NationStates Jolt Archive

The German government has unveiled a plan to cut carbon emissions from business by less than 1% by 2012.

The German government depicts this as a 6% cut from the period 2000-2002.

But set against the real allocation for Germany industry in 2005 it amounts to a cut of only 0.63%, which campaign groups have greeted with dismay.

"These figures are unbelievable, pathetically unambitious," said Regina Gunther from WWF Germany. "It is shameful that our environment minister has agreed to this."

Last year German industries were so successful in lobbying that their government handed them 21 million more tonnes of carbon permits than they actually needed.

European weakness on ETS phase two targets will badly under-cut the EU's position in international negotiations on climate.

Whole article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5126402.stm

...so along with no EU nation (other than Great Britain) being on target for their Kyoto Treaty numbers, Germany has seen the light that all Kyoto does is give First World countries an unfair disadvantage in terms of industry against the rest of the world.

Thoughts?

Germany sees the light, joins the US
Excellent! A 51st state! Take that, European Union!

I'm not sure what is scarier - the title of your post or what it says.

I'll claim tiredness and point to the fact of it being 6 am to get out from contributing anything more thoughtful.

I'm not sure what is scarier - the title of your post or what it says.

I'll claim tiredness and point to the fact of it being 6 am to get out from contributing anything more thoughtful.

I'm more impressed that Kyoto is basically dead, and it's because of non-commitment by the European signatories.

...so along with no EU nation (other than Great Britain) being on target for their Kyoto Treaty numbers, Germany has seen the light that all Kyoto does is give First World countries an unfair disadvantage in terms of industry against the rest of the world.

Thoughts?

Can't they just buy trees in third-world countries to make up for the deficit? Or did that option not make the final draft of Kyoto?

Can't they just buy trees in third-world countries to make up for the deficit? Or did that option not make the final draft of Kyoto?

I don't think many folks favour saving the climate by chopping trees out of the Amazon Basin in Brasil.

I don't think many folks favour saving the climate by chopping trees out of the Amazon Basin in Brasil.

Hah, no.. what I meant was that, in one draft of Kyoto, nations could buy new trees (not pre-existing ones), and plant them to make up for their emmissions deficit. "Carbon sinks" they called them.

Hah, no.. what I meant was that, in one draft of Kyoto, nations could buy new trees (not pre-existing ones), and plant them to make up for their emmissions deficit. "Carbon sinks" they called them.

I guess that tree-plan got axed by the dictates of Moral Clarity.

Which is a good thing, inasmuch as we should be focussed on living with LESS energy, rather than trying to trade our way out of trouble.

LOL - The title of this thread is incorrect.

Germany has been trying to cut carbon emissions for years domestically. If you bothered to watch the Fox Soccer Channel's daily series "All About Germany" during the World Cup, you'd know that the 12 cities hosting matches, have taken great strides to cut pollution, since Germany was more polluted than any other country immediately after World War II.

Frankfurt, for example, managed to reverse the pollution in the river Meno (Main in German). Dortmund, once an industrial capital in Germany, has been working since the late 90s to establish a cleaner city, and have done so for the most part. The same can be said for Leipzig, Gielsenkirchen, Berlin, Munich, Cologne, Hamburg, etc.

If anything, the US is following in the footsteps of the other nations in the world that have been working for decades to convert to alternative fuels and renewable resources. Brazil is already running all of its vehicles on an ethanol fuel made from sugar cane. Japan has establish Hydrogen fueling stations for Hydrogen-powered vehicles. The US has YET to establish ANY policies domestically to cut it's own carbon emissions, and to convert to alternative and renewable fuels. The US is far too preoccupied with telling everyone else what to do. I think the US needs to focus on itself for awhile.

If you bothered to watch the Fox Soccer Channel's daily series "All About Germany" during the World Cup, you'd know that the 12 cities hosting matches, have taken great strides to cut pollution, since Germany was more polluted than any other country immediately after World War II.


Probably depends on your definition of "pollution." Didn't see too many mushroom clouds over Germany.. ;)

Hah, no.. what I meant was that, in one draft of Kyoto, nations could buy new trees (not pre-existing ones), and plant them to make up for their emmissions deficit. "Carbon sinks" they called them.

Great. Take up our land and resources to offset your profligacy. No way.
If you want to plant trees to act as carbon sinks it will have to be done on your own territory, not in some third world country.

Brazil is already running all of its vehicles on an ethanol fuel made from sugar cane.

Not true. We have many cars that can run on ethanol, and all new ones made here seem to be able to, and we do add 15% ethanol to our petrol, but the majority here still use petrol. (We just happen to be self sufficient in oil apparently).

LOL - The title of this thread is incorrect.

Germany has been trying to cut carbon emissions for years domestically. If you bothered to watch the Fox Soccer Channel's daily series "All About Germany" during the World Cup, you'd know that the 12 cities hosting matches, have taken great strides to cut pollution, since Germany was more polluted than any other country immediately after World War II.

Frankfurt, for example, managed to reverse the pollution in the river Meno (Main in German). Dortmund, once an industrial capital in Germany, has been working since the late 90s to establish a cleaner city, and have done so for the most part. The same can be said for Leipzig, Gielsenkirchen, Berlin, Munich, Cologne, Hamburg, etc.

If anything, the US is following in the footsteps of the other nations in the world that have been working for decades to convert to alternative fuels and renewable resources. Brazil is already running all of its vehicles on an ethanol fuel made from sugar cane. Japan has establish Hydrogen fueling stations for Hydrogen-powered vehicles. The US has YET to establish ANY policies domestically to cut it's own carbon emissions, and to convert to alternative and renewable fuels. The US is far too preoccupied with telling everyone else what to do. I think the US needs to focus on itself for awhile.

The US has: it didn't need some international document to tell it to put scrubbers on smokestacks in the late 70s or get rid of leaded gas, etc.

The point is that Kyoto was and is a flawed document, and by the looks of it is as dead as the Naval Spending Cap agreement before WW2.

I look forward to constant floods, storms, heatwaves and frequent ice ages if it means we can make rich people richer.

Probably depends on your definition of "pollution." Didn't see too many mushroom clouds over Germany.. ;)


yeah but you did see allot of "ash clouds" :eek:

Probably depends on your definition of "pollution." Didn't see too many mushroom clouds over Germany.. ;)

But you see a lot of acid rain damage to ancient structures in Germany. Just look at the Cologne Cathedral. The sculptors and stone masons cannot keep up with the damage acid rain is causing the Cathedral's original stone work. The acid rain is due to both world wars and major pollution on Germany's part. As a result, Germany has re-doubled its efforts in the last 20 years to clear up it's pollution levels to slow down the damage from pollution, and to ensure it's future generations of a beautiful home.

The US has: it didn't need some international document to tell it to put scrubbers on smokestacks in the late 70s or get rid of leaded gas, etc.

Interesting that the US stopped after that, rather than continuing to work on alternative fuel options, and converting completely to non-pollutive industries...

Not true. We have many cars that can run on ethanol, and all new ones made here seem to be able to, and we do add 15% ethanol to our petrol, but the majority here still use petrol. (We just happen to be self sufficient in oil apparently).

Not from what I've heard. As I understand it, Brazilian scientists have developed an ethanol fuel based fully from sugar cane, and that by the end of this year (2006), Brazil will be completely off of gasoline. At least, that's what the government wants to accomplish.

Great. Take up our land and resources to offset your profligacy. No way.
If you want to plant trees to act as carbon sinks it will have to be done on your own territory, not in some third world country.

To be fair, it was going to be payed for. That makes it head and shoulders better than people just asking for trees to not be cut down with no financial recompense for the cost.

That said, they really ought to do it at home.

Interesting that the US stopped after that, rather than continuing to work on alternative fuel options, and converting completely to non-pollutive industries...


I agree that the US's fuel consumption by motor vehicles is a joke (the Ford fleet, for example, is averaged at 2 miles per gallon LESS than 1983).

However, the US *is* working on alternative fuels.
You can buy ethanol vehicles and there are services stations for them in most states: http://www.e85fuel.com/database/search.php
(though I grant there are far too few of these yet.)

What, pray tell, is a non-pollutive industry?

Not true. We have many cars that can run on ethanol, and all new ones made here seem to be able to, and we do add 15% ethanol to our petrol, but the majority here still use petrol. (We just happen to be self sufficient in oil apparently).
Isn't it about a third of cars run on ethanol?

What, pray tell, is a non-pollutive industry?

They don't exist yet. But, there are some industries that produce far fewer emissions than most industrial plants in the US. I'm talking mostly from certain types of labs, specially designed chemical plants that recycle their byproducts in the plant, music and art studios (yes these are types of industry), etc.