Saturday 7 March 2009

EU - NO AGREEMENT TO FUND CLIMATE CHANGE IN DEVELOPING NATIONS

EU ministers agreed that it would cost 170 billion a year to fight climate change in developing countries by 2020, but could not come up with the money (thank goodness!) according to this report. They are usually only too keen to pour our cash into a bottomless pit, so I wonder what stopped them - perhaps it was because they thought this was reckless even for them, and in the current recession it might make them a tad unpopular with the public.
at

6 comments:

  1. Anonymous7 March 2009 at 21:18

    The idea of fighting the global warming comes to me as a pretty pointless one nowadays. So much money is needed elsewhere, to help countries get out of their recession. I don't think that now is the time to worry about climate change, not that it isn't an alarming concern. Smaller countries are needing all the money they can get but still are not getting them, why waste 170 bil a year when that money could help so many other currently more important problems.

    Take care, Elli

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous10 March 2009 at 05:03

    Let me explain it to you, Derek. They're happy to give their banker and corporate friends tax payer money, but they don't give a crap about poor people.

    @Elli: who says you can't address economic hardship and climate change with the same dollar? Have a look into Permaculture and Transition Towns.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Derek Tipp10 March 2009 at 16:06

    Elli - what evidence is there that climate change is an "alarming concern"?

    Tim - I think it is simply the case that governments have no other option than to lend money to the banks to prevent a serious recession lasting several years. Many other businesses will go under. Governments no longer have surplus billions to throw at other projects.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous11 March 2009 at 03:39

    Derek, don't be so gullible. The government does have the option of not robbing savers and tax payers.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Derek Tipp12 March 2009 at 23:40

    So Tim, you are opposed to the financial measures to prevent the banks going under, even though this would cause a much more serious problem?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous15 March 2009 at 02:12

    They will go under anyway. The general population will be impoverished through taxation and inflation while the people who ran the failed companies are enriched. So yes, I am against these measures.

    ReplyDelete

Climate Science welcomes your views/messages.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)