;">George W. Bush</a> was elected president in 2001, insiders in the monopoly-dominated oil industry remained unsure that he would fight for them - and against climate scientists.Bush had suggested during his candidacy that CO2 should be treated as a pollutant and, therefore, subject to regulation under the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Air_Act%28United_States%29" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial;">Clean Air Act</a> - even if the international Kyoto Agreement was not economically favourable for America.Bush’s fence-sitting was strategic: swing states such as Florida were environmentally conscious and speaking out would likely give Democrat presidential candidate <a href="http://www.algore.com/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial;">Al Gore</a> the advantage.But, optimistic environmentalists remained hopeful while wary oil-men were worried that it demonstrated a willingness to agree to the broad principles of the treaty.A Rumoured SpeechShortly after his inauguration, a rumour circulated that Bush planned to include a line reinforcing his earlier pledge in a forthcoming speech.Word of the speech reached the <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/competitive-enterprise-institute" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial;">Competitive Enterprise Institute</a> (CEI), a Koch- and Exxon-funded think tank that helped donate to Bush’s presidential campaign. CEI set to work. As their founder and president, <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/global-warming-deniers-well-funded-99775" target="blank" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102); text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial;">Fred Smith later </a><a href="http://www.newsweek.com/global-warming-deniers-well-funded-99775" target="blank" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102); text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial;">told Newsweek</a>: “We alerted anyone we thought could have influence and get the line, if it was in the speech, out.”Despite the think tank’s best efforts, Environmental Protection Agency administrator <a href="http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/christine-todd-whitman" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial;">Christine Todd Whitman</a> testified, on 27 February 2001 at a Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works subcommittee, that she was in favour of regulating CO2 emissions under the Clean Air Act.A week later, she signed a joint statement at the G8 Environment Ministers Meeting [ITALY?] which said: “We commit ourselves to strive to reach agreement on outstanding political issues and to ensure in a cost-effective manner the environmental integrity of the Kyoto Protocol.”The President’s PositionAt this, the denial machine set in motion.<a href="https://twitter.com/haleybarbour" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);"> </a><a href="https://twitter.com/haleybarbour" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial;">Haley Barbour</a>, a lobbyist for a utility firm that stood to lose if greenhouse gases were regulated, urged Vice President <a href="http://www.biography.com/people/dick-cheney-9246063" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Dick Cheney</a><a href="http://www.biography.com/people/dick-cheney-9246063" target="blank" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102); text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial;"> </a>in a March 1 memo to persuade Bush not to align with the “eco-extremism” of those who saw carbon dioxide as a pollutant.A group of far-right Republican senators wrote an open letter to their new president. In light of Whitman’s testimony, they asked that Bush clarify his position on climate change, “in particular the Kyoto Protocol, and the regulation of carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act.”Aware of the rising tide against her, Whitman went to the Oval Office to fight her case on the morning of March 13. But, Bush had already composed his response, shortly to be [ACUTALLY WRITTEN BY DC?] sent via Cheney to the senators, which he read to her.“I do not believe,” read the letter, “that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a ‘pollutant’ under the Clean Air Act.”Information from the Department of Energy had shown that consumers’ energy bills might be affected, and that this warranted a re-evaluation of his earlier pledge, “especially… given the incomplete state of scientific knowledge of the causes of and solution to global climate change.”Polluter Pull-OutWhitman left defeated, just as the puppeteer Cheney arrived to hand-deliver the President’s response to the senators.By the end of the month, the world’s biggest polluter had pulled out of Kyoto.Whitman, who later said the decision was “the equivalent to ‘flipping the bird’ frankly to the rest of the world,” was the one to deliver the news. “We have no interest in implementing that treaty,” the former New Jersey Governor told assembled journalists.Though the terms of the treaty would be finalised in Bonn that July [cop 6 2001] , they would be made all but useless, with the world’s largest polluter out of the game.Years later, freedom of information disclosures revealed the industry’s input to this decision.A briefing note prepared for Paula Dobrianksy, Under-Secretary of State for Global Affairs, ahead of her meeting with Glenn Kelly of the Exxon-bankrolled Global Climate Coalition, states: “POTUS [President of the United States] rejected Kyoto, in part, based on input from you… Interested in hearing from you, what type of international alternatives to Kyoto would you support?”This AuthorBrendan Montague is editor of The Ecologist, founder of Request Initiative and co-author of Impact of Market Forces on Addictive Substances and Behaviours: <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/impact-of-market-forces-on-addictive-substances-and-behaviours-9780198753261?cc=gb&lang=en&" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial;">The web of influence</a> of addictive industries (Oxford University Press). He tweets at @EcoMontague. This article first appeared at <a href="https://www.desmog.co.uk/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; background-color: transparent; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(183, 0, 123); border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial;">Desmog.uk</a>.</div><div>=</div><div><a href="https://www.democracynow.org/2017/11/15/trumps_climate_adviser_david_banks_at">https://www.democracynow.org/2017/11/15/trumps_climate_adviser_david_banks_at</a></div><div><div class="story_summary" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="text" style="box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 27px; letter-spacing: -0.2px;">This year’s U.N. climate summit in Bonn, Germany, marks the first climate conference since President Donald Trump vowed to pull the United States out of the landmark 2015 Paris climate agreement, a process that takes four years. We speak with Trump’s climate adviser David Banks, the White House special assistant for international energy and environment, about his views on climate change and the Trump administration’s stance on the role by humans in inducing climate change. This comes one day after the Trump administration made its official debut at COP23 with a forum pushing coal, gas and nuclear power that included speakers from coal company Peabody Energy, a nuclear engineering firm and a gas exporter.</div></div><div class="mobile_anchor_target" id="transcript" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h5 class="transcript" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 10px; line-height: 1;">Transcript</h5><div class="grey_description fine_print" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px 0px 20px; line-height: 19px;">This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.</div><div class="text" style="box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 27px; letter-spacing: -0.2px;">AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. We’re broadcasting live from the U.N. climate summit in Bonn, Germany. This is the first climate summit since President Trump vowed to pull the U.S. out of the landmark 2015 Paris climate agreement, a process that takes four years.On Monday, there was a revolt here at the U.N. climate summit as the Trump administration made its official debut at a forum pushing coal, gas and nuclear power. The panel was the only official appearance by the U.S. delegation during this year’s U.N. climate summit and included speakers from coal company Peabody Energy, a nuclear engineering firm and a gas exporter. It also included representatives of Vice President Mike Pence’s office and Trump’s climate adviser, David Banks, the White House special assistant for international energy and environment.On the panel, Banks said he was very accessible to the press, although, well, he has repeatedly refused requests to come on Democracy Now! Yesterday on Democracy Now! during our interview with former Greenpeace head Kumi Naidoo, David Banks lingered just off set, waving to us, but declined to come on the show. However, just after the broadcast, we raced over to David Banks, where a scrum of reporters were questioning him.<blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243);">AMY GOODMAN: David Banks, do you believe human beings have anything to do with climate change, anything to do with the warming of the planet?</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">DAVID BANKS: So, from an administration perspective, I think the president would say the climate is always changing.</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">AMY GOODMAN: Do you believe that human beings are involved with climate change?</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">DAVID BANKS: Do I? Why are you so interested in what I—</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">AMY GOODMAN: You’re the representative of the Trump administration here. You’re the first person we’ve been able to speak to here about the Trump administration position.</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">DAVID BANKS: No, I think—look, I think that—I think the administration would agree that humans contribute to climate change. Right? I think—I think the question—and by the way, this is not—</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">AMY GOODMAN: So, do you disagree with the president that climate change is a Chinese hoax?</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">DAVID BANKS: Look, I mean, I work for the president of the United States, and I support the president’s decisions. Right? I supported the president’s decision when it came to withdrawing from the Paris Agreement. Right? You know, the president—</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">AMY GOODMAN: So, do you believe it’s a Chinese hoax?</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">DAVID BANKS: Do I believe it’s a Chinese hoax?</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">AMY GOODMAN: Climate change. I’m just quoting the president of the United States, who you work for.</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">DAVID BANKS: No, but I think you’re missing the point of the tweet. I mean, look—</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">AMY GOODMAN: Explain it.</blockquote><blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding-left: 30px; border-left: 3px solid rgb(241, 242, 243); padding-top: 30px !important;">DAVID BANKS: Well, no, the point of the tweet was—again, we talked a little bit about this last night. You know, the president views climate change through the lens of, you know—or climate change policy through the lens of, you know, what does this do to U.S. manufacturing, what does it do to U.S. competitiveness, right? And so, you know—and given his—given his focus on trade—right?—and the trade imbalance, particularly how U.S. manufacturing has been devastated, you know, since—particularly since China entered the WTO, you know, I think—</blockquote></div></div></div><div>
</div><div>=</div><div>elec cars?</div><div></div><div><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference</a></div><div><div id="toc" class="toc" style="border: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); background-color: rgb(248, 249, 250); padding: 7px; display: table; zoom: 1;"><div id="toctitle" class="toctitle" style="direction: ltr; text-align: center;">
</div><ul style="list-style-type: none; margin: 0.3em 0px; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none;"><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#1995:COP_1.2C_Germany" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">11995: COP 1, Germany</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-2" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#1996:COP_2.2C_Geneva.2C_Switzerland" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">21996: COP 2, Geneva, Switzerland</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-3" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#1997:COP_3.2C_The_Kyoto_Protocol_on_Climate_Change" style="background: none;">31997: COP 3, The Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-4" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#1998:COP_4.2C_Buenos_Aires.2C_Argentina" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">41998: COP 4, Buenos Aires, Argentina</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-5" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#1999:COP_5.2C_Bonn.2C_Germany" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">51999: COP 5, Bonn, Germany</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-6" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2000:COP_6.2C_The_Hague.2C_Netherlands" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">62000: COP 6, The Hague, Netherlands</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-7" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2001:COP_6.2C_Bonn.2C_Germany" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">72001: COP 6, Bonn, Germany</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-8" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2001:COP_7.2C_Marrakech.2C_Morocco" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">82001: COP 7, Marrakech, Morocco</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-9" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2002:COP_8.2C_New_Delhi.2C_India" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">92002: COP 8, New Delhi, India</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-10" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2003:COP_9.2C_Milan.2C_Italy" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">102003: COP 9, Milan, Italy</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-11" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2004:COP_10.2C_Buenos_Aires.2C_Argentina" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">112004: COP 10, Buenos Aires, Argentina</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-12" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2005:COP_11.2FCMP_1.2C_Montreal.2C_Canada" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">122005: COP 11/CMP 1, Montreal, Canada</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-13" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2006:COP_12.2FCMP_2.2C_Nairobi.2C_Kenya" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">132006: COP 12/CMP 2, Nairobi, Kenya</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-14" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2007:COP_13.2FCMP_3.2C_Bali.2C_Indonesia" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">142007: COP 13/CMP 3, Bali, Indonesia</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-15" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2008:COP_14.2FCMP_4.2C_Pozna.C5.84.2C_Poland" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">152008: COP 14/CMP 4, Poznań, Poland</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-16" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2009:COP_15.2FCMP_5.2C_Copenhagen.2C_Denmark" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">162009: COP 15/CMP 5, Copenhagen, Denmark</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-17" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2010:COP_16.2FCMP_6.2C_Canc.C3.BAn.2C_Mexico" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">172010: COP 16/CMP 6, Cancún, Mexico</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-18" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2011:COP_17.2FCMP_7.2C_Durban.2C_South_Africa" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">182011: COP 17/CMP 7, Durban, South Africa</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-19" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2012:COP_18.2FCMP_8.2C_Doha.2C_Qatar" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">192012: COP 18/CMP 8, Doha, Qatar</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-20" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2013:COP_19.2FCMP_9.2C_Warsaw.2C_Poland" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">202013: COP 19/CMP 9, Warsaw, Poland</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-21" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2014:COP_20.2FCMP_10.2C_Lima.2C_Peru" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">212014: COP 20/CMP 10, Lima, Peru</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-22" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2015:COP_21.2FCMP_11.2C_Paris.2C_France" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">222015: COP 21/CMP 11, Paris, France</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-23" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2016:COP_22.2FCMP_12.2FCMA_1.2C_Marrakech.2C_Morocco" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">232016: COP 22/CMP 12/CMA 1, Marrakech, Morocco</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-24" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2017:COP_23.2FCMP_13.2FCMA_2.2C_Bonn.2C_Germany" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">242017: COP 23/CMP 13/CMA 2, Bonn, Germany</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-25" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2018:COP_24.2FCMP_14.2FCMA_3" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">252018: COP 24/CMP 14/CMA 3</a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-26" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Climate_Change_conference#2019:COP_25.2FCMP_15.2FCMA_4" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">262019: COP 25/CMP 15/CMA 4</a></li></ul></div></div><div>=</div><div><a href="http://www.alternet.org/environment/can-anyone-cook-worse-idea-un-climate-talks-giving-fossil-industry-front-seat">http://www.alternet.org/environment/can-anyone-cook-worse-idea-un-climate-talks-giving-fossil-industry-front-seat</a></div><div>
</div><div>Should fossil fuel corporations like Exxon Mobil have access to the U.N. climate talks?</div>That question is at the center of a <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=https://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/insidejob&source=gmail&ust=1494089369615000&usg=AFQjCNG3Tm8LmJwaaxasrak-dz9qDvlMhw" href="https://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/insidejob" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">new report</a> released this week that offers new analysis on the ways the fossil fuel industry has undermined the U.N. climate negotiations through trade associations that do its bidding.How does the fossil fuel industry influence U.N. climate talks?The fossil fuel industry influences the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in a variety of ways. One is by wining and dining government delegates behind closed doors. Another is through its many trade associations, which are admitted to the UNFCCC as observer organizations. With that accreditation in hand, these groups—commonly referred to as Business/Industry Non-Governmental Organizations (or BINGOs)—are free to walk the halls, lobby governments, and influence the negotiations.The report peels back the curtain on just six of the more than <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=http://unfccc.int/parties_and_observers/ngo/items/9411.php&source=gmail&ust=1494089369615000&usg=AFQjCNG1MqgkyrhzIfDS2mlvIeWmU5B8Jg" href="http://unfccc.int/parties_and_observers/ngo/items/9411.php" target="blank" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none;">270 of these business industry groups</a> currently admitted to the climate talks: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Mining Association, Business Roundtable, FuelsEurope, Business Council of Australia, and the International Chamber of Commerce.How much influence and access do the fossil fuel industry trade associations have?In a nutshell: Significant influence.These trade associations do the bidding of the fossil fuel industry inside the halls of the U.N. negotiations. They are funded by and represent some of the world’s biggest polluters, including Exxon Mobil, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, Peabody Energy, Duke Energy and Marathon Oil Company.In fact, Corporate Accountability International <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=https://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/WebPrimer&source=gmail&ust=1494089369615000&usg=AFQjCNF-TFolOTMj8aKerhRSPr27Qdtg5A" href="https://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/WebPrimer" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">exposed</a> many of these groups for their fossil fuel industry connections prior to the Marrakech climate talks in 2016. Not only do these BINGOs have deep connections to the fossil fuel industry, many also actively weaken, slow, or block climate policy themselves. Currently, there are no policies in place to protect against organizations intent on derailing the UNFCCC process.As Tamar Lawrence-Samuel, international policy director at Corporate Accountability International has said, “Right now, hundreds of business trade associations have access to the climate talks, and many of them are funded by some of the world’s biggest polluters and climate change deniers. With so many arsonists in the fire department, it’s no wonder we’ve failed to put the fire out.”Governments are taking a standNext week, governments will convene in Bonn, Germany to continue the UNFCCC negotiations. At these meetings, governments will, for the first time in history, officially discuss conflicts of interest—the issue at the heart of the question of whether the fossil fuel industry or its trade associations should have access to the U.N. talks.Governments are looking to the precedent set in the <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=http://bigstory.ap.org/article/4e88c6ed19244359850d23333d39f030/global-govts-make-tobacco-firms-liable-smoking-harm&source=gmail&ust=1494089369615000&usg=AFQjCNE2dmkSBwM6NRoUqEV4ZCma70ZKMw" href="http://bigstory.ap.org/article/4e88c6ed19244359850d23333d39f030/global-govts-make-tobacco-firms-liable-smoking-harm" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">global tobacco treaty</a>. The tobacco treaty’s key provision, called Article 5.3, and the guidelines for implementing Article 5.3, protect against classic industry interference tactics by barring partnerships, financial relationships, revolving door cases, and industry participation in the policymaking process. These provisions have been <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=http://www.who.int/dg/speeches/2014/tobacco-control-cop6/en/&source=gmail&ust=1494089369615000&usg=AFQjCNGPnnlngpIqRVraAvxhC2p50m5uuQ" href="http://www.who.int/dg/speeches/2014/tobacco-control-cop6/en/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">recognized by</a> World Health Organization director-general Margaret Chan as the single largest catalyst of progress in a treaty that could save 200 million lives by 2050 when fully implemented.The talks build on existing momentum: Last May, governments representing nearly 70 percent of the world’s population called for the UNFCCC to address conflicts of interest.Want to take action?The report and discussion in Bonn build on the <a data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&q=http://kickbigpollutersout.org/&source=gmail&ust=1494089369615000&usg=AFQjCNHV_O8k8vmkGKv7wRMoLYJi7Uhwsw" href="http://kickbigpollutersout.org/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Kick Big Polluters Out campaign</a>—a years-long movement of civil society groups and hundreds of thousands of people across the world demanding climate policy be protected from fossil fuel industry interference.The campaign has recommended common-sense solutions, such as for governments to define a conflict of interest and to create a stringent, transparent process for admitting observer organizations into the UNFCCC.<div><div>=</div><div><a href="https://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/</a></div><div>
</div><div>Even just two years ago, it was almost unimaginable that the conflicts of interest posed by the presence of fossil fuel corporations would be a primary topic at <a href="https://theleapblog.org/rescuing-the-climate-talks-from-corporate-capture-a-roadmap/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">any U.N. climate treaty meeting</a>. But our <a href="https://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/blog/hope-and-determination-strong-climate-policy" style="text-decoration-line: none;">steady campaigning</a> has paid off in a big way: During the last two weeks, practically everyone involved in and covering the treaty meetings in Bonn, Germany, had something to say about the fossil fuel industry's conflicts of interest.A few days before the meeting, we released a report, <a href="http://www.alternet.org/environment/can-anyone-cook-worse-idea-un-climate-talks-giving-fossil-industry-front-seat" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Inside Job</a>, which exposed how groups representing industry interests are allowed access to climate treaty negotiations despite a hefty track record of undermining climate action. Media outlets from the <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/28ad2bd8-2c34-11e7-9ec8-168383da43b7" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Financial Times</a>, to <a href="https://www.marketplace.org/2017/05/08/business/climate-talks-begin-germany-some-countries-worry-business-groups-have-too-much" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">NPR</a>, to <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/05/big-polluters-un-climate-talks" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Mother Jones</a>, to <a href="http://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2017-05/un-klimakonferenz-klimaschutz-usa-eu-lobbyismus-konzerne-donald-trump-bonn" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">mainstream German outlets</a>, to the <a href="http://www.lemonde.fr/climat/article/2017/05/11/le-role-des-lobbys-industriels-dans-les-negociations-climat-sur-la-sellette_5126025_1652612.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">French Le Monde</a> covered the report. And when our team arrived in Germany, it was clear many government delegates had already read the exposé.Big polluters and governments that represent their interests (namely the U.S., Australia, and the European Union) quickly shifted from doubting this issue would gain traction to spending the first day and a half of the meetings intensifying their attempts to keep the issue from being discussed.You know you are doing something right when one of the most powerful industry front groups feels compelled to respond to your research. The Chamber of Commerce, which was featured in Inside Job and has received millions of dollars from Exxon Mobil, wrote an unconvincing blog post about why fossil fuel corporations need to be at the negotiating table.But despite the attempts by the industry to put the kibosh on discussions of conflicts of interests, we successfully made it the centerpiece topic during a workshop about the participation of non-Parties (read: all entities that are not government delegates). During the workshop, governments and civil society representatives demanded the U.N. treaty body address the irreconcilable conflicts of interest between the fossil fuel industry and the policies that must be made to slow and address the effects of climate change. International Policy Director Tamar Lawrence-Samuel reminded everyone that weeding out vested interests through conflict of interest policies is not the exception, but the norm, in governments and similar forums around the globe.<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en" style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background: url(" sites="sites" all="all" themes="themes" custom="custom" stopcorporateabuse_zen="stopcorporateabuse_zen" build="build" img="img" cai="cai" bg-repeat-light.png="bg-repeat-light.png" px="px" repeat="repeat" rgb="rgb" line-height="line-height" padding="padding"><p dir="ltr" lang="en" style="margin: 0px; background: url(" sites="sites" all="all" themes="themes" custom="custom" stopcorporateabuse_zen="stopcorporateabuse_zen" build="build" img="img" cai="cai" border-horizontal.gif="border-horizontal.gif" px="px" repeat-x="repeat-x" overflow="overflow" hidden="hidden" padding="padding">For the first time, parties officially discussed conflicts of interest at UNFCCC meetings during <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SB46?src=hash" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">#SB46</a>. Learn more: <a href="https://t.co/OFQF92NJ6O" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">https://t.co/OFQF92NJ6O</a> <a href="https://t.co/4Ha5iFn4On" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">pic.twitter.com/4Ha5iFn4On</a><p style="margin: 0px; background: url(" sites="sites" all="all" themes="themes" custom="custom" stopcorporateabuse_zen="stopcorporateabuse_zen" build="build" img="img" cai="cai" border-horizontal.gif="border-horizontal.gif" px="px" repeat-x="repeat-x" overflow="overflow" hidden="hidden" padding="padding">— Road Thru Paris (@RoadThruParis) <a href="https://twitter.com/RoadThruParis/status/862232236174823424" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">May 10, 2017</a></blockquote>Predictably, business groups and the governments that represent their interests intervened in defense of corporate inclusion. At one point, a delegate from Australia even went so far as to call Exxon Mobil a corporation that was leading on climate action!We followed the workshop with a packed press conference, and continued to keep this issue front and center throughout the rest of the meetings.With this success under our belts, we will continue to organize governments and allies to support the adoption of a policy that kicks big polluters out of the U.N. climate treaty for good. We know it's ambitious, and we also know it's possible. Most importantly, we know it must be done to save people and our planet from climate catastrophe.Kelle Louaillier is the president of Corporate Accountability International.</div><div>=</div></div><div>
</div><div></div><div>cop21</div><div>9/15</div><div> latest round of <a href="http://unfccc.int/meetings/bonn_aug_2015/meeting/8923.php" title="UNFCCC: Bonn Climate Change Conference" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; line-height: 25.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">climate talks in the German city of Bonn</a> have ended with a failure to deliver common grounds for the negotiations at the <a href="http://www.cop21.gouv.fr/en" title="UN Climate Change Conference, Paris 2015" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; line-height: 25.2px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">UN climate summit in Paris</a> at the end of this year.</div><div><div class="post-content" itemprop="text" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.4em;"><div class="pf-content" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">The <a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=paris" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Paris talks</a>, involving all UN member states, are meant to deliver a draft that could lead to a new world climate treaty to replace the expired <a href="https://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php" title="UNFCC: Kyoto Protocol" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Kyoto Protocol</a>. But experts now fear that there will not be enough time left to see a major breakthrough.Jan Kowalzig, climate change policy adviser at <a href="https://www.oxfam.org/en/pressroom/reactions/oxfam-reaction-close-un-climate-talks-bonn-germany" title="Oxfam: Reaction to the close of UN climate talks in Bonn, Germany" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Oxfam</a>, described last week’s negotiations in Bonn as “unbearably tardy.”He said: “If the negotiators keep up that slow pace, the ministers at the UN summit will get an unfinished paper that they will have to resolve with no time for reflection. The outcome will then most likely be an extremely weak new treaty that will not save the world from <a href="http://ecowatch.com/climate-change-news/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">climate change</a>.”Unresolved ObstaclesIn Bonn, the <a href="http://unfccc.int/bodies/body/6645.php" title="UNFCCC: Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP)" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action</a> (ADP)—the body set up by the UN Climate Change Convention to devise a successor to the Kyoto Protocol—was asked to produce a paper for the Paris summit.After a <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/08/28/climate-talks-bonn/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">week of negotiations</a>, they ended up with just a bunch of ideas and lots of unresolved obstacles.“We cannot go on working on that basis,” says Sarah Blau, who led the EU’s delegation in Bonn. “We would love to start working on a new treaty, but all options have to be on the table. We have not reached that stage yet.”Two major hurdles remain as the Paris deadline nears: climate finance and emissions cuts. Back in 2010, the world agreed on building up a <a href="http://news.gcfund.org/" title="Green Climate Fund" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Green Climate Fund</a> to help developing nations to tackle the impacts of climate change. The developed nations promised to provide the fund with US$100 billion by 2020.So far, only around US$10 billion is in that pot. So who will contribute how much? And by when? The diplomats in Bonn were unable to say.On the emissions cuts, it is becoming increasingly obvious that the <a href="http://www.climatenewsnetwork.net/pledges-on-ghg-cuts-too-weak-to-achieve-safety-limit/" title="Pledges on GHG cuts too weak to achieve safety limit" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">existing pledges are far from enough</a> to keep the world below the 2°C level—the internationally-agreed safety limit to try to prevent runaway climate change.So the developing nations are demanding regular updates and adjustments to the agreed emissions cuts every five years, to check whether the world is still on the right track. The EU disapproves of this, saying updates every 10 years are sufficient.As the EU wants to achieve its planned 40 percent CO2 reduction by 2020, it would not take its next step until 2030.“We feel confident that our 40 percent CO2 target by 2020 is one of the most ambitious goals, and we do not see any need for more regular adjustments,” Blau says.Long-Term TargetGreenpeace says the EU’s 10-year strategy could render the 2°C limit meaningless.Martin Kaiser, head of the Greenpeace climate policy unit, says: “It would be a catastrophe if the new treaty froze the existing reduction targets and pledges. We do need more regular adjustments that respect the latest climate science outcomes and the development of renewable energies.”The only progress in Bonn was the wider acceptance among UN member states of the need to write a long-term target into a new global climate treaty.But it remains unresolved whether that should be a zero CO2 emissions target, a 100 percent renewable energy target, or just a repetition of the existing 2°C limit—which many climate scientists think should in any case be reduced to 1.5°C.At the end of September, heads of state are due to meet in New York at the UN general assembly. In mid-October, there will be another preparatory meeting in Bonn, hoping finally to produce an agreed paper for Paris.“We are definitely running out of time,” warns Christoph Bals, policy director at the NGO <a href="http://germanwatch.org/en/home" title="Germanwatch" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Germanwatch</a>. “What we truly need now are clear signals from the ministers and heads of state ahead of Paris. Otherwise, the next UN climate summit is most likely to fail.”YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE<a class="black-to-green" href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/05/changing-climate-birds/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Audubon Society: North American Birds Are Threatened by Climate Change</a><a class="black-to-green" href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/01/wall-street-action-climate-change/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Even Wall Street Asks: ‘Why Would You Not?’ Take Action on Climate Change</a><a class="black-to-green" href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/08/31/bernie-sanders-climate-debate/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Bernie Sanders: The Environment Deserves a Debate</a></div></div><div class="clear" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; clear: both; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div id="taboola-below-article-thumbnails-sc" class=" trc_related_container trc_spotlight_widget trc_elastic trc_elastic_trc_16698 " style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; clear: both; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="trc_rbox_container" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; direction: ltr;"><div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><div id="trc_wrapper_16698" class="trc_rbox thumbs-2r trc-content-sponsored " style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; width: auto; border: 0px solid rgb(223, 223, 223); border-radius: 0px; box-shadow: none; overflow: hidden;">===</div></div></div></div></div><div> Agenda for work on new global climate deal is adopted

* Agreement breaks week-long deadlock over procedure

* Mistrust between countries remains

* Urgent climate action needed to limit global warming (Adds further context, quotes)

By Nina Chestney

BONN,

May 25 (Reuters) - More than 180 countries agreed on an agenda for

work on a new climate treaty by 2015 at United Nations climate talks on

Friday, breaking a deadlock over procedure, but mistrust remains that

could threaten progress for the rest of the year.

"(The

workplan) was not an easy issue to agree (on)," U.N. climate chief

Christiana Figueres told reporters after the negotiations held at Bonn

in Germany.

"All parties needed reassurances from each other to allow them to undertake the work with a certain sense of comfort."

U.N.

climate talks in South Africa last year agreed a package of measures

that would extend the 1997 Kyoto Protocol after it expires at the end

of this year and decide a new, legally binding accord to cut global

greenhouse gas emissions by 2015, coming into force by 2020.

In

the Bonn talks, the first negotiation session since that deal was

struck, delegates have argued for over a week on how to organise work

on a new climate deal and appoint a chair to steer the process.

Procedural

wrangling during the two-week session, attended by national

negotiating teams below ministerial level, has shown there is mistrust

among participants and heaps pressure on ministerial talks in Doha,

Qatar, at the end of the year to deliver, observers said.

"When

people start fighting about agendas it is a symptom of lack of trust

and of some pretty substantive areas of disagreement," said Celine

Charveriat, director of advocacy and campaigns at international

development charity Oxfam.

The European Union and

others have accused China, along with other developing countries, of

"procedural blocking" or trying to backtrack on the Durban deal by

altering the approach to negotiations.

One

initiative, an attempt to bring discussion on emissions cuts by both

rich and poor countries into one forum, rather than keep it in two

separate negotiating tracks, is no longer an obstacle to progress but

others may emerge.

"We cleared a difficult hurdle

here. There is no doubt that it will be the first of many, and we must

remember that time is not on our side," said Sai Navoti, lead

negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States, which represents

small nations most vulnerable to global warming.

On

the other side, developing countries accuse the United States, the EU

and other rich nations of trying to avoid making deeper emissions cuts

and dodging increases in finance to help poorer nations deal with

climate change.

URGENCY...<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/25/un-climate-talks-bonn-negotiations_n_1545525.html?ir=Green">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/25/un-climate-talks-bonn-negotiations_n_1545525.html?ir=Green</a></div></div>