Saturday, December 08, 2007

Carbon Notes's not today, I'm seated at a picnic table at IslandWood with one of me new classmates and we're clacking away and talking about blogs, climate change, and Youtube. What could be better.

I have been thinking about the "carbon footprint" concept for a while in concert with looming GHG emissions regulation, my own travel for business and personal reasons, and the project I am working on for school. There appears to be quite a bit of activity in this area over the past year or so. Two GHG Emissions tracking protocols have been launched based upon the WBCSD/WRI GHG Emissions Tracking Protocol. The California Climate Registry was introduced in 2001 with an in 2007. The latest update has integrated the WRI/WBCSD Protocol standards to provide homogeneity across the globe. 39 states have signed on the the newly released National Climate Registry, including California. Does that mean the CA Climate Registry will roll into the national registry? What about companies that take action without any official federal regulation in place? Will they receive credit? There are many unknowns in the near term associated with CO2 tracking and regulation. it will be interesting to see what comes out, especially in the US after the presidential election in 2008.

How 'bout a little comic relief from the good folks at

News flash from Bali: All nations must join climate fight-Bali draft.
The draft lays out three options for how to proceed after Bali -- ranging from non-binding talks over the next two years to a deadline for adopting a new global pact at a U.N. meeting in Copenhagen in late 2009.
Rich nations should consider ways to step up efforts to curb emissions of greenhouse gases by setting "quantified national emission objectives", the draft says.
Poor countries should take "national mitigation actions ... that limit the growth of, or reduce, emissions," it says. It adds that "social development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities" for poor nations.
What's amazing to me is that we are 15 years after the Rio summit and the language seems to be just a non-committal and ambiguous.

Can you imagine this ad in the USA sponsored by the government? If Nancy Pelosi has her way, maybe we'll see it in 2009.

No comments: