Might be hailed by pundits as a renewed commitment to renew the global campaign to reduce industrial greenhouse gas emissions, does the 2011 Durban Climate Conference really offer significant improvement over the 1997 Kyoto Protocol set to expire in 2012?
By: Ringo Bones
South African Foreign Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabana who was appointed president of this year’s Durban Climate Conference might had managed to fast track herself for future Nobel Peace Prize nominations if you truly believe the hype surrounding the alleged success of the 2011 Durban Climate Conference. But like most hardcore environmentalists that has been subjected to vituperation by the American Evangelical right since 1995 when it comes to whether climate change is real, I highly doubt it if this year’s climate conference is really a step beyond the 1997 Kyoto Protocol set to expire next year. After all, India, Mainland China, and the United States – today’s top three generators of greenhouse gasses via industrial activity – were never signatory’s of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol.
The only positive outcome of the 2011 Durban Climate Conference is that the “lucrative” business of carbon credits born out of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol can still be able to maintain their bottom lines thanks to “token agreements” reached in the very last minutes of the Durban Climate Conference when it comes to how much polluters must pay to continue to pump out carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into our overloaded sewers in the sky in order to maintain their industrial bottom line. After all, we’re technically still in a global economic recession, aren’t we?