Qataris have average income per capita in excess of $60,000pa, but they are not in Annex 1 of the Kyoto Protocol.

They produce more oil than Exxon-Mobil.

But, what the hell…. the weather’s survivable in December and they have massive air conditioning. And they are trying to compete with Dubai as the tourist capital of the ME, so they should turn on a good show.

“In essence it is now clear that Kyoto is dying — already irrelevant in terms of mitigation, it will become increasingly irrelevant in political terms too”

Gareth describes the Lynas post as “one the best and most detailed accounts I’ve come across”. Not surprising, I came across this article (Tom Nelson link I think) that encapsulates the perspective: They Mean Well. Really? By Victor Volsky:-

“It is impossible to underrate the importance of situational morality for liberals. So divorced are they from reality, so used to dealing only with abstractions, so innocent of the world as it is, that they exhibit a sort of reverse-Midas touch — any attempt on their part to do something practical inevitably turns into a series of pratfalls. Naturally, they are loath to talk of their deeds, concentrating instead on their pristine and virtuous intentions, the only thing that really counts in their book.”

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/they_mean_well_really.html#ixzz1gaLm6WFL

“Qatar Petroleum (QP) is a state owned petroleum company in Qatar. The company operates all oil and gas activities in Qatar, including exploration, production, refining, transport, and storage. QP’s Chairman Abdullah Bin Hamad Al-Attiyah, is also the head of the Ministry of Energy and Industry and, as of April 2007, the Deputy Prime Minister of Qatar. QP’s operations are therefore directly linked with state planning agencies, regulatory authorities, and policymaking bodies. Together, revenues from oil and natural gas amount to 60% of the country’s GDP. Currently it is the third largest oil company in the world by oil and gas reserves.”

An oil-fueled host and Sharia law has the makings of a subdued and uncomfortable party.

6. Further decides that the process shall raise the level of ambition

Enjoyed this under WUWT, Kyoto – in the past for Canada:-

Jimbo says:
December 12, 2011 at 4:18 pm

“Kyoto is just a thing of the past. Children just aren’t going to know what Kyoto is. It was a very rare and unexciting event”

When is the next Conference of Party-goers?

Qatar. From Wiki, :-

The laws of Qatar tolerate alcohol to a certain extent. However, the few bars and nightclubs in Qatar operate only in expensive hotels and clubs, with Qatar Distribution Company[16] the only importer and retailer for alcohol in Qatar. Under Qatar’s Sharia, it is illegal to show alcohol or be drunk in public

COPs 18, 19 and 20 will be non-events anyway though because only COP21 2015 is relevant now – unless all the parties suddenly get extraordinarily generous and start contributing dollops of cash to the Green Climate Fund or something.

Lack of ambition and ambitionless re not the same thing. We can have an ambition of zero, that does not mean that we lack ambition.

We need to be clear that we are collectively committed to declaring our ambition and leadership in these issues, even if those happen to be at zero

When is the next Conference of Party-goers?

Plenty left to do after Durban agreement

By Brian Fallow
5:30 AM Tuesday Dec 13, 2011

“Climate Change Negotiations Minister Tim Groser said the negotiations for the long-term regime beyond 2020 would be long and arduous.

And in a statement with Climate Change Minister Nick Smith he left open the possibility that New Zealand’s commitments after 2012 might not be within the framework of the Kyoto Protocol but rather “join all the developing countries, the United States, Canada, Japan, Russia and others, in making those commitments under the alternative transitional arrangements described in different texts“.

“It is not a matter of whether we make commitments – New Zealand will – but where they are made and how ambitious we should be,” they said.”

1) What “different texts”? (interesting reading if we knew)

2) Beyond 2012, are they nullifying commitments made under the Kyoto Protocol and Copenhagen Accord and starting with a clean slate? (I think so).

3) “where they are made” indicates that there will be factions at COP21 2015: Kyoto Protocol aligned Europeans, like-minded clean-slate group, spoilers etc and agreement to disagree (COP21 will be fun).

4) “how ambitious we should be” probably means “considerably less ambitious than we are now with KP and CA” (and maybe completely ambitionless)

Where the previous message was “There are currently no decisions for this meeting, they will be uploaded shortly. In some cases, no decisions are available” there is a new message “The COP 17/CMP 7 decisions can be found on the home page [hotlinked] of the website”. That link leads to this:-

Decisions adopted by COP 17 and CMP 7

http://unfccc.int/2860.php

I think these “decisions” are scurrilous in that I cannot see how they were all agreed on in the process. For example ‘Launching of the Green Climate Fund’ was a decision of Cancun – not Durban.

Almost-genuine decisions seem to be ‘Establishment of an Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action’ and ‘Dates and venues of future sessions’ but I do not see a decision on the Kyoto Protocol.

These “decisions” do not tally with the press statements. They just look like what the UNFCCC want the decisions to be – not what the Parties actually decided or agreed to.

The second “decision” on the list is ‘Establishment of an Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action’ which is only part of what I think is closest to the ‘Durban Platform’ that I posted elsewhere but when you look at the document it reads:-

Establishment of an Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action

Proposal by the President
Draft decision -/CP.17

That is NOT a decision of the Parties.

1) Installation of strategically placed scarecrows in the corn patch.

2) Procurement of a watering can, and marriage of supplemental wives to transport the extra water from the well (requires cost/benefit analysis but there are spin-offs).

3) Mend the gap in the kraal down by the chook run.

I don’t think they would have raised much revenue from a tax on aviation bunker fuel anyway.

“Manage water resources” – water management has been around a while, see Water Management in Ancient Persia http://www.destinationiran.com/water-management-in-ancient-persia.htm

“Boost food security” – herding and horticulture has been around a while, see large scale elephant hunts staged in Europe 600,000 years ago and first domesticated crops, wheat and barley 10,000 years ago http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/history/lecture01/lec01.html

“Climate-proof agriculture” – climate proofing has been around a while (ancient Romans), see The History of the Greenhouse http://greenhouseconstruction.blogsavy.com/