President Barack Obama addressing the Summit on Climate Change at the United Nations in New York today. (Photo by Tsutomu Kobayashi / Japan Pool / AP)
by Christi Parsons and updated
NEW YORK -- President Obama this morning issued an appeal to world leaders to help avert "an irreversible catastrophe" in the earth's climate, accepting a portion of blame for global warming on behalf of the United States, but also urging the world's biggest polluters to change their ways.
Speaking before a United Nations summit on climate change, the president's first address to the world body, Obama touted steps the U.S. has taken to slow global warming and attempted to reassure the world that Americans are committed to the cause.
"We understand the gravity of the climate threat," Obama said. " We are determined to act. And we will meet our responsibility to future generations."
The president also urged world leaders to work toward an international agreement on global warming, as they draw closer to a U.N. summit in Copenhagen the end of this year.
The remarks come at a time of rising concern about progress in those talks. Aides to Obama say things aren't proceeding as quickly as they would like, and are leaving open room for the possibility that talks will extend into next year.
While there are dire predictions coming from other quarters - European officials say the talks are close to deadlock - administration officials think there still is cause for hope.
This morning, Obama tried to make the case for it. He ticked off a list of steps the U.S. has taken, including investing economic stimulus money in clean energy projects and raising its vehicle emission standards.
Notably, he did not call for the Senate to pass a bill before the Copenhagen meeting in December, or even to get one out of committee by then.
But the president laid down a personal marker on the issue, speaking in starker terms than he has used in months to describe the risk of not acting.
"The security and stability of each nation and all peoples - our prosperity, our health, our safety - are in jeopardy," Obama said. "And the time we have to reverse this tide is running out."
Obama also offered a case for every nation to rise to the challenge, asserting that individual countries can still pursue economic prosperity while doing their part to protect the planet.
"Each of us must do what we can when we can to grow our economies without endangering our planet, and we must all do it together," Obama said. We must seize the opportunity to make Copenhagen a significant step forward in the global fight against climate change.
The poorest nations have more to gain by correcting course, Obama suggested, arguing that they suffer disproportionately from the effects of climate change.
"For these are the nations that are already living with the unfolding effects of a warming planet - famine and drought, disappearing coastal villages and the conflict that arises from scarce resources," Obama said.
"Their future is no longer a choice between a growing economy and a cleaner planet, because their survival depends on both."
Chinese President Hu Jintao is also addressing the climate change summit today, in addition to meeting with Obama privately this afternoon.
In private meetings and public comments throughout the day, Obama tried to make the case for a cooperative effort. He met with Hu, a major player in the climate talks, and a full complement of U.N. members attending an evening dinner to talk about climate issues.
During his own address to the U.N., Hu pledged to cut carbon dioxide emissions in his country, but told the assembly he would measure the cuts in terms of its gross domestic product - a sign of the concern about not slowing China's rapid economic growth. He didn't set a figure for the cuts.
As the delegations made their way through New York, their motorcades not only jammed traffic, but also made the emissions-wary take notice.
"I think the U.N. should make a pledge," deadpanned Obama climate negotiator Todd Stern, to achieve "electric vehicle motorcades in five years."
On a more serious note, Obama spent the day touting steps the U.S. has taken to reduce its carbon footprint, including investing economic stimulus money in clean energy projects and raising vehicle emission standards.
Without pressing for Senate action on an energy bill that has cleared the House including so-called "cap and trade'' provisions for curtailing greenhouse gas emissions, Carol Browner, Obama's point person on climate issues, said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is in charge of the schedule, not the White House.
The administration is "using laws on the books," she said, "to make a very important down payment" improvement.
Obama offered a case for every nation to rise to the challenge, asserting that individual countries can still pursue economic prosperity while doing their part to protect the planet.
"Each of us must do what we can when we can to grow our economies without endangering our planet, and we must all do it together," Obama said. "We must seize the opportunity to make Copenhagen a significant step forward in the global fight against climate change."
The poorest nations have more to gain by correcting course, Obama suggested, arguing that they suffer disproportionately from the effects of climate change.
"For these are the nations that are already living with the unfolding effects of a warming planet - famine and drought, disappearing coastal villages and the conflict that arises from scarce resources," Obama said. "Their future is no longer a choice between a growing economy and a cleaner planet, because their survival depends on both."
Comments
Excuse me!. but the Universe has been here for millions of years, even the Dems couldn't have screwed up the planet in just a few years. Stop trying to scare the world with this global warming issue, When more than half the scientists disagree over this issue. Everyone should know that everything that goes around comes around, in other words its cyclical. And unless you get India and China along with the rest of the world to go along, then just our effects would be ineffective.
Posted by: Paul | September 22, 2009 11:09 AM
Just shocking that our Pzez. would ignore factual scientific doubts about this Hollywood hyped "global warming" (or whatever the latest obscure term, as they change as facts debunk old descriptions) and promote an unproven theory, with a great deal of disagreement within the scientific community that is in fact shifting towards being proven incorrect. As he again "apologizes" for America, in his opinion, for its supposed misdeeds, again causing harm to the world, he also appears to ignore the vast economic damage it would impose upon America's economy or the 1700 extra dollars per year it would cost the average American (a fact from a confidential March 2009 Treasury Dept. study, hidden and totally misrepresented by Obama and Congressional Dems.) Of course, as we heard in the words of the radical, self-proclaimed communist, ex-green czar Van Jones, that this policy was useful in uniting to the radicals with the environmentalists for an end by any means to gain their socialist agenda. Makes one wonder about the real reason Obama would support such uncertain position which would have such massive negative consequences for America.
Posted by: bubba Porter | September 22, 2009 11:52 AM
Excuse me!. but the Universe has been here for millions of years, even the Dems couldn't have screwed up the planet in just a few years.
Posted by: Paul | September 22, 2009 11:09 AM
Simplistic and naive view at best. Let's not even take the "global warming" issue, as that is a topic the rabid refuse to acknowledge, but let's look at the 700 species already extinct and that 1/2 of all species are threatened in one way or another and by "most" scientists are expected to be extinct by 2100. Look at the big fish population.....90% deminished from 1960.
Posted by: bill r. | September 22, 2009 12:09 PM
Just shocking that our Pzez. would ignore factual scientific doubts about this Hollywood hyped "global warming" (or whatever the latest obscure term, as they change as facts debunk old descriptions) and promote an unproven theory, with a great deal of disagreement within the scientific community that is in fact shifting towards being proven incorrect. As he again "apologizes" for America, in his opinion, for its supposed misdeeds, again causing harm to the world, he also appears to ignore the vast economic damage it would impose upon America's economy or the 1700 extra dollars per year it would cost the average American (a fact from a confidential March 2009 Treasury Dept. study, hidden and totally misrepresented by Obama and Congressional Dems.) Of course, as we heard in the words of the radical, self-proclaimed communist, ex-green czar Van Jones, that this policy was useful in uniting to the radicals with the environmentalists for an end by any means to gain their socialist agenda. Makes one wonder about the real reason Obama would support such uncertain position which would have such massive negative consequences for America.
Posted by: bubba Porter | September 22, 2009 12:52 PM
The amount of scientific doubt, among scientists in the field, is not nearly so substantial as the flat earthers claim.
Even so, maybe we should take a lesson from Dick Cheney, one of the wingnuts' favorite philosopher/mass murderers. Dick had some like the One Percent test: if there was just a one percent chance of a terrorist risk, the country had to pull out all stops to prevent it.
Shouldn't the same "reasoning" apply to global climate change? If there's just a 1 percent chance that we're destroying the planet and all life on it, shouldn't we take reasonable precautions to prevent it? We are, after all, talking about the entire world as we know it, which in some circles is considered important.
Posted by: a blinkin | September 22, 2009 2:12 PM
A better climate certainly will take away some of the pressure on healthcare.
Posted by: Jaap den Haan | September 22, 2009 2:45 PM
Just shocking that our Pzez. would ignore factual scientific doubts about this Hollywood hyped "global warming" (or whatever the latest obscure term, as they change as facts debunk old descriptions)
Posted by: bubba Porter | September 22, 2009 11:52 AM
Ok MORON, let me clear this up for you. Climate Change is the tern used for the local weather changes that Global Warming has created! Got that? Two terms two differnt meanings.
And if you dont believe this is happening just look north to the ice caps and tell me what you see?
As usual same old sotry from the right, ignore the future and just stick with what YOU think worked in the past.
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | September 22, 2009 5:12 PM
Scot, climate change is NOT the local term for what global warming is causing. Climate Change is the new way of telling us about global warming.
Anyway, the polar ice cap to the North always melts to some degree over the summer. It did last summer and then it refroze last winter just as it always does.
Also, Scot, this planet changes ALL the time. From the mid 1300s to the mid 1800s this planet went through the Little Ice Age. Since that ended, the planet warmed, which makes sense following an ice age. In the past decade, the planet has stabilized and in fact cooled.
There is no global warming and there is no climate change, at least not how we're told about it. Up until a couple of years ago, sunspot activity was high, which most scientists says meant warmer temps on Earth and the rest of the solar system. Now, there basically is no sunspot activity, which scientists say is one reason our temps have fallen.
So, Scot, use that God-given thing you have called a brain and less of that God-given thing called the buttocks!
Posted by: John D | September 22, 2009 6:23 PM
First it was this:
http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19731203,00.html
Then 33 years later its this:
http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,20060403,00.html
Whatever facts they need to fit their story. The facts say differently:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23411799-7583,00.html
And then you have the hypocrits at the UN
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/22/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5329380.shtml
Or could it be sunspots. The following graph talks about correlations - flatliners go get an adult to explain this to you
http://motls.blogspot.com/2009/04/correlation-of-sunspots-and-sea-level.html
Posted by: Terry | September 22, 2009 10:50 PM
Nearly all scientists agree that the climate has changed by human action, and the other way round. Radioactivity plays a bigger role than believed. The hormonal system in general is influenced by pollution. The increase in production of estrogen is marked, this is not only true about women, as we can see.
Posted by: Jaap den Haan | September 23, 2009 5:08 AM
Terry is right. Science is all bunk and scientists are all frauds. We don't need to listen to them. Good ole american common sense as espoused by our conservative political and business leaders is alll we need to listen too. We don't need all that high falutin' book learning, we just need a few graphs, Rush and the Bible to guide our understanding of complex issues like the climate.
Posted by: We don't need no stinkin' science! | September 23, 2009 10:31 AM
Scot, using typical lefty, liberal demonizing is so passe', please stick to some level of intelligent discourse on the Swamp or stay on the daily kooks site, where your peers run amok it that garbage trash talk for the benefit of their own discussions void of any knowledge. Ditto to the cut and paste offenders.
Posted by: bubba Porter | September 23, 2009 10:41 AM
Stinky,
There are scientists on both sides of this issue.
http://www.oism.org/pproject/
Why won't Al Gore, the Nobel prize winning scientist, debate the issue with a scientist that does not believe in Global Warming?
http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/20873/Why_Wont_Al_Gore_Debate.html
I would expect a scientists would want to look at the facts - like the correlation present in that graph.
Posted by: Terry | September 23, 2009 5:49 PM
The only thing that controls global temperatures is the sun.Through out history we have had cold and warm periods directly related to the sun(sunspots) and its periods of solar flairs.This just another example of Obama and his cronies redistributing the wealth with this rubbish about potential oil disasters.
Posted by: Dan | October 12, 2009 5:35 PM
The only thing that controls global temperatures is the sun.Through out history we have had cold and warm periods directly related to the sun(sunspots) and its periods of solar flairs.This just another example of Obama and his cronies redistributing the wealth with this rubbish about potential oil disasters.
Posted by: Dan | October 12, 2009 5:35 PM