Views and debates on climate change policy
Home | Panelists | Staff Blog | RSS

Post Carbon

Leaked Danish text: faked shock?

By Juliet Eilperin

Earlier this week the climate talks in Copenhagen erupted when The Guardian newspaper published a copy of a proposal drafted by Danish officials, aimed at outlining a basis for negotiations here. But new information obtained by The Washington Post sheds a different light on the uproar.

Developing country representatives expressed shock and dismay once the text became public. Ambassador Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping--permanent representative of Sudan to the United Nations and the chief negotiator for the G-77--declared, with tears rolling down his face, "We have been asked to sign a suicide pact."

In fact, Di-Aping had seen it a week before, as had other major climate negotiators from rich and poor countries. They had gathered in Copenhagen to go over the language, according to one of the meeting's participants who asked not to be identified because of the ongoing negotiations.

This is not to say that Di-Aping might not have been genuinely upset about the Danish proposal. But there's no way he could have been surprised--he actually offered his thoughts on the proposal several times in the session, as attendees such as Su Wei, deputy head of the Chinese delegation here.

So when bloggers such as Adam Welz write entries such as this one, saying he had "witnessed an unexpected and extraordinary outburst of candour from one of the key players in these negotiations," he might want to reassess.

With the high stakes involved in these climate negotiations, there's often more than meets the eye.

By

Juliet Eilperin

 |  December 12, 2009; 6:07 AM ET Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg     Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: China: Poor or rich? | Next: Copenhagen's morning reads

Comments

Please report offensive comments below.



Suckers!

Posted by: Rob_ | December 13, 2009 12:02 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Water Vapor is a bigger greenhouse gas - that must be regulated - somehow.


How do reasonable people get them to scrap the whole plan?


That is the only way.


.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 12, 2009 9:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment

...again, all this is proving is that the 3rd world bought on because they thought they'd get 100's of billions of dollars or even trillions, and now they see they're being given 10 billion dollars.

But trillions will change hands, but it will be to people in power, to the GE's of the world, the big multi-nationals.

It's now apparent that cap and tax could be the biggest power and money grab by multi-nationals in the last 100 years.

Posted by: Ombudsman1 | December 12, 2009 4:40 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Prof Richard Lindzen from MIT used real observations, not fraudulent computer predictions, from the past 20 years to show that co2 actually is not trapped in any large
amount by the atmosphere!!!! Real data yielding real results results, how novel.

The Climate Deceivers have been outed by more then just their emails! It's all about money but most of us already know that don't we.

Posted by: Jimbo77 | December 12, 2009 4:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment

This whole thing gets worse and worse. First the e-mails (and just what does Stolen have to do with it? So someone stole them, thats theft, not forgery.) and now we get to play Lets Pretend. This whole thing is about MONEY. A World Without Borders fighting for the bigest piece of the pie. A socialist world controlled by the UN, who controls the MONEY. Now that IS theft. Again. Surprise, Surprise.

Now ...lets get to Al Gore. Go to indiaenews.com. Find the article dated 12.13.2007 titled Al Gores oratory electrifies Bali summit. On page 2 you'll see "Drawing repeated applause from his audience, Gore assured the delegates that the US WOULD move forward once the NEXT government was in power, and offered the many steps taken by the Congress, state governments and local government as well as the stated positions of ALL Major Democratic and TWO Republican presidential candidates as reason for his confidence." Politics as usual? Surprise, Surprise.

Now just go back a few days ago to 12.5.2009 to the Washington (AP) article "Obama shifts visit to Copenhagen climate event to build on China, India moves toward deal." Read the first paragraph on page 2. It appears Obama will pledge to reduce gases in the range of 17 percent, REGARDLESS of the growth in our economy. It also says in order for him to achieve his target Congress will have to pass legislation to curb greenhouses gases. However the Senate said it will not take up the measure until next year.

Got any idea who told the EPA to take control? Or who told them to say this is an extreme emergency? Cap and Trade must be passed NOW, we can't afford to keep doing nothing? You pass it now or we'll hurt you bad? Surprise, Surprise it's just a GAME. A game of Lets Pretend. The same old game they always play. I don't wanna play with them anymore. They never give me my turn.

Posted by: LandoftheLost | December 12, 2009 3:55 PM
Report Offensive Comment

RE: Please,please can I just send my wallet & cash directly to Copenhagen?? No intermediaries,no committees, just PAY<PAY<PAY."
Yes. Yes you can, clearly it doesn't seem to be doing you any good.

Posted by: bproulx45 | December 12, 2009 3:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment

KESAC's point about water vapor is a typical tactic of climate deniers--they take a fact and use it out of context to create a misleading conclusion.

While water vapor amounts to 80+ percent of total GHGs, its relatively short duration in the atmosphere and natural systemic limitations on its quantity--you get too much of a concentration, it forms as precipitation--prevent fluctuations that would drive a global temperature increase. A massive rise since 1850 in the quantity of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, which are long-lived in the atmosphere, is what is driving the trend, and those are generated by human activity.

A detailed explanation of this can be found at
http://www.yaleclimatemediaforum.org/2008/02/common-climate-misconceptions-the-water-vapor-feedback-2/

Posted by: pjkiger1 | December 12, 2009 2:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Please,please can I just send my wallet & cash directly to Copenhagen?? No intermediaries,no committees, just PAY<PAY<PAY. RichFromTampa

Posted by: RichFromTampa | December 12, 2009 1:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Interesting how a supposedly scientific discussion has become such a political one, with people having similar political views astoundingly coming up with similar scientific conclusions. How many people with strong opinions on the topic have done any research beyond hearing some commentators and looking at e-mail messages sent by friends? I guess it makes as much sense as people with no medical expertise arguing about the health effects of air pollution, toxic emissions, smoking, etc. I wonder if anyone at all looks at the scientific evidence with no preconceptions and is ready to accept whatever the science dictates, even if it goes against one's politial beliefs.

Posted by: Sutter | December 12, 2009 1:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment

So this is what passes for news in Copenhagen?

Ms. Eilperin: there is a real scandal going on, perhaps the most serious in the realm of science in a century. What do the illuminati gathered in Copenhagen think about that?

Posted by: theduke89 | December 12, 2009 12:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Kesac - What if someone were to paint over the windows in your living room, and then told you "why are you fighting with me when over 85% of the room is already painted?" Water vapor already blocks the infrared radiation that water is capable of absorbing, and that's why the Earth is well above freezing, but even small additional amounts of carbon or methane blocks infrared light that presently escapes. That's undeniable, even if modeling Earth's climate is very complicated.

Posted by: Hopeful9 | December 12, 2009 11:30 AM
Report Offensive Comment

How did Ms. Eilperin decide to state that the document was leaked and not 'stolen'. Is there any difference when an unauthorized 'outing' occurs? perhaps a double standard ?

Posted by: philly3 | December 12, 2009 11:10 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Why are we fighting over carbon emissions when water vapor makes up 85% of the greenhouse gases?

Posted by: kesac | December 12, 2009 9:56 AM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company