Unpredictability for Post Kyoto commitee

In a little reported outcome from the new international body to REPLACE the Kyoto agreement,the 189 nation international body selected Australia to chair the new body.

Environment Minister Ian Campbell has defended Australia's place at the head of a new international climate change body despite its refusal to sign the Kyoto agreement.

"I think it's a recognition that the sort of targets and timetables of Kyoto, although incredibly well-intentioned, are simply not effective to date in achieving that twin goal," he said.

The Australians focused on one question: What climate change strategies should we adopt in the future? Two options have emerged. Replace the fractured Kyoto model with another model using regulations to reduce greenhouse gases; or change tack and foster technologies that reduce emissions.

The Greens' solution is to propose something even more draconian than Kyoto. They propose a national system to regulate and trade emissions and targets to make deeper cuts in emissions than those proposed in the Kyoto Protocol, specifically to halve by 2050 today's emissions.

The preferred international approach now is the US strategy to develop low-emission technologies. It is the only realistic global strategy. Kyoto stalled because the threat to growth it presented was unacceptable to developing countries. The more radical alternative is even more unacceptable.

This reconfirms the G8 Gleneagles agreement,and the St Petersberg agreement for 2006

UPDATE

Canada is expected to join the APC 6 country agreement,the break from the ideological command and control systems of the Eu based beaucrracy of the IPCC and kyoto is to be expected.The beureaucracy that produced the EU Commission Directive 1677/88 of 15.06.1988
17 pages od directives into the specification of a cumcumber including the optima,maima and minima of the curvature of the arc(bend) obviously has no innovation capacity.

The APC 6 commitment is to technology.