Pages

21 Aralık 2009 Pazartesi

NY Times: A Grudging Accord in Climate Talks

December 20, 2009 A Grudging Accord in Climate Talks


COPENHAGEN — After two weeks of delays, theatrics and last-minute deal-making, the United Nations climate change talks concluded here early Saturday morning with a grudging agreement by the participants to “take note” of a pact shaped by five major nations.
The final accord, a 12-paragraph document, was a statement of intention, not a binding pledge to begin taking action on global warming — a compromise seen to represent a flawed but essential step forward.
Robert C. Orr, the United Nations assistant secretary general for policy and planning, said that virtually every country had signaled that it would back the accord, and that “take note” was shorthand for acceptance.
But many delegates of the 193 countries that had gathered here left Copenhagen in a sour mood, disappointed that the pact lacked so many elements they considered crucial, including firm targets for mid- or long-term reductions of greenhouse gas emissions and a deadline for concluding a binding treaty next year.
Even President Obama, a principal force behind the final deal, said the accord would take only a modest step toward healing the Earth’s fragile atmosphere.
Many participants also said that the chaos and contentiousness of the talks may signal the end of reliance on a process that for almost two decades had been viewed as the best approach to tackling global warming: the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and a series of 15 conventions following a 1992 climate summit meeting in Rio de Janeiro.
The process has become unworkable, many said, because it has proved virtually impossible to forge consensus among the disparate blocs of countries fighting over environmental guilt, future costs and who should referee the results.
“The climate treaty process isn’t going to die, but the real work of coordinating international efforts to reduce emissions will primarily occur elsewhere,” said Michael Levi, who has been tracking the diplomatic effort for the Council on Foreign Relations.
That elsewhere will likely be a much smaller group of nations, roughly 30 countries responsible for 90 percent of global warming emissions. It was these nations that Mr. Obama rallied in a series of dramatic encounters on Friday to finally ink a deal that starts a flow of financing for poor countries to adapt to climate change and sets up a system for major economies to monitor and report their greenhouse gas emissions.
This smaller group of nations will meet periodically to tackle a narrower agenda of issues, like technology sharing or the merging of carbon trading markets, without the chaos and posturing of the United Nations process. A version of this already exists in the 17-nation Major Economies Forum, which has been a model of decorum and progress compared with what the world saw unfold at the climate talks.
The deal worked out in Copenhagen is a political agreement forged by major emitters to curb greenhouse gases, to help developing nations build clean-energy economies and to send money flowing to cushion the effects of climate change on vulnerable states. But even if countries live up to their commitments on emissions, a stark gap remains — measured in tens of billions of tons of projected flows of carbon dioxide — between nations’ combined pledges and what would be required to reliably avert the risks of disruptive changes in rainfall and drought, ecosystems and polar ice cover from global warming, scientists say.
The chances of success substantially hinge on whether Mr. Obama can fulfill his promises to reduce American greenhouse gas emissions and raise tens of billions of dollars to help other countries deal with global warming. That in turn depends in large part on whether Congress takes action on a bill that puts a price on carbon and devotes a large part of the proceeds to foreign aid. And that is no sure thing.
Yvo de Boer, the United Nations official who manages the climate negotiations, said that though the Copenhagen accord was “politically incredibly significant,” it hardly moved the treaty process from where it was in 2007, when the world’s countries pledged to complete a binding agreement here this year.
“We have a lot of work to do on the road to Mexico,” he said, in a reference to the next climate meeting to be held in Mexico City next year.
Even reaching the tenuous accord in Copenhagen was a tortuous path, culminating in an impassioned debate on the floor of the plenary meeting that lasted into the wee hours of Saturday morning.
Speaker after speaker from the developing world denounced the deal as a sham process fashioned behind closed doors by a club of rich countries and large emerging powers. The debate reached such a pitch that the Sudanese delegate likened the effect of the accord on poor nations to the Holocaust.
That set off a backlash and many of the smallest and most vulnerable nations, while continuing to express reservations, began falling in line behind the deal. Ultimately, all but a handful of countries — Venezuela, Cuba, Sudan and Saudi Arabia among them — went along with the decision to accept the document.
Before the parties gathered in Copenhagen, the United States and China had been sniping at each other over various aspects of the proposed agreement, particularly over American demands that Beijing agree to a system of international monitoring, through which its public promise to reduce the carbon intensity of its economy — the rate of emissions per unit of economic activity — could be verified. But as that friction was growing, there was also significant progress on sharing clean energy technology and even exchanges between American and Chinese environmental officials over ways to accurately measure greenhouse gas emissions.
Mr. Obama and Premier Wen Jiabao of China conducted a productive summit meeting in Beijing last month. On Thanksgiving Day, the Chinese government announced its pollution reduction target and said it would enforce it with domestic law. American officials privately said the target was too low and raised questions about the reliability of Beijing’s reporting methods, saying that some form of international monitoring would be necessary. China protested and declared that it would not sacrifice its sovereignty to an outside verification scheme.
The friction boiled over on Friday, as Mr. Obama arrived at the Copenhagen meeting.
Twice during the day, Mr. Wen sent an underling to represent him at the meetings with Mr. Obama. To make things worse, each time it was a lower-level official.
It was bad enough, said officials, describing the atmosphere later, that Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei was sitting at the table with President Obama, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany and other world leaders. But Friday afternoon, after what administration officials believed had been a constructive one-on-one meeting between Mr. Obama and Mr. Wen, the Chinese premier sent his special representative on climate change negotiations, Yu Qingtai, to a meeting of the leaders of major countries, including Mr. Obama.
The White House made a point of noting the snub in a statement to reporters. Mr. Obama, for his part, said to his staff: “I don’t want to mess around with this anymore. I want to talk to Wen,” according to an aide.
The White House set up an evening meeting between Mr. Obama and Mr. Wen. It also set up a separate meeting with Jacob Zuma, the president of South Africa, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil, and Manmohan Singh, the Indian prime minister. The approval of those was needed to seal any climate deal.
Shortly before the appointed time of the meeting with Mr. Wen, Denis McDonough, the national security council chief of staff, and Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, arrived and were startled to find the Chinese prime minister already meeting with the leaders of the three other countries.
They alerted Mr. Obama and he rushed down to the site of the meeting.
“Mr. Premier, are you ready to see me?” Mr. Obama called from the doorway. “Are you ready?”
Despite its tense start, the meeting led to an accord that settled a number of issues, including a compromise on wording on the issue of monitoring and verification that satisfied Mr. Wen.
Mr. Obama then took the proposed text to a group of European nations whose representatives grumbled but signed off.
As his motorcade idled in front of the conference center, Mr. Obama took to a rostrum emblazoned with the presidential seal.
“This progress did not come easily, and we know that this progress alone is not enough,” the president said, with no note of triumph in his voice.
He added, “We’ve come a long way, but we have much further to go.”

Reporting was contributed by Helene Cooper, Elisabeth Rosenthal, Tom Zeller Jr. and James Kanter.

UNFCCC PRESS RELEASE: Copenhagen United Nations Climate Change Conference ends with political agreement to cap temperature rise, reduce emissions and raise finance

UNFCCC PRESS RELEASE: Copenhagen United Nations Climate Change Conference ends with political agreement to cap temperature rise, reduce emissions and raise finance

(Copenhagen, 19 December 2009) The United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen ended today with an agreement by countries to cap the global temperature rise by commiting to significant emission reductions, and to raise finance to kickstart action in the developing world to deal with climate change.

At the meeting, world leaders agreed the ‘Copenhagen Accord’, which was supported by a majority of countries, including amongst them the biggest and the richest, and the smallest and most vulnerable.

“We have sealed the deal,” said UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said. “This accord cannot be everything that everyone hoped for, but it is an essential beginning,” he said.

The Copenhagen Accord recognizes the scientific view that an increase in global temperature below 2 degrees is required to stave off the worst effects of climate change.

In order to achieve this goal, the accord specifies that industrialised countries will commit to implement, individually or jointly, quantified economy-wide emissions targets from 2020, to be listed in the accord before 31 January 2010.

A number of developing countries, including major emerging economies, agreed to communicate their efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions every two years, also listing their voluntary pledges before the 31 January 2010.

Nationally appropriate mitigation actions seeking international support are to be recorded in a registry along with relevant technology, finance and capacity building support from industrialised nations.

“We must be honest about what we have got,” said UNFCCC Executive Secretary Yvo de Boer. “The world walks away from Copenhagen with a deal. But clearly ambitions to reduce emissions must be raised significantly if we are to hold the world to 2 degrees,” he added.

Because the pledges listed by developed and developing countries may, according to science, be found insufficient to keep the global temperature rise below 2 degrees or less, leaders called for a review of the accord, to be completed by 2015.

The review would include a consideration of the long-term goal to limit the global average temperature rise to 1.5 degrees.

Heads of state and government also intend to unleash prompt action on mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology, reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries and capacity-building.

To this effect, they intend to establish the “Copenhagen Green Climate Fund” to support immediate action on climate change. The collective commitment towards the fund by developed countries over the next three years will approach 30 billion US dollars.

For long-term finance, developed countries agreed to support a goal of jointly mobilizing 100 billion dollars a year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries.

In order to step up action on the development and transfer of technology, governments intend to establish a new technology mechanism to accelerate development and transfer in support of action on adaptation and mitigation.

119 world leaders attended the meeting, the largest gathering of heads of state and government in the history of the UN. “Climate change is the permanent leadership challenge of our time,” said UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. “I therefore urge world leaders to remain engaged,” he said.

“We now have a package to work with and begin immediate action,” said UNFCCC Executive Secretary Yvo de Boer. “However, we need to be clear that it is a letter of intent and is not precise about what needs to be done in legal terms. So the challenge is now to turn what we have agreed
politically in Copenhagen into something real, measurable and verifiable,” he added.

The next annual UN Climate Change Conference will take place towards the end of 2010 in Mexico City, preceded by a major two week negotiating session in Bonn, Germany, scheduled 31 May to 11 June.

About the UNFCCC
With 194 Parties, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has near universal membership and is the parent treaty of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol has been ratified by 190 of the UNFCCC Parties. Under the Protocol, 37 States, consisting of highly industrialized countries and countries undergoing the process of transition to a market economy, have legally binding emission limitation and reduction commitments. The ultimate objective of both treaties is to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that will prevent dangerous human interference with the climate system.

Center for Biological Diversity Statement on President Obama’s Copenhagen Speech

For Immediate Release, December 18, 2009

COPENHAGEN— Just hours after touching down in Copenhagen, President Obama delivered a speech indicating that the U.S. negotiating position is unchanged. The U.S. has pledged to cut emissions by only about 3% below 1990 levels by 2020. According to a United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat document http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/leaked-secritariat-doc-degrees-1.pdf ; leaked yesterday, the emissions reductions promised by the U.S. and other countries would, even if fully realized, still result in atmospheric CO2concentrations exceeding 550 parts per million and a global temperature rise of over 3 degrees C. This translates into a death sentence for small island nations, coral reefs, polar bears and much of the world’s biodiversity. And the 550 ppm and 3 degree prediction of the Secretariat is likely optimistic; independent scientists conclude & http://climateinteractive.org/scoreboard ;the current proposals in Copenhagen would take us to over 750 ppm and 3.9 degrees of warming.

Obama also conditioned U.S. support for a $100 billion fund to help the most vulnerable nations in the developing world cope with the impact of global warming “if – and only if – it is part of the broader accord” outlined by the U.S.

Kassie Siegel, director of the Climate Law Institute of the Center for Biological Diversity, had the following response to President Obama’s speech:
“Obama offered only ultimatums to those countries most impacted by global warming; accept our terms or we will block funding to help you survive the crisis we caused but for which we still refuse to take responsibility.”
“Notably, in an apparent conscious renunciation of one of the most fundamental principals of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Obama replaced the phrase ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’ with the new phrase ‘common but differentiated responses.’ In short, under Obama, the U.S. apparently refuses to accept its unique responsibility as the largest cumulative greenhouse emitter on the planet.”
“Given Obama reaffirmed his position that the U.S. would commit to cutting carbon dioxide emissions by only 3% below 1990 levels by 2020, any deal announced in Copenhagen can not in any rational sense of the word be deemed a ‘success.’ The IPCC estimates that CO2 reductions of 25-40% below 1990 levels are needed by 2020 to avoid greater than 2 degrees of warming, while cuts of over 45% are likely needed to get on a trajectory for the only scientifically and ethically credible target of 350 ppm.”
“For the U.S. to put on the negotiating table a take-it-or-leave-it proposal that, by all reasonable and rational accounts would result in the death or displacement of millions of people and the extinctions of hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of species, is unacceptable. It’s hard to image Obama the Candidate endorsing such position. But Obama the President is, when it comes to actual actions on climate, far closer to President Bush than Candidate Obama. The U.S. and the world need Candidate Obama to reemerge.”
*The Center for Biological Diversity http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/index.html ;is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 240,000 members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.*

19 Aralık 2009 Cumartesi

The regulation of video on demand services - Statement | Ofcom

The regulation of video on demand services - Statement | Ofcom

Ofcom has published the framework for the regulation of Video on Demand (VOD) services. This will cover services like 4OD, ITV Player, and Demand Five which have to be regulated by 19th December 2009 in-line with the EU’s Audiovisual Media Services Directive which covers VOD services that are "TV-Like".

The directive doesn't cover newspaper's on-line content or user generated content. However VOD content covered will not be subject to Ofcom's Broadcasting Code.

The regulations will fully come into force in March 2010 when they will cover any "TV=Like" service and many of the Internet TV netcasters will be regulated.

This is meant to introduce a level playing field for all broadcasters but many see it as an unnecessary burden which will just require more bureaucracy.

Programs for example

· must not contain any incitement to hatred based on race, sex, religion or nationality;
· must provide appropriate protection for minors against harmful material; and
· sponsored programmes and services must comply with applicable sponsorship requirements.

Advertising rules cover

· advertising must be readily recognisable and cannot contain any surreptitious advertising or use subliminal advertising techniques.
· advertising must not encourage behaviour that is prejudicial to the health or safety of people.
· tobacco products, prescription-only medicines or medical treatments cannot be advertised.

Time will tell how effective the legislation is as netcaster can presumable more their infrastructure to an area that isn't covered by the legislation.

A Three-digit Number for Non-Emergency Healthcare Services - Designating number “111” | Ofcom

A Three-digit Number for Non-Emergency Healthcare Services - Designating number “111” | Ofcom

Ofcom has introduced a new 3 digit non-emergency medical number 111.

The number will be trialed in various strategic health authorities in 2010 before rolling out nationally.

17 Aralık 2009 Perşembe

John Kerry's Copenhagen Speech

The Video is here.
*The full text of the speech is below:*

Thank you also for the privilege of allowing me to share some thoughts at this historic meeting.

For seventeen years now we’ve been coming together. Through enormous transitions in our politics -- new Presidents, new Prime Ministers, new friends who quickly became old friends; we’ve taken a long journey together.

From Rio to Copenhagen, with 14 COPs in between, through all the hurdles and the challenges, two constants have remained: First, the urgency of the science that tells us we must act. Second, we have never wavered from our determination to get the job done. And that’s why we’re on the brink of
making history now.

Back in 1992 an American President personally traveled to climate talks in Rio to help plant the seeds of possibility, the promise of a beginning; But that promise was allowed to wither on the vine. In the years that followed the United States joined with other major polluters to delay, divide and deny. We simply failed to lead in the manner this challenge demands.

But this is a new day. Just as in Rio, an American President is now coming to these talks in good faith—this time, to promise a new beginning and to re-commit the United States to being part of a global solution.

Seventeen years is a long time to pursue an urgent goal. But history reminds us that sometimes even urgent struggles take time. Consider the hundred years of conflict in Northern Ireland. At the moment when peace was finally achieved after tireless efforts, Senator George Mitchell, said simply: “We had seven hundred days of failure and one day of success.”

And that’s why we’re gathered here again: Because we know that, in one day, with one agreement, we can put the world on a safer path. And in the coming hours and days, the world expects us to get the job done.

Even back in 1992, we all came together for a simple reason: we accepted the science. I’ve often said that global climate change is an issue where no one has the luxury of being “half-pregnant.” You either are or you aren’t. And so it is with climate change. You either understand and accept the science – or you don’t. Folks this isn’t a cafeteria where you can pick and choose and accept the science that tells us what *is* happening, but then reject the science that warns us what *will *happen*. *

If Dick Cheney can argue that even a 1% chance of a terrorist attack is 100% justification for preemptive action—then surely, when scientists tell us that climate change is nearly a 100% certainty, we ought to be able to stand together, all of us, and join in an all out effort to combat a mortal threat
to the life of this planet.

In recent days it has been interesting to watch people who have never even accepted the basic science now suddenly transform themselves into climate change investigators, wannabe Inspector Clouseaus looking for some sort of smoking gun to erase decades of constant and unequivocal research.

There isn’t a nation on the planet where the evidence of the impacts of climate change isn’t mounting. Frankly, those who look for any excuse to continue challenging the science have a fundamental responsibility which they have never fulfilled: Prove us wrong or stand down. Prove that the
pollution we put in the atmosphere is *not* having the harmful effect we know it is. Tell us where the gases go and what they do. Pony up one single, cogent, legitimate, scholarly analysis. Prove that the ocean isn’t actually rising; prove that the ice caps aren’t melting, that deserts aren’t expanding. And prove that human beings have nothing to do with any of it. And by the way -- good luck!
 
Ladies and Gentlemen: Here in Copenhagen, now and forever, amateur hour is over. It’s time for science fact to trump science fiction.

Experts from the world’s leading universities and think tanks—including The Fletcher School and the Heinz Center—have created a new “climate scorecard” called C-ROADS that more accurately predicts where we’re headed. It shows that if you take the best, latest offers of every country, and assume they
will be perfectly, completely implemented—guess what? None of it is nearly enough to get the job done.

Right now our best efforts may limit us to a rise of 3.9 degrees centigrade above pre-industrial levels, even though the world’s major economies agreed this year in Italy that anything beyond 2 degrees would be catastrophic. That’s why Copenhagen is not about one country or one faction simply making
a demand of another. It’s the science itself, demanding action from all of us.

As fingers point in one direction or another, as frustration grows with the politics of one country or another, let’s not lose sight of the reality that no country individually, and none of us collectively, are doing enough.

So why then are these next three days so important? *Because it is crucial that we get started.* By setting a price on carbon and committing ourselves to reduce emissions, we send a signal to the marketplace that will revolutionize global supply and use of energy. It will forever alter the patterns of capital investment and consumer behavior. I believe in the power of the free market. And when the free market is unleashed to solve a problem, our innovators and entrepreneurs can eclipse all the predictions and render all the models obsolete. If you don’t believe me let me remind you that in 1992 when we met in Rio there were about 26 sites on the internet. Type Copenhagen into Google today and you get 43 million hits.

The 12 months since we gathered in Poznan have seen a series of successes that add up to a changed and changing world. And I’m proud to say that nowhere has that change been more pronounced than in the United States, where we are at last moving in the right direction.
 
In January, we swore in a President who promised to “mark a new chapter in America's leadership on climate change.” And he has.
 
Since January, we have made the single largest investment in clean energy in our nation’s history: eighty billion dollars which will result directly in emissions reductions. At the Major Economies Forum we led the world in agreeing to cut global emissions in half by 2050. We have set bold, binding
targets to raise the fuel economy of America’s cars and trucks for the first time in three decades—and now accelerated those targets by four years. This Monday, our Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced a $350 million dollar clean energy fund for advanced economies to help pay for wind, solar, and efficiency projects in the developing world.
 
Thirty-three of our fifty states have voluntarily entered into compacts to reduce emissions. As a result, over half the American economy is already preparing to implement mandatory emissions reduction policies, and three regions are currently setting up emissions trading systems. More than 1,000 mayors are taking strict measures to aim towards Kyoto targets--and a number of cities are actually getting close on their own. Across America, grassroots initiatives are sprouting up as citizens lead their leaders.
 
It was against that backdrop that the House of Representatives finally passed comprehensive climate change legislation with billions of dollars for international adaptation, technology transfer, deforestation and, for the first time in American history, a national mandatory emissions target.

And just last week, the Environmental Protection Agency sent a wakeup call to Capitol Hill: If Congress won’t legislate, the EPA will regulate.

In the last ten months, we’ve accomplished more than we did in the previous ten years. Two years ago in Bali, in a room much like this one, a delegate from Papua New Guinea chastised the United States saying “If…you are not willing to lead, then please, leave it to the rest of us, please get out of
the way.” Well, we’re here today. The United States is back and President Barack Obama is coming to Copenhagen to put America on the right side of history.

But, as energized as I am about all we’ve done this year, we still need to complete the task in the United States Senate. Frankly, meeting that challenge early next spring can be significantly assisted by what is achieved here. In the Senate and in America, the concerns that kept us out of Kyoto back in 1997 are still with us today, and we need to preempt them here in Copenhagen.
 
Make no mistake: I don’t offer these insights to defend inaction. I simply want to describe for you the reality of what it will take to get this done.

Some of my colleagues in Washington– like some leaders elsewhere— remain reluctant to grapple with a climate crisis mostly measured in future dangers, when they’re confronted every day with the present pain of hardworking people in a tough economic time. To pass a bill, we must be able
to assure a Senator from Ohio that steel workers in his state won’t lose their jobs to India and China because those countries are not participating in a way that is measureable, reportable and verifiable. Every American – indeed, I think all citizens—need to know that no country will claim an unfair advantage.
 
Shared responsibility must include an obligation to share information about each country’s good faith efforts to keep its commitments. After all – that’s what an agreement means. People need to trust the process, and that trust is built through transparency.
 
There is nothing new or threatening about such transparency. We have it in nuclear arms agreements and in trade agreements. Countries have accepted the international rules and enforcement mechanisms of the WTO and flourished, and today we must share with each other, in good faith, our efforts to meet the new standards that come with our international climate commitments.
 
Without an agreement here in Copenhagen that addresses this core issue of transparency, it will be exceedingly difficult to persuade already doubtful elected officials that they are safe in asking their citizens to go along. Senators and Congressmen alike are determined that there must be consequences for any country that thinks they can duck altogether or fake their participation in a solution. Once a treaty is in force, countries that fail to make a good faith effort toward reducing emissions will find
that they cannot dump high carbon intensity products into our markets. That is a fair response to non-compliance with a binding international agreement.
 
One of the last barriers to bold American leadership is the knowledge that even if we take tough steps forward, our efforts can be totally eclipsed by rising emissions from others. You may not know it, but when the US Senate talks about climate policy, fundamentally, all of you are in the room—because our debate always comes back to the need for a global effort.

Let me be clear: America will continue to honor the bedrock principle of common but differentiated responsibility. “Differentiated” means less developed countries can adopt different reduction targets at different rates reflecting their economic and energy realities. But let’s be honest here: our common responsibility demands that if we’re serious about solving climate change, then every country that contributes significantly to the problem today or will contribute in the future, must be a part of the
solution in a way that is transparent and accountable.

I recognize that there is an inconsistency in asking other countries to grow differently than we did. Industrial pollution did not begin in the developing world. For a century and a half the United States and the countries of Europe became modern economies with scant knowledge of the damage we were doing to our climate. But for the last twenty years, at least, we *have* known—and that only adds to our responsibility.

I am sympathetic to developing countries’ concerns: because of our emissions it’s their crops that will disappear; because of our inaction, it’s their fields that turn to desert; and their people, who will be worst affected, are least equipped to meet this challenge. Those are legitimate issues. But for developing countries, winning the right to repeat our mistakes will be cold comfort if it leads us all to climate catastrophe—especially when there are alternative technologies and energy sources available to allow them to develop sustainably. To help developing nations take responsibility, climate finance must be resolved in negotiations this week to become a core element of a Copenhagen agreement.

Today, there is no excuse for America not to act when we account for just five percent of the world’s population, but 20 percent of its emissions. By the very same token, when 97 percent of new emissions over the next two decades will come from the developing world, that is more than “an inconvenient truth” in our larger struggle. It is a core issue. By 2020 China’s emissions will be 40% larger than America’s. It is inescapable that ultimately, the only workable way forward will be a global solution where *all* major emitters take on binding commitments.

The developing world is already making enormous progress. China has committed to a 40-45 percent carbon intensity reduction; Brazil has pledged a remarkable 80 percent cut in its all-important emissions from deforestation; and India too has broken new ground with an offer to cut its emissions intensity by 20-25 percent. Yes, many would like to see more, and yes these commitments must be made part of an international agreement, but these countries’ decision to join in announcing targeted reductions is an historic breakthrough and they deserve our applause for getting this far.
 
And in America, we too are making progress. Every day we are building support in the Senate, across the political spectrum. Lindsey Graham, a conservative Republican Senator from South Carolina, has become a trusted partner. Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who wrote the amendment that
effectively ended U.S. participation in Kyoto, who has championed American coal for fifty years, said just this month, and I quote: “To deny the mounting science of climate change is to stick our

Copenhagen Video: Al Gore Exhorts Leaders To Preserve The ‘Glories Of This Beautiful Earth’ For The Next Generation

The Video is here.

Transcript:

I wish that I had the words to transfer directly from my heart to yours the passion that I feel for this issue. For me, it raises a fundamental question: Who are we as human beings?

Who are we?

If at some future date, the next generation faces the prospect of living in a world with steadily deteriorating prospects and no chance to reclaim the glories of this beautiful earth that we have enjoyed — if they look back at Copenhagen and ask, “Why didn’t you act? Why did you let this process fall into paralysis, and neither succeed or fail but become a symbol of futility? What were the arguments were again? You didn’t realize that we were at stake?”

If their conclusion was that the generation of human beings alive in the first years of the 21st century gathered together in Copenhagen with the leaders of virtually every nation in the world and instead of forthrightly addressing a mortal threat to the future of civilization, instead decided
that the arguments were more important than the solution, that the compromises were just too difficult and allowed the process to fall into paralysis, thus condemning them to a life completely unlike what they deserve, they would be justified in asking of us:

“Who are you?

Didn’t you care?

Did you not feel any connection to us?”

The real source of the passion and the feelings that I have for this issue is a simple conviction: *I don’t believe that’s who we are*. I believe we are capable of rising to this occasion in spite of the difficulties. I believe that we are capable of resolving the remaining issues to the point where we can meet in Mexico City this July, in the aftermath of a successful action by the United States Senate in April, and conclude a binding international treaty that begins the process and builds our confidence and
leads us to make bolder commitments and cuts in global warming pollution and provides the supports that are necessary until, like the Montreal Protocol process, we get to the point where we actually solve this crisis.

We can do it, we must do it, and as I have said many times, I believe political will is a renewable resource. Thank you very much.

16 Aralık 2009 Çarşamba

Total Hotspots gets Rummbled

Rummble has acquired Total Hotspots (THS). THS already used Rummble's technology to power the THS service whereby users could find and rate WiFi services.

THS has reduced the price of their iPhone application over the Christmas period from £2.99 to £0.59.

Alex Housley CEO of THS now joins Rummble as VP Business to help drive service development and key partnerships.

14 Aralık 2009 Pazartesi

WiGIG Alliance beams 7Gb/s at 60GHz

The WiGIG alliance (made up of around 30 companies including Intel and Broadcom etc) have announced that WiGIG will transmit at speeds of around 7Gb/s using the 60GHz band.

This band is either unlicensed or license exempt in many parts of the world (including the US and next year the UK and many parts of Europe).

Initially WiGIG said they'd support up to 6Gb/s, but this has since been bettered. 60GHz does not propagate well and it was envisaged that it would only be suitable for in-room use (under 10m), but new 'beam' technologies will allow greater distances to be achieved allowing for in-building use.

Though there is a WiFi specification for higher speeds (802.11AD) the technologies are seen to be complimentary and since companies like Intel sit in both camps it's likely both technologies will be integrated into WiFi chipsets.

WiFi using 802.11n is expected to support around 600Mb/s so WiGIG offers a magnitude better speeds.

Kodak Zi8 review

Kodak have been making video cameras for a while and the Zi8 is the newest of their video devices. It's a great little video camera with a flexible USB connector that is hidden but sliding a flap allows it to come out so it can be plugged into a USB slot in a computer.

When plugged in, 2 drives are available one has the videos on and the other has Arcsoft video software for Windows. The camera produces .MOV files which are directly accessible using a Mac (they can be read by Quicktime, iMovie etc).

Most people will consider the Zi8 against the popular Flip range of video cameras such as the Flip Mino HD. The Zi8 is definitely bigger (it's about an inch fatter) but this gives it a bigger display. Here the features that the Zi8 has that the Flip doesn't: -

* 2.5" display compared to the Flip's 1.5" display.
* Full 1080p video while the Flip only manages 720p (which the Zi8 can also do if required).
* External microphone jack.
* SD card slot, cards can just be swapped when they're full rather than having to find a computer to download the content to.
* Macro mode for close-up stuff.
* Still capture (i.e. single shots).
* Image stabilisation.
* Zi8 comes with a HDMI cable to connect to a TV/etc.

The start-up time of the Zi8 is also quick and when on presents a list of resolutions that can be used (defaults to the one selected in set-up).

The quality is pretty good and it's easy to use, there's a digital zoom mode (activated by moving the red toggle up and down). The only poor thing is low level light recording which isn't brilliant (sic).

The Zi8 is also generally cheaper than the Flip HD models.

Follow the link to see a video of Valentina performing at the Flowerpot in Kentish Town.

13 Aralık 2009 Pazar

Video: Tuvalu at Copenhagen: 'The Fate Of My Country Rests In Your Hands'


12/12/09: Ian Fry, Tuvalu delegate to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, makes a plea for a legally binding agreement on climate change. Fry noted that it is “an irony of the modern world that the fate of the world is being determined by some senators in the US Congress”.
The Video is here:

The transcript is here:
The entire population of Tuvalu lives below two meters above sea level. The highest point above sea level in the entire nation of Tuvalu is only four meters.

Madam President, we are not naive to the circumstances and the political considerations that are before us. It appears that we are waiting for some senators in the US Congress to conclude before we can consider this issue properly. It is an irony of the modern world that the fate of the world is being determined by some senators in the U.S. Congress.

We note that President Obama recently went to Norway to pick up a Nobel Prize, rightly or wrongly. But we can suggest that for him to honor this Nobel Prize, he should address the greatest threat to humanity that we have before us, climate change, and the greatest threat to security, climate change. So I make a strong plea that we give proper consideration to a conclusion at this meeting that leads to two legally binding agreements.

Madame President, this is not just an issue of Tuvalu. Pacific island countries — Kiribas, Marshall Islands, Maldives, Haiti, Bahamas, Grenada — Sao Tome in West Africa and all the LDCs: Bhutan, Laos, Mali, Senegal, Timor-Leste — and millions of other people around this world are affected enormously by climate change.

This is not just Tuvalu.

Over the last few days I’ve received calls from all over the world, offering faith and hope that we can come to a meaningful conclusion on this issue. Madame President, this is not a ego trip for me. I have refused to undertake media interviews, because I don’t think this is just an issue of an ego trip
for me. I am just merely a humble and insignificant employee of the environment department of the government of Tuvalu. As a humble servant of the government of Tuvalu, I have to make a strong plea to you that we consider this matter properly. I don’t want to cause embarrassment to you or the government. But I want to have this issue to be considered properly.

I clearly want to have the leaders put before them an option for considering a legally binding treaty to sign on at this meeting. I make this a strong and impassioned plea. We’ve had our proposal on the table for six months. Six months, it’s not the last two days of this meeting. I woke this morning, and I was crying, and that’s not easy for a grown man to admit. The fate of my country rests in your hands.

11 Aralık 2009 Cuma

Release of the 59 – 64 GHz band | Ofcom

Release of the 59 – 64 GHz band | Ofcom

Ofcom has published a statement regarding its intent to make the 60GHz band license exempt. This will actually cover spectrum from 57.1 - 63.9 GHz (which leaves a 100MHz guard band at either side i.e. the band is actually from 57 - 64 GHz).

This gices a 6.8GHz block of spectrum which is suitable for very hand bandwidth short range applications such as 100Mb/s Ethernet and even 1Gb/s Ethernet type services (as in Fixed Wireless Services or FWS), though it is also suitable for things like Intelligent Transport Services and new standards such as Wireless HD (for transporting HD television around the home).

60GHz has poor propagation and is rapidly attenuated in air and building materials are likely to block signals completely, so it is eminently suited to short range in-building use.

In order to make the band license exempt, Ofcom will need to change the Wireless Telegraphy Act with a standard instrument in line with Ofcom policy on the exempt regulations.

In spring 2010 Ofcom will issue a policy statement and consultation on draft license exmption regulation including the necessary changes to make the 60GHz band license exempt. In Summer 2010 Ofcom will publish the Final Regulatory Statement on license exemption and the regulations will come into force.

In order to utilise equipment in the 60GHz band there are various conditions: -

Equipment and Antennas must conform to essential requirements of the RTTE and the technical conditions as set out in this statement, the maximum EIRP is 55 dBm, the maximum transmitter Output Power is 10 dBm and the minimum Antenna Gain is 30 dBi.

There are also 3 areas in the UK where equipment must not be used within a 6Km radius and these are: -

* Site 1: 57 21' 3.6", -07 23' 36.6"
* Site 2: 51 37' 16.8", -04 58' 21"
* Site 3: 52 38' 1.8", -00 36' 22.8"

which are MoD Geolocation sites and need to be protected against harmful interference.

Equipment is starting to become available for this band both for the FWS market and for in-home wireless distribution systems.

10 Aralık 2009 Perşembe

Consultation on a new specimen performance bond for the purposes of Regulation 16 of the Electronic Communications Code (Conditions and Restrictions) Regulations 2003 | Ofcom

Consultation on a new specimen performance bond for the purposes of Regulation 16 of the Electronic Communications Code (Conditions and Restrictions) Regulations 2003 | Ofcom

Ofcom can grant "code powers" to any Electronic Communication Network which gives them the right to dig roads, install masts etc.

A part of the conditions in having code powers is that if the company goes out of business they must have enough funds to complete the works and repair any roads that they have put trenches in etc.

Previously Ofcom have mandated that companies take out insurance have bonds in place to cover any uncompleted work. Ofcom have now updated the bind requirements for companies wishing to have code powers and are consulting on the new bind conditions, of which they have published a sample.

The consultation closes on 14/01/2010.

This wont effect many companies, it's only the telcos, mobile operators and other networks that use code powers so they can build their networks.

8 Aralık 2009 Salı

Blackberry adds themes to Blackberry World

RIM the company behind the Blackberry has added themes to Blackberry World (their app store). Themes can be free or paid for and must be suitable for all ages.

Any images or sounds in the theme must be owned by the theme submitter.

Blackberry World, though expanding, is still tiny compared to other mainstream app stores.

Apple goes La La

Apple has acquired music service LaLa but no details of the deal were specified. LaLa allows users to stream tracks or buy DRM free MP3. Any of their 8m tracks may be streamed for free once, but tracks can be licensed for 10c for unlimited play or downloaded for 89c.

It was expected that Lala would release an iPhone app that would allow users to stream tracks from a digital locker where tracks had been purchased.

Though Apple haven't given details, it's expected that they'll incorporate Lala's streaming service into iTunes where tracks cost between 69c and $1.29.

7 Aralık 2009 Pazartesi

Windows Mobile now Rummbles too

Rummble have announced the availability of the Rummble application for Windows Mobile which is being launch at the Heroes of the Mobile Screen event in London.

The application will work on Windows Mobile 6.1+ devices and has the following features: -

* Discover personalised recommendations nearby, quickly and easily
* Check-in to any venue and notify your group of friends instantly
* Show the buzz from specific venues in real-time from the twittersphere
* Find out where your friends are and what they are doing
* Connect Rummble to Twitter, Facebook, Bebo and Linked-In
* Fast and accurate location lookups with Skyhook Wireless.

It is available through Windows Marketplace, which comes pre-installed on new Windows phones or is available as a download from here.

5 Aralık 2009 Cumartesi

45% off Ebook Purchases from O'Reilly

Thanks for reading Clean Tech and Green Business News.
Here's an O'Reilly Offer to thank you!
Mary Vincent

If you would like to view this information in your browser, click here.
O'Reilly
Forward this announcement

Hi,
Can you pass along the following limited time discount to your members?
Special offer for O'Reilly User Group program members: Along with your 35% discount off print books, you can now get 45% off all ebooks you purchase direct from oreilly.com for a limited time.
When you buy an O'Reilly ebook you get lifetime access to the book, and whenever possible we make it available to you in four, DRM-free file formats--PDF, .epub, Kindle-compatible .mobi, and Android ebook--that you can use on the devices of your choice. Our ebook files are fully searchable, and you can cut-and-paste and print them. We also alert you when we've updated the files with corrections and additions.
Just use code DSUG when ordering online at www.oreilly.com/store
Read more about our ebook formats and the ways to use them here: http://oreilly.com/ebooks
Until next time--
Marsee Henon

2 Aralık 2009 Çarşamba

Android now Rummbles

Rummble has just been released for Android phones. Rummble is an application that allows people to rate and locate venues etc. It also has 'check-in' functionality so that friends can be notified that you've arrived at a venue.

Rummble has been available on the iPhone for sometime, but version 1.5 with check-in and social sharing functions was released last week. Now the Android version has these features and the ability to view where friends are on a map and better twitter integration.

The press release included a QRcode which when decoded had a URL to the Rummble blog which also has a QRcode to the Android download. There are of course some sensible free QRcode decoders for Android already out there.

Rummble is a company to watch.

1 Aralık 2009 Salı

Google release Update Engine for MacOS X

Google have released an application and framework that developers can include in their code allowing MacOS X programs to auto-update.

The code is available to download from Update Engine under an Apache 2.0 license.

The system allows MacOS X programs to check back to a server (specified in a .plist file) that then checks versions and other relevant information and if an update is available goes and gets it. This then also generates a script which can be used to install the app.

This should make it very easy for Apple developers to include auto-update functionality to their applications.

Foursquare release Blackberry version

300 lucky (?) Blackberry users have been selected to beta test a Foursquare client that works on Blackberry devices. The beta is private, but users are allowed to show it working to friends etc, though not post public links to the download etc.

So results will be posted here, though as per the instructions, no screenshots or links to where to download it, sorry.

TomTom support not so supportive

Recently my TomTom GO910 computer voice stopped working even though upgrades etc had taken place using the supplied TomTom Home software. The pre-recordered voices worked fine, only the text-to-speech system from Loquendo seemed to have failed.

After logging a support incident with TomTom, they recommended removing the LogquendoTTS directory from the device and then a long protracted support dialogue took place. After backing-up several directories and performing various set-up steps an email came in asked to restore the LoquendoTTS directory that had been deleted (before any back-ups were requested).

Now the unit has to go back to TomTom at their expense, but even so it means not having a navigation device for a while. Not the most optimal use of my time and a bit of a support failure.