<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Copenhagen Diagnosis</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sindark.com/2009/11/26/the-copenhagen-diagnosis/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sindark.com/2009/11/26/the-copenhagen-diagnosis/</link>
	<description>Temporarily Torontonian</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 01:04:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Canada Guy</title>
		<link>http://www.sindark.com/2009/11/26/the-copenhagen-diagnosis/#comment-84228</link>
		<dc:creator>Canada Guy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:41:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sindark.com/?p=6718#comment-84228</guid>
		<description>The US and China have finally announced real numbers for their targets to reduce carbon emissions.  Unfortunately these numbers, especially from the US, are far too weak.  We need a strong agreement at Copenhagen, but this won&#039;t get us there.  In many ways, a weak agreement at Copenhagen could be even worse than no agreement, as it would lock in targets too small to make a significant difference.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.selfdestructivebastards.com/2009/11/emissions-targets.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://www.selfdestructivebastards.com/2009/11/emissions-targets.html&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The US and China have finally announced real numbers for their targets to reduce carbon emissions.  Unfortunately these numbers, especially from the US, are far too weak.  We need a strong agreement at Copenhagen, but this won&#8217;t get us there.  In many ways, a weak agreement at Copenhagen could be even worse than no agreement, as it would lock in targets too small to make a significant difference.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.selfdestructivebastards.com/2009/11/emissions-targets.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.selfdestructivebastards.com/2009/11/emission s-targets.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

