http://blogs.euobserver.com/gardner/2009/09/11/copenhagen-climb-down/ Stephen Gardner is editor of Euro-correspondent.com, and Brussels freelance environment correspondent for the Bureau of National Affairs (US). He is also a contributor to other media such as the BBC and the UK magazines Ethical Corporation and Private Eye. Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:23:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://blogs.euobserver.com/gardner/2009/09/11/copenhagen-climb-down/comment-page-1/#comment-40 Gabriella Mon, 14 Sep 2009 06:07:53 +0000 http://blogs.euobserver.com/gardner/?p=31#comment-40 The European Commission is right to reduce its allocation of assistance since it cannot afford to send even 100 euros of aid. Based off the discussions a few months ago at Green Week, it is only necessary that the EU ask for China, India, and the US's participation in this goal. I doubt the US will even reach that goal, but he couldn't have said it better with hey are not going to get more than that, so let's get real. Climate change is a force not to be taken lightly. The more cooperation the better. If the EU can get the US to sign on to a long-term commitment of reduction, that would be a feat in itself and commendable of the EU as a power. With the major powers able to set an example, then perhaps other nations would fall in line. Reducing climate change might just be the EU’s ticket to leadership. With a stake economically and environmentally speaking, the EU could gain a more respectable position internationally by starting a big enough dent in the climate struggle. Then again, can the EU ever have the weight to get the US to cooperate on such issues? I find myself on the pessimistic side of that question, of course based off years of the US’ lack in environmental commitment (take Kyoto). Until pragmatism as you put it, surpasses the standard of science, the US isn’t going to budge. As to your question, political pragmatism seems to be holding out thus far – at what point can we make the switch to scientific fact? The European Commission is right to reduce its allocation of assistance since it cannot afford to send even 100 euros of aid. Based off the discussions a few months ago at Green Week, it is only necessary that the EU ask for China, India, and the US’s participation in this goal. I doubt the US will even reach that goal, but he couldn’t have said it better with hey are not going to get more than that, so let’s get real. Climate change is a force not to be taken lightly. The more cooperation the better.
If the EU can get the US to sign on to a long-term commitment of reduction, that would be a feat in itself and commendable of the EU as a power. With the major powers able to set an example, then perhaps other nations would fall in line. Reducing climate change might just be the EU’s ticket to leadership. With a stake economically and environmentally speaking, the EU could gain a more respectable position internationally by starting a big enough dent in the climate struggle. Then again, can the EU ever have the weight to get the US to cooperate on such issues? I find myself on the pessimistic side of that question, of course based off years of the US’ lack in environmental commitment (take Kyoto). Until pragmatism as you put it, surpasses the standard of science, the US isn’t going to budge. As to your question, political pragmatism seems to be holding out thus far – at what point can we make the switch to scientific fact?

]]>