Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme(CPRS) DRAFT UPDATED.

[Democratic Mahaland]

The Constitutional Monarchy of Democratic Mahaland would like to announce the following suggestions for the CPRS:

1) A carbon pollution reduction target be set for all nations existing on Earth. This will consist of a global target (such as 20% by 2050) and minimum national targets (such as 10% by 2050). Nations will be able to make realistic individual targets according to their carbon pollution capabilities but will be encouraged to announce targets of atleast 20%. Please not the above percentages and time frames are examples, not sugestions.

2) That a subsidary body of the WA be established with the purpose of ensuring that nations are able to achieve their targets efficiently and economically. This may include a fund to assist poor or developing nations establish renewable energy production plants and international cooperative research into affordable and efficient forms of renewable energy.

3) Nations existing on planets other than Earth also be encouraged to become more environmentally sustainable.

Mahaland would also wish to point out that renewable energy is not the only way to reduce carbon emissions. Other methods of reducing pollution could include geosequestation, a technology that already works successfully in Mahaland, encouraging residents to save energy, discourage overuse of electricity by raising electricity prices and enocuraging the use of public transport and reducing commuting times.

Mahaland also points out that this resolution is not, and should not be, a recognition that man made climate change exists. The opinions of individual nations should not become involved in the debate over this resolution. This resolution should be further developed, refined and passed regardless of whether climate change exists or not.

Gregory P. Jones
Minister of International Affairs of The Constitutional Monarchy of Democratic Mahaland.
Parliament House, New Vaduz, Mahaland
8/12/09 17:15 CMT

[Enn]

1) A carbon pollution reduction target be set for all nations existing on Earth. This will consist of a global target (such as 20% by 2050) and minimum national targets (such as 10% by 2050). Nations will be able to make realistic individual targets according to their carbon pollution capabilities but will be encouraged to announce targets of atleast 20%. Please not the above percentages and time frames are examples, not sugestions.

OOC: Years are very problematic. For one thing, you've got FT nations that are well past 2050. For another, you've got Past-tech nations, for whom 2050 is centuries, or even millenia away. To say nothing of Magitek, where the entire concept of AD is out of place.

[Democratic Mahaland]

OOC: Years are very problematic. For one thing, you've got FT nations that are well past 2050. For another, you've got Past-tech nations, for whom 2050 is centuries, or even millenia away. To say nothing of Magitek, where the entire concept of AD is out of place.

This is of course a good point, which is why in our sugestions we specified out time frame as an example early. The important thing is that carbon pollution is reduced as soon as possible. Perhaps a time limit (eg: within 50 years or equivalent measure of time) would be more apporpriate.

Department of International Affairs, New Vaduz, Mahaland

[Bears Armed]

The Constitutional Monarchy of Democratic Mahaland would like to announce the following suggestions for the CPRS:

1) A carbon pollution reduction target be set for all nations existing on Earth. This will consist of a global target (such as 20% by 2050) and minimum national targets (such as 10% by 2050). Nations will be able to make realistic individual targets according to their carbon pollution capabilities but will be encouraged to announce targets of atleast 20%. Please not the above percentages and time frames are examples, not sugestions.

2) That a subsidary body of the WA be established with the purpose of ensuring that nations are able to achieve their targets efficiently and economically. This may include a fund to assist poor or developing nations establish renewable energy production plants and international cooperative research into affordable and efficient forms of renewable energy.

3) Nations existing on planets other than Earth also be encouraged to become more environmentally sustainable.

"A WA resolution can not differentiate between member nations in the way that your first and third suggestions here would do. Furthermore, any blanket requirement for a percentage reduction would punish those nations that already have 'carbon pollution' outputs significantly below the average, possibly forcing them to cut energy supplies to essential functions rather than just -- as might be the case in nations with significantly higher outputs -- to more 'wasteful' ones..."

Borrin o Redwood,
Chief Observer at the World Assembly
for
The High Council of Clans,
The Confederated Clans of the Free Bears of Bears Armed.

[Democratic Mahaland]

The Constitutional Monarchy of Democratic Mahaland would like to recoginse that the WA cannot indeed differentiate between nations as our first and third sugestions proposed. Mahaland asks for understanding that as we are a new memebr of the WA and world stage we are likely to make errors in our sugestions. We are learning and improving on a daily basis.We recognise that a uniform tax would indeed be unfair to many nations but point out that this shows the need for this proposal to be further discussed, modified and refined into an acceptable proposal. Mahaland still contends that a "Global" target be developed that would reduce the combined carbon emmissions of all WA member nations (This would be unlikely to affect any nations that require Carbon to exist for whatever reason or nations that already have low carbon emissions). This is in no way a final sugestion.

The CPRS is an incredibly complex issue. It urgently needs to be further discussed to produce a scheme that will work for all nations. Mahaland encourages the nations of NS to unite to tackle this issue once and for all.

[Rutianas]

With all due respect Paula. As a Mod has said previously. This debate is not about whether climate change is real or not.

Handing over to the private sector is encouraged but it is not compulsory.

Exactly how would I word it, without saying the word. "Earth". Not every single RPer RP's with planets.

Those nations can gain assistance from those nations that are in surplus with electricity supply.

Yours,
Renegade Turnist.

I don't care how you word it. It's one we would be opposed to if we were even in the WA anymore. As it is, our kittens, who are in the WA, are opposed to this. While they have their own ways of creating electricity through hamster technology, they are very much opposed to the thought of assisting other less developed nations. Why, pray tell, should anyone more advanced assist those who are less so? It would put a strain on their own systems, even if they have a surplus. How, exactly, would these less fortunate nations pay for said electricity if they are not developed enough to provide it themselves?

And since you have declared in your proposal that Climate Change is real, then by not allowing us to debate it severely destroys your proposal as is. It is not real in the Imperial Republic. Our kittens have informed us that they are not suffering any kind of Climate Change as they have no polluting energy sources. But why should we stop at just energy sources if you're so concerned over pollution causing this mythical Climate Change? Why not ban all use of fossil fuels. We've heard they're really nasty. That would, of course, ban gasoline run cars among other things. Let's just go ahead and cause a major break down of society in many many nations. That sounds good. That sounds really good.

Paula Jenner, Rutianas Ambassador

(OOC: Editing your post almost a day after it's been written and responded to doesn't help much. I don't know how many people go back and read the whole debate to see if anything has changed, but I know I don't normally do so. )

[Maul-5]

Are you sure that the earth is warming at an increasing rate that is our fault? Are you sure it's not;

1. Natural fluctuations.

2. Improper measurements

3. Forged results divulged in email messages between eminent climatologic scientists

?

Kat said we're not supposed to talk about that.

The proposal claims the issue is black and white climactic change can be stopped by cutbacks. This is possibly the wrong tact with which to take this issue.

EDIT: Forgot to say why this is important; so can't the proposal be changed to rectify these legitimate concerns for its content.
EDIT 2: Perhaps it must be clear, from the many reports from eminent assembly members, that this is an unworkable policy for the different nations with advanced, or less so, technological levels and who inhabit different planets.

[James Bluntus]

With all due respect Paula. As a Mod has said previously. This debate is not about whether climate change is real or not.

Handing over to the private sector is encouraged but it is not compulsory.

Exactly how would I word it, without saying the word. "Earth". Not every single RPer RP's with planets.

Those nations can gain assistance from those nations that are in surplus with electricity supply.

Yours,
Renegade Turnist.

I don't care how you word it. It's one we would be opposed to if we were even in the WA anymore. As it is, our kittens, who are in the WA, are opposed to this. While they have their own ways of creating electricity through hamster technology, they are very much opposed to the thought of assisting other less developed nations. Why, pray tell, should anyone more advanced assist those who are less so? It would put a strain on their own systems, even if they have a surplus. How, exactly, would these less fortunate nations pay for said electricity if they are not developed enough to provide it themselves?

And since you have declared in your proposal that Climate Change is real, then by not allowing us to debate it severely destroys your proposal as is. It is not real in the Imperial Republic. Our kittens have informed us that they are not suffering any kind of Climate Change as they have no polluting energy sources. But why should we stop at just energy sources if you're so concerned over pollution causing this mythical Climate Change? Why not ban all use of fossil fuels. We've heard they're really nasty. That would, of course, ban gasoline run cars among other things. Let's just go ahead and cause a major break down of society in many many nations. That sounds good. That sounds really good.

Paula Jenner, Rutianas Ambassador

(OOC: Editing your post almost a day after it's been written and responded to doesn't help much. I don't know how many people go back and read the whole debate to see if anything has changed, but I know I don't normally do so. )

Dear Ambassador.

While I respect your view that climate change is "Mythical". Your view is one that is not widely supported by the majority of Ambassadors within the GA. The majority of the Ambassadors acknowledge that climate change is real and that something should be done about it. As a result of the general census that this bill should be improved. I am going to continue to listen to the majority of Ambassadors that would like to see this proposal improve and passed. One thing that this proposal will not do is ban fossil fuels. It may encourage the disuse of fossil fuels but it will not ban them outright. This is still very early in the drafting stage. I am not going to rush into submitting this.

[Zarabad]

not to sound trolling here... but Zarabad has no intention of following this because climate change is bologna...

[James Bluntus]

not to sound trolling here... but Zarabad has no intention of following this because climate change is bologna...

I fully respect that. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs. I respect that.

[Krioval]

Dear Ambassador.

While I respect your view that climate change is "Mythical". Your view is one that is not widely supported by the majority of Ambassadors within the GA. The majority of the Ambassadors acknowledge that climate change is real and that something should be done about it. As a result of the general census that this bill should be improved. I am going to continue to listen to the majority of Ambassadors that would like to see this proposal improve and passed. One thing that this proposal will not do is ban fossil fuels. It may encourage the disuse of fossil fuels but it will not ban them outright. This is still very early in the drafting stage. I am not going to rush into submitting this.

Perhaps Your Excellency could point out this wellspring of popular support for this legislation, because I simply do not see it. The Imperial Chiefdom has made a suggestion earlier: create a proposal that promotes the development and implementation of non-polluting technology. Then it would have a chance of not being yet another of those dreary environmental proposals that have so many "thou shalt not" clauses that they read like the founding principles of an ancient nomadic religion. Instead of saying "no polluting" and then decimating entire nations' ways of life, consider a proposal that actually tries to maintain economic outputs while reducing environmental damage.

[Lord] Ambassador Darvek Tyvok
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

[Democratic Mahaland]

It is the opinion of the Constitutional Monarchy of Democratic Mahaland that this proposal must be reformed and put to vote as soon as possible. It would appear that at present this discusion is going nowhere fast. Perhaps a new draft of the CPRS could be presented to this forum for further discussion. Altohugh we agree that this proposal cannot be rushed, as you can probably tell we are eager to see it passed. This will also let us see how the proposal is progressing and developing as discussion progresses.

Department of International Affairs, New Vaduz, Mahaland
9/12/09 18:50 CMT

[James Bluntus]

CARBON POLLUTION REDUCTION SCHEME

ALARMED that the planets throughout the universe is warming at an increasing rate as a result of greenhouse gases being trapped in the atmosphere.

ALARMED that some nations are not doing anything to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.

BELIEVES that legislation must be urgently enacted to bring an end to Climate Change.

Hereby enacts the following,

(1) Mandates the shutdown of polluting energy source stations 15 years after the renewable energy plant of the nation's choice has been operation.
(2) Encourages governments to hand electricity industries to private investors to assist in the change over from polluting energy sources to renewable energy sources.
(3) This resolution does not prohibit public ownership of electricity industries.
(4) Encourages nations to set targets for emission cuts by the time that the polluting energy sources shut down.
(5) Gives the individual nations the right to choose which renewable energy source they would like to adopt.
(6) Encourages the disuse of fossil fuels.
(7) Establishes the World Assembly Renewable Energy Fund to assist nations in implementing renewable energy initiatives.

Updated.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Honoured ambassador to James Bluntus, I still feel that there is no credible evidence to prove that the whole universe is warming in general. While it may be true for some planets, it may be the opposite in others.

[Burninati0n]

Ack! Now it creates a totally random and undefined committee at the end?!?!

[Rutianas]

Dear Ambassador.

While I respect your view that climate change is "Mythical". Your view is one that is not widely supported by the majority of Ambassadors within the GA. The majority of the Ambassadors acknowledge that climate change is real and that something should be done about it. As a result of the general census that this bill should be improved. I am going to continue to listen to the majority of Ambassadors that would like to see this proposal improve and passed. One thing that this proposal will not do is ban fossil fuels. It may encourage the disuse of fossil fuels but it will not ban them outright. This is still very early in the drafting stage. I am not going to rush into submitting this.

I don't see overwhelming support for the fact that climate change is real. Nor do I see a bunch of people standing up and saying that something should be done about it. In fact, the majority here seem to think this proposal just will not work. If you truly listen to the majority, you'd drop this. The World Assembly is made up of a lot of different species and cultures. To make a blanket statement like 'climate change is on all the worlds because of fossil fuels' is foolish and undeserved. Some nations may not use them. Some nations may not have discovered them. I assure you that if those worlds are suffering from climate change it is not because of fossil fuels; therefore this proposal will do nothing to assist them in controlling their climate change.

Also, encouraging governments to get private investors involved reeks of encouraging capitalism. While this method may work for some, it does not for others. Now, perhaps if this were to read 'local private investors' then maybe, just maybe, it would be just a bit more palatable for us. And that's not saying much. I'm still very much against anything that will cause more harm than good. You still have not explained how nations without any way to create renewable energy is supposed to comply with this. These nations would be hard pressed to develop. And before you say that more technologically advanced nations should provide them with energy, think on whether or not those nations are even allowed to provide that kind of assistance. There may be technology sharing laws in place.

Paula Jenner, Rutianas Ambassador

[Maul-5]

Dear Ambassador.

While I respect your view that climate change is "Mythical". Your view is one that is not widely supported by the majority of Ambassadors within the GA. The majority of the Ambassadors acknowledge that climate change is real and that something should be done about it. As a result of the general census that this bill should be improved. I am going to continue to listen to the majority of Ambassadors that would like to see this proposal improve and passed. One thing that this proposal will not do is ban fossil fuels. It may encourage the disuse of fossil fuels but it will not ban them outright. This is still very early in the drafting stage. I am not going to rush into submitting this.

I don't see overwhelming support for the fact that climate change is real. Nor do I see a bunch of people standing up and saying that something should be done about it. In fact, the majority here seem to think this proposal just will not work. If you truly listen to the majority, you'd drop this. The World Assembly is made up of a lot of different species and cultures. To make a blanket statement like 'climate change is on all the worlds because of fossil fuels' is foolish and undeserved. Some nations may not use them. Some nations may not have discovered them. I assure you that if those worlds are suffering from climate change it is not because of fossil fuels; therefore this proposal will do nothing to assist them in controlling their climate change.

Also, encouraging governments to get private investors involved reeks of encouraging capitalism. While this method may work for some, it does not for others. Now, perhaps if this were to read 'local private investors' then maybe, just maybe, it would be just a bit more palatable for us. And that's not saying much. I'm still very much against anything that will cause more harm than good. You still have not explained how nations without any way to create renewable energy is supposed to comply with this. These nations would be hard pressed to develop. And before you say that more technologically advanced nations should provide them with energy, think on whether or not those nations are even allowed to provide that kind of assistance. There may be technology sharing laws in place.

Paula Jenner, Rutianas Ambassador

On the Planet of Maul-5 for instance there is no such warming, the termperature has in fact left a cooling period because of us pumping methane into the atmosphere.

It is a very smelly planet.

[Flibbleites]

Dear Ambassador.

While I respect your view that climate change is "Mythical". Your view is one that is not widely supported by the majority of Ambassadors within the GA. The majority of the Ambassadors acknowledge that climate change is real and that something should be done about it. As a result of the general census that this bill should be improved. I am going to continue to listen to the majority of Ambassadors that would like to see this proposal improve and passed. One thing that this proposal will not do is ban fossil fuels. It may encourage the disuse of fossil fuels but it will not ban them outright. This is still very early in the drafting stage. I am not going to rush into submitting this.

I don't see overwhelming support for the fact that climate change is real. Nor do I see a bunch of people standing up and saying that something should be done about it. In fact, the majority here seem to think this proposal just will not work. If you truly listen to the majority, you'd drop this. The World Assembly is made up of a lot of different species and cultures. To make a blanket statement like 'climate change is on all the worlds because of fossil fuels' is foolish and undeserved. Some nations may not use them. Some nations may not have discovered them. I assure you that if those worlds are suffering from climate change it is not because of fossil fuels; therefore this proposal will do nothing to assist them in controlling their climate change.

Also, encouraging governments to get private investors involved reeks of encouraging capitalism. While this method may work for some, it does not for others. Now, perhaps if this were to read 'local private investors' then maybe, just maybe, it would be just a bit more palatable for us. And that's not saying much. I'm still very much against anything that will cause more harm than good. You still have not explained how nations without any way to create renewable energy is supposed to comply with this. These nations would be hard pressed to develop. And before you say that more technologically advanced nations should provide them with energy, think on whether or not those nations are even allowed to provide that kind of assistance. There may be technology sharing laws in place.

Paula Jenner, Rutianas Ambassador

On the Planet of Maul-5 for instance there is no such warming, the termperature has in fact left a cooling period because of us pumping methane into the atmosphere.

It is a very smelly planet.

I hope that your planet stays away from open flames, other wise you could end up experiencing extreme global warming.

Timothy Schmidt
Bob Flibble's PA

[Maul-5]

Oh don't worry, we actually inhabit bio-domes which are flame resistant, we just have to maintain the outside surface temperature above a certain level. It is a complex system, I barely understand it myself. You would have to alert yourself to the works of Dr. Helwah to fully get it. I unfortunately have not.

Nico Nique
Dr. Helwah's PR Agent

[Bazatia]

The Republic of Bazatia cannot support this bill in its current form. The bill does not define "pollution" and "renewable energy". Also, it does interfere with many nations' internal affairs. Also, our nation has concerns about this bill. Bazatia relies mainly on Nuclear Power generation, would that be considered a renewable energy? Also, we would not want to have to help a developing nation develop an entire power grid, as that would severely damage our economy.

[Ostronopolis]

19:45 Hours - Ostronopolis Ambassador To The World Assembly - Margret Brown - CPRS Debate


This bill is far too intruding upon the industry of the world. The bill sponsors have placed far too many hopes on this bill, which will adversely effect our national, and on that matter many national economies thereby effective the global economic situation at large. Moreover, this is intriguing to have this bill conclude, that this will establish ANY sort of effective legislation that will help the ecosystem.

Based on this conclusion, we can also add the sentiment that there is no conclusive and established evidential proposals included herein, or any other area which establishes a fact that is scientifically proven to have effected the ecosystem, globally or nationally. Therefore, this proposal is flawed and cannot be supported by any logical state in belief of economic prosperity.

We ask and propose for a revision providing the market with proper incentive, and a disallowing of unneeded regulation. We would also like some sort of unbiased and largely supported conclusion that states why such a draft is needed.

[Democratic Mahaland]

1) Many nations have been quick to criticise aspects of this proposal. Rather than just belitiling arguments can they please offer alternative sugestions. If they do this than this proposal can progress and improve. In case this dosent mak much sense perhaps these examples may help:

The Republic of Bazatia cannot support this bill in its current form. The bill does not define "pollution" and "renewable energy". Also, it does interfere with many nations' internal affairs. Also, our nation has concerns about this bill. Bazatia relies mainly on Nuclear Power generation, would that be considered a renewable energy? Also, we would not want to have to help a developing nation develop an entire power grid, as that would severely damage our economy.

This is good as it points out flaws in the proposal that need to be fixed and explains why. Altohugh it dosent specifaclly sugest anything it still shows what needs to be done.

Honoured ambassador to James Bluntus, I still feel that there is no credible evidence to prove that the whole universe is warming in general. While it may be true for some planets, it may be the opposite in others.

I am very sorry to single out this comment but i needed an example, I apoligise for any offense this may cause. This comment is not so helpfull as it only points out a flaw. It would be incredibly helpfull if these sorts of comments could include a sugestion for how the flaw in the proposal could be fixed. If the flaw is that carbon pollution is only a problem for some countries a sugestion to remedy this could be to have the proposal only binding to nations where carbon pollution is a problem (although as has been previously pointed out the WA cannot make this kind of distinction)

2) Democratic Mahaland has made it quite clear that it's position is that the WA should pass a proposal to specifically target and reduce carbon pollution. However, every nation is in a different predicatment. Some desperately need to reduce carbon pollution but for others it is simply not a problem. This makes it very hard to make a blanket reform that affects all nations and for any such reform to be passed by the WA. The easiest solution to this would seem to be to allow nations to deal with issue individually based on their nations needs and capabilities.

Perhaps the best way to deal with this issue is to make it just that, an issue. Most nations deal with at least one issue a day, as we all know. Also, any nations with populations over 500 million can submit their ideas for an issue. If this issue was accepted it would allow each nation to deal with the issue seperately.

Some of the pros of this are that: Each nation can make a decision relevant to their nation; Each nation is not forced into a position they do not want to be in; non-WA member nations can also be invloved. Some of the cons of this are: Many nations will surely take envromentally irresponsible actions; there will not be a consistent international position on this issue; the WA will not have a position on this issue.

The issue could be something like this: Climate scientists have warned of the potentiall harmfull affects of Carbon emission in (country name). They are calling for immediate action to reduce emmissions etc:

possible actions:
-reduce carbon emmissions asap to preserve the environment
-ignore the warnings of scientists, the environment dosent matter, reducing emmisons may damge the economy, we can deal with climate problems as they come
- Carbon pollotion is not a problem for this nation, it has no effect on our planet or nation, maybe even dosent exist on this planet (for nations where "climate change" is not a problem)

Please note that if it were possible, The Constitutional Monarchy of Democratic Mahaland would submit this idea itself. As it is, however, our population is not large enough to submit an idea for an issue. This is why we have made this sugestion public, in the hope that another, larger nation can help.

Department of International Affairs, New Vaduz, Mahaland
10/12/09 17:45 CMT

[Flibbleites]

1) Many nations have been quick to criticise aspects of this proposal. Rather than just belitiling arguments can they please offer alternative sugestions. If they do this than this proposal can progress and improve.

What if we don't want to see it progress, what if we want to see it die a horrible flaming death?

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

[The Palentine]

1) Many nations have been quick to criticise aspects of this proposal. Rather than just belitiling arguments can they please offer alternative sugestions. If they do this than this proposal can progress and improve.

What if we don't want to see it progress, what if we want to see it die a horrible flaming death?

Bob Flibble
WA Representative

I'll drink to that old bean.
Excelsior,
Sen. Horatio Sulla

[Grays Harbor]

1) Many nations have been quick to criticise aspects of this proposal. Rather than just belitiling arguments can they please offer alternative sugestions. If they do this than this proposal can progress and improve.

We have an alternative. Halt talks on this one size fits all piece of micromanagement feel good proposal. We have no desire to wreck our rconomy by mandating wholesale sweeping changeover while at the same time being forced to pay for the entire energy grid of some ill defined "undeveloped" nations. Our nation ans citizens have not worked to build a strong economy just to watch it swept away at a stroke by some nebulous and ill conceived WA mandate.

Although, then once our economy is trashed, perhaps then we can apply to have all of our bills paid for as we would then be one of the nations with a pitiful economy that the proposer of this and those who want to pat themselves on the back for 'doing good' is expecting everybody else to foot the bill for.