{"id":104790,"date":"2009-12-21T08:04:40","date_gmt":"2009-12-21T13:04:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.wsj.com\/environmentalcapital\/2009\/12\/21\/green-ink-copenhagens-autopsy-greens-versus-greens-and-solar-ipos\/"},"modified":"2009-12-21T08:04:40","modified_gmt":"2009-12-21T13:04:40","slug":"green-ink-copenhagen%e2%80%99s-autopsy-greens-versus-greens-and-solar-ipos","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/104790","title":{"rendered":"Green Ink: Copenhagen\u2019s Autopsy, Greens versus Greens, and Solar IPOs"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"paper\"Crude oil futures are tickling $75 a barrel on geopolitical worries after fresh attacks on Iraqi pipelines and renewed violence in Nigeria, Bloomberg reports<\/a>. Shell can\u0092t MEND the Nigerian mess, and is ready to throw in the towe<\/a>l on its Nigerian onshore operations, in the WSJ.<\/p>\n

Ready for the Copenhagen post-mortems? The moderate climate-change accord reached over the weekend in Denmark has pleased pretty much no one, and punts all the big questions for resolution at a later date. That\u0092s the most horrifying conclusion out of Copenhagen, in the WSJ<\/a>: \u0093Far from resolving the issue, the Copenhagen conference set up months more of international haggling over what to do about climate change.\u0094 The FT offers a detailed look<\/a> at how the final accord came to be.<\/p>\n

It\u0092s time for the blame game over who killed Copenhagen. U.K. climate minister Ed Miliband blames China,<\/a> in The Guardian. China, for its part, is satisfied with a \u0093goaless draw,\u0094<\/a> also in The Guardian. Europe feels blindsided<\/a> by the last-minute talks brokered by President Obama, in the NYT. <\/p>\n

What does the Copenhagen accord really mean? For Michael Levi of CFR<\/a>, it\u0092s a meaningful agreement but raises questions about the utility of the UN process for tackling climate change. Harvard’s Rob Stavins<\/a> takes a deep dive into the accord, and weighs the potential impact internationally and in the U.S.<\/p>\n

Speaking of which, there\u0092s a division of opinion on whether the climate deal helps or hurts U.S. legislative prospects. For Bloomberg<\/a>, getting developing countries to agree to something makes a climate bill an easier sell in the Senate. For Politico<\/a>, the U.S. gave away too much and got too little in return.<\/p>\n

The WSJ edit page<\/a> is clear on what happened: \u0093What Copenhagen offered instead was a lesson in limits for a White House partial to symbolic gestures and routinely disappointed by reality.\u0094<\/p>\n

Tom Friedman milks Copenhagen<\/a> head-shaking to make another call for a clean-energy revolution: \u0093An Earth Race led by America \u0097 built on markets, economic competition, national self-interest and strategic advantage \u0097 is a much more self-sustaining way to reduce carbon emissions than a festival of voluntary, nonbinding commitments at a U.N. conference.\u0094<\/p>\n

So what about that clean-energy future? A couple of green-versus-green battles shaping up. Sen. Dianne Feinstein will introduce legislation to protect the Mojave Desert<\/a> from despoilers–and renewable energy, in the L.A. Times. And the Sierra Club is both for and against newfangled natural-gas production, which may be cleaner-burning than coal but the production of which gives enviros the heebies, in the WSJ<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Earth2Tech offers a detailed look at Solyndra<\/a>, the solar power company just emerging from stealth mode and preparing a public offer.<\/p>\n

Finally, from China with love: Duke Energy is in talks with China\u0092s State Grid to build transmission networks in the U.S. with Chinese technology, in the WSJ.<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/img><\/a>
\n<\/img><\/a><\/p>\n

\n<\/img><\/a> <\/img><\/a> <\/img><\/a> <\/img><\/a> <\/img><\/a>\n<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Crude oil futures are tickling $75 a barrel on geopolitical worries after fresh attacks on Iraqi pipelines and renewed violence in Nigeria, Bloomberg reports. Shell can\u0092t MEND the Nigerian mess, and is ready to throw in the towel on its Nigerian onshore operations, in the WSJ. Ready for the Copenhagen post-mortems? The moderate climate-change accord […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":761,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-104790","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/104790","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/761"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=104790"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/104790\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=104790"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=104790"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=104790"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}