Copenhagen Convention: Prioritizing how we save the earth

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
From the webpage

"The basic idea was to improve prioritization of the numerous problems the world faces, by gathering some of the world's greatest economists to a meeting where some of the biggest challenges in the world would be assessed.

The unique approach was to use an expert panel to make a ranking of various economic estimates of opportunities that would meet these challenges. Thorough challenge papers were commissioned from leading specialists - the challenge paper authors - for each challenge."

The priority list:

http://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/Files/Billeder/CC/Experts_list.gif

dan carville weiner, Thursday, 3 June 2004 17:07 (twenty years ago) link

I was surprised at #1.

Kyoto at the bottom of the list non shockah.

dan carville weiner, Thursday, 3 June 2004 17:09 (twenty years ago) link

I don't see the Orgasmatron on the list. Am I missing something?

Michael White (Hereward), Thursday, 3 June 2004 17:10 (twenty years ago) link

tipped off by this article in Wired.

dan carville weiner, Thursday, 3 June 2004 17:11 (twenty years ago) link

There's load of water resources issues on that list.

Michael White (Hereward), Thursday, 3 June 2004 17:15 (twenty years ago) link

five years pass...

or not.

Dean Gaffney's December (history mayne), Saturday, 19 December 2009 00:06 (fifteen years ago) link

the parade of political failure over the last year or so is pretty stunning

Tracer Hand, Saturday, 19 December 2009 00:38 (fifteen years ago) link

everyone sucks

sonderangerbot, Saturday, 19 December 2009 03:16 (fifteen years ago) link

China were assholes, eyewitness account: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/22/copenhagen-climate-change-mark-lynas

days of wine and neuroses (suzy), Tuesday, 22 December 2009 22:44 (fifteen years ago) link

Hmmm, a depressing read.

We should have called Suzie and Bobby (NickB), Tuesday, 22 December 2009 22:52 (fifteen years ago) link

the salon article is less hyperbolic and takes longer to read, but I think it's a lot more clearheaded & balanced than most other accounts I've read

that eyewitness account is understandably angry and seems hard to contest, especially when you read the guardian's 'china is being scapegoated' rejoinder editorial -- which doesn't really come up with much to say in China's defense at all.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/dec/19/copenhagen-climate-summit-ailun-yang

Milton Parker, Wednesday, 23 December 2009 01:09 (fifteen years ago) link

So fuckin' pissed at China, even before reading that article. I'm not saying they're entirely to blame, I'm just saying I'm disappointed at their negotiating "skills" the most, among others.

Quiet, I'm making my Youtube Star Wars Review (Z S), Wednesday, 23 December 2009 03:18 (fifteen years ago) link

That's right, I'm mad at the ENTIRE COUNTRY

Quiet, I'm making my Youtube Star Wars Review (Z S), Wednesday, 23 December 2009 03:19 (fifteen years ago) link

That idiotic Guardian "defense" belongs on pg. 19 of a Timeout issue.

Quiet, I'm making my Youtube Star Wars Review (Z S), Wednesday, 23 December 2009 03:21 (fifteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.