U.S., Australia say businesses will cut emissions voluntarily

[Judi Lynn]

U.S., Australia say businesses will cut emissions voluntarily
By MERAIAH FOLEY

Wednesday, January 11, 2006 Posted at 6:27 AM EST

Associated Press

Sydney, Australia — The United States and Australia insisted Wednesday at the opening of a two-day climate change conference that industry leaders can be relied upon to voluntarily slash emissions blamed for heating the earth's atmosphere.

The Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate brought together senior ministers from the United States, Australia, Japan, China, South Korea and India, along with executives from energy and resource firms.

The countries -- with 45 per cent of the world's population -- account for nearly half of the world's gross domestic product, energy consumption and global greenhouse gas emissions, the Australian government said.

Environmentalists have branded the meeting a stunt to divert attention from the U.S. and Australian governments' refusal to sign the Kyoto Protocol, which legally binds countries to targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 2012.
(snip/...)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060111.wclimate0111/BNStory/International/

[rfranklin]

1. Flash! In a related story, Tom Delay appointed ethics chief in House...

Also, this just in....George W. Bush made a recess appointment of Mr. Sly Fox as Federal Hen House Security Officer.

[acmavm]

2. They'll do it voluntarily? Did they say it with a straight face?????? n/t

[rooboy]

3. Yeah. And Charles Manson turned himself in. n/t

[Gman]

4. When huge, big fat pigs fly

[rodeodance]

5. will have to get in touch with my lobbying firm first.

[OneBlueSky]

6. c'mon . . . this is from The Onion, right? . . . n/t

.

[mbperrin]

7. In other news, Big Bidnezz announces they will raise minimum wage

workers by the same percentage Congress gives themselves each year.....

yeah, right!

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. Corporations are legally bound to attempt to increase their profits

for the shareholders, so the only way any action that costs money will be done is either by an explicit majority vote of shareholders, or by law and regulation. Since shareholders tend to be huge anonymous funds, the chances of them deciding to do something altruistic and philanthropic are almost zero.

[mbperrin]

10. Shouldn't they actually be worried about share value on behalf

of their shareholders? The simplistic view that profits=value surely could be argued against, such that destroying the planet, the corporation, and the shareholders could not really be seen as increasing share values. Truth is, though, that business people seem deliberately obtuse about this, so much so that even drug dealers claim to be "business people." I am in no way criticizing you for repeating their statements about immediate instant today profits with no regard for any time beyong the next quarter - this is their standard thinking mode, and you are right to point it out. My argument is with their lack of vision, singular disability to envision the future, and monomaniacal drive to have their way and their way only every day. But you're right - only laws will do, so let's pass some stiff ones.

[muriel_volestrangler]

12. You're right, it is value, not profits, they are meant to deliver

and value can be understood to have a slightly wider meaning than 'share price', so sometimes corporations do take a wider picture, if they can show their actions build future stability for the company.

The problem is that these moves by corporations are usually small, and largely in terms of 'improving the company's image'. Greenhouse gases build up with small contributions from all of us (some more than others, of course), so it's difficult for any one company to say "we're producing too much - we must make large changes in what we do". The same goes for us individuals. When money's involved, we have a way of keeping track of small changes, but the accounting for greenhouse gases isn't that detailed - and it never will be unless regulations demand it.

[M155Y_A1CH]

9. Why is he allowed to lie like that?

That statement is completely unrealistic.
No way could it be even a little bit true.

[leesa]

11. Yes. This works so well.

[maddezmom]

13. kick

[shugah]

14. Private sector will defeat climate change, US tells anti-Kyoto summit

Private sector will defeat climate change, US tells anti-Kyoto summit

Thursday January 12, 2006
The Guardian

The United States yesterday announced it would rely on the private sector to tackle global warming by devising more fuel-efficient technologies.

At the inaugural meeting of an international alliance to rival the Kyoto process, the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate demonstrated the support of the US, Australia, Japan, China, South Korea and India and dozens of energy corporations.

Environmentalists, however, dismissed the conference as a political stunt and warned that no technological quick fix could resolve the problem of climate change.

Speaking before the opening session in Sydney, Samuel Bodman, the US energy secretary, said it was better for industry to devise more efficient technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions rather than impose binding targets that hamper economic development.

"I believe that the people who run the private sector, who run these companies, they do have children, they do have grandchildren, they do live and breathe in the world," Mr Bodman declared.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1684530,00.html

[ClintonTyree]

15. Ha...

ha ha, ha ha ha, ha ha ha ha , ha ha ha ha ha , ha ha ha ha ha ha , ha ha ha ha ha ha ha , ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha , ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha , ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ....... :rofl: Stop it! You're killing me! :rofl: And they expect people to BELIEVE this? :rofl: These bushbots never cease to amaze me. Yeah, let's give the keys to the hen-house to the fox, it'll be alright! :rofl: What idiots. :rofl:

[Gman]

16. When huge, morbidly obese pigs fly

[Spider Jerusalem]

17. Of course. After all, corporations can ALWAYS be trusted...

to act in the common interest and to take the long view rather than focussing upon immediate gain and short-term profit... :eyes:

[Debau2005]

18. hahahaha

You made me spew my coffee this morning. Self-policing by industies...hahahahaha :rofl: :spray: :rofl: :spray: :rofl: :spray: :rofl: :spray: :rofl: :spray: :rofl: :spray:

[baby_mouse]

19. Mr Bodman, if he genuinely believes what he says...

... is more than a little naive.

The steersman of corporations are *required* by the corporation to make PROFITS, not look after the environment. It's their job, and if they aren't making profits, they can lose their jobs. Looking after the environment is more expensive that not.

There is no permanance in the private sector. There are no guarantees. Companies go under, get taken over, have bad years and lose money. If they will make more money by fucking over their nearest competitor and the environment to make a quick buck that guarantees their survival, THAT's what they will HAVE to do.

The Private sector cannot AFFORD to be the leaders on environmental issues.

[Nomen Tuum]

20. What do you expect from a fool who lives in a LASSEIZ-FAIRYLAND?

Hey, look all we have to do is CLAP HARDER and TINKERBELLE will spray us all with fairy dust, then Jesus will rapture us!

[rodeodance]

21. that is exactly their tactic!!

[RaRa]

22. And how much botox did they need to inject to keep a straight face? n/t