Some things change, some don’t. Carbon dioxide emissions haven’t changed much in the last quarter century in the US, while they have quadrupled or quintupled in China, which is now the largest emitter of CO2. But you wouldn’t know that from the media’s handling of the party that just concluded in Bali, the results of which have been widely misreported.

One thing that never changes is the self-importance of bureaucrats and politicians, and their desire to arrogate power to themselves. The Sydney Morning Herald sympathetically describes the self indulgent, appalling scene in Bali as the deadline approached for the vacation of the 15,000 to end, and the scores of private jets to leave:

Deadlines came and went. Things were so bad on Saturday that at one point the UN’s chief negotiator, Yvo de Boer, fled the podium. He was holding back tears. That afternoon, well into extra time, the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, made an unscheduled return, walking in alongside Indonesia’s Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. It was too late for cajoling; time instead for rebuking and pleading. Ki-moon spoke of disappointment, and urged compromise on “everybody”. The host president said: “The world is watching anxiously and I beg you not to let them down.”

Their words “electrified the room”, de Boer said. The European Union — having earlier bowed to American pressure to tone down wording on emissions targets — swiftly kicked over another roadblock, acceding to demands from developing countries for promises on technology sharing.

Still the Americans held out. No, Dobriansky said once more, to more boos and jeers. The deadlock remained, but with a difference: no nation, not Australia, nor Japan, nor Canada, backed them.

Going down to the wire, Bali rules applied, and those rules meant niceties could be stomped on. The most powerful man in the room could be mugged in broad daylight by one of the weakest. Kevin Conrad, the delegate from Papua New Guinea, did not waste time taking the Americans down a dark alley. He wanted billions of witnesses.

“We seek your leadership,” he said. “But if for some reason you are not willing to lead, leave it to the rest of us. Please, get out of the way.” The room was silent as he said it, and drowned in explosive applause as he returned the shiv to its sheath. Dobriansky surrendered. A deal could be done, propelling the world forward to negotiating a new accord by 2009.

There was rejoicing. “A historic breakthrough,” said Gordon Brown in London. “A pivotal first step,” said Ban Ki-moon. “An incredible drama” that ended in a “brilliant strategy to unite the world”, said the Union of Concerned Scientists. America had been “humbled”, said Bill Hare of Greenpeace.

There is little in the world more revolting than the spectacle of such men congratulating themselves, except perhaps the fawning media coverage bestowed upon them. Moreover, the media appear to have misstated the essence of the story, centering it on America, as in the example above. Though developing nations like China and India were brought on board in a weak agreement, the media have in general acted as if they know nothing of what has actually transpired in the years since Kyoto, and that the story was about American intransigence. The American Thinker provides some background about the fact that the US is no longer the real story when it comes to global environmental regulation:

If we look at that data and compare 2004 (latest year for which data is available) to 1997 (last year before the Kyoto treaty was signed), we find the following:

* Emissions worldwide increased 18.0%.
* Emissions from countries that signed the treaty increased 21.1%.
* Emissions from non-signers increased 10.0%.
* Emissions from the U.S. increased 6.6%.

The data have additional interesting aspects. For example, if you look at the spreadsheet by country from 1980 until 2004, you will see that the rate of increase in carbon dioxide emissions (not that we care all that much about carbon dioxide concentrations) has been less than 1% per year in the United States. China, on the other hand, had an increase from 397 metric tons to 1284 during the same period, and even surpassed the US in total CO2 emissions earlier this year.

The media have misreported the Bali story. They have reported it as though the US was hobbled and humbled. But the reality is that the developing nations like China and India were brought on board in a final, tepid agreement, and that this made it possible for the US to participate as well. The watered-down nature of the agreement left a number of developed countries dissatisfied.

In a way you have to give the Bali revelers their due. By watering down a final agreement sufficiently to get the countries with the largest CO2 increases on board, they assured themselves that there would be plenty of such pleasant retreats in the future, as they work out further silly “frameworks” of this and that. (China will likely never agree to anything that cuts its growth rate to a level that would increase unemployment.) Moreover, by bringing the likes of India and China into the fold, they have increased the number of wealthy pockets they can pick, as they continue to revel in the usufructs of their power and to strut about like peacocks on island resorts.

Finally, as bad as the politicians and bureaucrats are, we can only expect the mainstream media to be even worse.

This entry was posted on Sunday, December 16th, 2007 at 10:53 am and is filed under China, General, MSM, Science, business, idiots!, radical chic. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.