Climate Conferences & Caveman Lawyers

Dec. 3rd through 14th, more than 180 different nations will be meeting in Bali, Indonesia to discuss the future of our planet’s environmental well-being, and hopefully begin piecing together a new multi-national green accord. In part, this gathering is in response to the first phase of the Kyoto Protocol on Climate expiring in 2012. The United Nations is asking those member nations present to consider “what’s next?”

Many of you will recall that in ‘97, the United States pulled out of an agreement that would have set specific emission targets, and the Bush administration declared that they felt the plan would be too expensive, and not very effective. Meanwhile China and India argued that their economies were just beginning to develop, and therefore the burden of responsibility should default to the more “developed” countries.

What will bring the big players to the table? Ask any climatologist or environmental expert about this, and the response will likely be the same: the only way that any global environmental policy will be effective is if the three countries mentioned previously agree to dedicate their efforts towards reducing their output of greenhouse gases. Because of this need to woo the Big 3 into compliance, the focus is going to be aimed at creating strategic incentives that will hopefully shed light on how healing the Earth can be a profitable endeavor.

What confuses me the most regarding the whole “global warming controversy,” is that there really is no ground left to stand on from which to feign ignorance to the scientific reality that climate is changing much faster than at any previously analyzed time period. This is fact. Yet, so many of us refuse the concept, to the edge of denial. Acting like a bunch of Unfrozen Caveman Lawyers. “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, although I may appear to understand your world, I really don’t, you see, I’m just a caveman.”