Ummmm - We're Actually Increasing Emissions?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-outlines-greenhouse-gas-targets/article1450606/

The federal government formally notified the United Nations that Canada will cut its carbon emissions by 17 per cent from 2005 levels over the next 10 years as part of the Copenhagen accord on climate change, Environment Minister Jim Prentice said Saturday. ...While the government's previous emission targets, announced in 2006, would have resulted in a 3-per-cent reduction in emissions over 1990 levels, these latest targets will actually increase emissions by 2.5 per cent, said Dave Martin, a climate and energy co-ordinator with Greenpeace.

I presume that Mr Martin means that GHG emissions will now increase by 2.5 per cent over 1990 levels.
Meanwhile, as I've posted elsewhere, Portland, Oregon will reduce its emissions to 10 per cent below 1990 levels in 2010. AND - this is a big point - reducing greenhouse gas emissions and creating clean energy sources creates more jobs than investing in fossil fuel industries.  Numerous win- win opportunities exist that Canada is neglecting.  Moreover, the risks posed by inaction are far higher than taking action now as pointed out by Lord Stern.  Prime Minister Stephen Harper will not take action without being pressured due to the short term time line imposed by politics. Let's pressure him: please send him a letter on the benefits of creating a green economy.

Ummm - I Don't Think This Is A GOOD Thing

I posted earlier today about the  UN study that predicted that global temperatures would rise by an average of 3C if the emissions cuts offered so far at the Copenhagen climate change summit don't increase.  Doing very little looks like an absolutely terrible idea now:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/16/ipcc-sea-level-rise-temperatures

A study forecasts 9 m sea-level rise if temperatures meet 2C threshold.  Hundreds of millions of people around the world would be affected as low low-lying coastal areas became inundated.

And yes, the author of the study is publishing it in a peer reveiwed journal: Nature to be exact.  Global temperatures may rise by an average of 3 C under the current emissions cuts at Copenhagen... and sea levels may rise by 9 metres at 2 C?  Why aren't we applying the precautionary principle?  After all, in the words of
protesters' signs,there is no Planet B

. 

Perhaps we should take care of it ......it is the only home we have.

For Those of you Who Wish to Invest Greenly

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=33214&Cr=climate+change&Cr1=

The private sector arm of the World Bank today launched the first ever eco-friendly stock market index that allows investors to track the carbon efficiency of companies doing business in emerging economies.

In partnership with the giant financial services corporation Standard and Poor’s (S&P), the International Finance Corporation (IFC) established the S&P/IFC Investable Emerging Markets Index expecting it to mobilize more than $1 billion for carbon-efficient companies over the next three years.

The pioneering index is meant to encourage carbon-based competition among emerging-market businesses, give carbon-efficient companies access to long-term investors and result in lower carbon emissions in developing countries, as well as reducing the carbon footprint of investors’ portfolios.

“With growing pressure on investors to diversify and maintain returns by increasing exposure to emerging markets, and with more and more investors keen to demonstrate a preference for sustainability… IFC hopes that the launch of this index will help ensure that carbon efficiency is rewarded,” said IFC Vice-President for Business Advisory Services Rachel Kyte.