Image of the Day:
US President and family leave the snowy continental US to the local mortals as they wing it to the warmth of Hawaii Volcanoes
Before leaving for Hawaii, however, he said in an interview with PBS Newshour:
“I think that people are justified in being disappointed about the outcome in Copenhagen.”
“What I said was essentially that rather than see a complete collapse in Copenhagen, in which nothing at all got done and would have been a huge backward step, at least we kind of held ground and there wasn’t too much backsliding from where we were.”
[Is he beginning to sound like his predecessor?]
How did you save the talks, Mr?
“At a point where there was about to be complete breakdown, and the prime minister of India was heading to the airport and the Chinese representatives were essentially skipping negotiations, and everybody’s screaming, what did happen was, cooler heads prevailed,” Obama said.
Prevailed to what end?
“We were able to at least agree on non-legally binding targets for all countries —not just the United States, not just Europe, but also for China and India, which, projecting forward, are going to be the world’s largest emitters,” he said.
Is a non-legally binding “agreement” worth the carbon paper it’s written on? Or was it achieved verbally?
Never mind your opinion as a president, please answer the question in your capacity as a “law professor.”
This space is left blank for Prof Obama’s answer: __________________________________________!
Earlier Sweden’s Environment Minister Andreas Carlgren called the UN Copenhagen climate negotiations, which the US and China had colluded to undermine, “a disaster for the world.”
“I call this a disaster, it doesn’t at all match the needs of the world …,” said Carlgren.