Frankly, I’m not betting the farm on Obama vetoing the bill, particularly if Republicans in exchange go along with his cherished hike in infrastructure spending, designed precisely to create jobs. As the article says, even his Democratic base is split on the pipeline, at a time when jobs truly are THE issue in this election.

The case for a veto no matter what is, I believe, stronger. Politically, he shows backbone and principle, can blast Republicans for the same anti-job position they want to pin on him, and secures the grassroots support he so desperately needs from his environmental base, the same base he has mutilated into apathy with other antagonistic ecodecisions.

But then again, on the subject of backbone and principle, the president has been quite convincing of late that he doesn’t have any when it comes to climate change. The signs are anything but reassuring.

The U.S. was one of the countries that most blocked progress (even simple steps) at Durban. Obama’s new all-or-nothing energy policy proudly includes record hikes in American oil and gas exploration. And when he “killed” Keystone, I’ve warned earlier that we would be ill advised to celebrate much, so absent from his statement was any mention of climate change. Now, if he was willing to turn on the climate at these crucial moments, what makes us think he’ll stick to the Keystone decision in the face of potential political risk?

The writing is all over the wall, folks. This man has simply abandoned the climate in favor of his reelection. He fails to see the political, historical and economic value (to him!) of standing up to the Republicans on this all-important issue. So don’t let his support of cleantech fool you. On Keystone, we simply do not know which way he’ll go.

Australia is a leading country for annual per capita greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution, coal exports and liquid natural gas (LNG) exports. Thus “annual per capita greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution” in units of “tonnes CO2-equivalent per person per year” (2005-2008 data) is 0.9 (Bangladesh), 0.9 (Pakistan), 2.2 (India), less than 3 (many African and Island countries), 3.2 (the Developing World), 5.5 (China), 6.7 (the World), 11 (Europe), 16 (the Developed World), 27 (the US) and 30 (Australia; or 54 if Australia’s huge exported CO2 pollution is included). Indeed the data for 2010 indicate that Australia’s annual domestic plus exported GHG pollution is 64 tonnes per person per year, 71 times greater than the per capita GHG pollution of Pakistan.

In 2009 the German Advisory Council on Climate Change (WBGU) determined that for a 75% chance of avoiding a 2 degree C temperature rise, the World must pollute less than 600 Gt CO2 between 2010 and essentially zero emissions in 2050. Unfortunately Australia (through disproportionately huge annual fossil fuel burning and exports) has already used up its share of this terminal GHG pollution budget and is now stealing the entitlement of other countries including acutely global warming-threatened countries such as Somalia and Bangladesh.

Australia’s disproportionately huge annual per capita GHG pollution weans that Australia is disproportionately contributing to a avoidable deraths in the Developing World due to a worsening climate genocide. Thus both Dr James Lovelock FRS (Gaia hypothesis) and Professor Kevin Anderson ( Director, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of Manchester, UK) have recently estimated that only about 0.5 billion people will survive this century due to unaddressed, man-made global warming. Noting that the world population is expected to reach 9.5 billion by 2050 (UN Population Division) , these estimates translate to a climate genocide involving deaths of 10 billion people this century, this including roughly twice the present population of particular mainly non-European groups, specifically 6 billion under-5 year old infants, 3 billion Muslims in a terminal Muslim Holocaust, 2 billion Indians, 1.3 billion non-Arab Africans, 0.5 billion Bengalis, 0.3 billion Pakistanis and 0.3 billion Bangladeshis (see “Climate Genocide”).

However in look-the-other-way Australia it is business as usual (BAU). The 2 major political groupings, Liberal-National Party Coalition Opposition (the Libs) and the Labor Government (the Labs) have essentially the same climate change inaction policies of “5% off 2000 greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution by 2020″ coupled with unlimited expansion of coal and gas exports that will mean that Australia’s domestic plus exported GHG pollution will, relative to 2000, roughly double by 2020 and quadruple by 2050 (see this). The Greens are pro-environment but only have about 14% of the vote and are detested by the major parties and the mainstream media, particularly the climate change denialist Murdoch newspapers that have 70% of newspaper readership in Australia.

On 4 October 2011 The Age On-line National Times (owned by the Fairfax media organization) published a critique of the Greens by John Matthews (strategist at “Loop Branding” and writer for “ArtKritique”) entitled “”Greens should come out of the forest” (see: Greens should come out of the forest ; see also this).

Key quotes from this nonsensical article: “You know there’s a problem with a brand when your competitors use it as shorthand for all that’s bad. So when Liberal frontbenchers spit out the phrase “Green-Labor government” as an expletive you can bet they’re pretty sure the “G” word carries negative connotations that will have their supporters grinding their teeth in rage. Right now the Green brand is a problem… If we look across the spectrum of politics and consider what makes the Greens different today we see it’s not their environmental politics. Belief in climate change is mainstream to all bar a few shock jocks, the odd snarling, cynical, right-wing bully and Tony Abbott. You can believe in the need to take action on global warming and not vote Green. Which sparks the question — so why would we?”

The Age kindly published my rebuttal of this absurd article:

“Green” is universally identified with a pro-environment stance, and the defence of our common, vital, natural environment and its irreplaceable ecosystems against destructive greed and private profit. However a related generality is Green defence of human social environments (human ecosystems) against amoral greed.

Accordingly, apart from the marginalized but ethically very sound Socialists, the Greens are the only significant political group realistically and honestly defending the sustainability and richness of both non-human ecosystems (the environment) and human ecosystems (human societies).

John Matthews’ assertion that “You can believe in the need to take action on global warming and not vote Green” is manifestly incorrect. Both the Liberal-National Party Coalition Opposition (the Libs) and the Labor Government (the Labs) have essentially the same climate change inaction policies of “5% off 2000 greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution by 2020″ coupled with unlimited expansion of coal and gas exports that will mean that Australia’s domestic plus exported GHG pollution will, relative to 2000, roughly double by 2020 and quadruple by 2050.

The Greens pragmatically support, as a carbon-pricing “first step”, Labor’s dishonest and counterproductive Carbon Tax (Treasury modelling says it will actually INCREASE Australia’s domestic GHG pollution) – ergo vote 1 Green and put Labor last.”

I could have added that before the 2010 elections the middle-of-the-road National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) conducted a survey of the policies of the major political parties on 40 issues in 7 major areas. Overall the Greens scored 100%, the ALP 53% and the LNP 23% in the NTEU survey. All anti-war, pro-environment, anti-racism, pro-Planet and pro-Humanity folk will vote 1 Green (indeed if you Google the phrase “vote 1 Green” you will get 543,000 results with articles containing this opinion of Dr Gideon Polya ranking items 1-5 on page 1).

The environmental policies of the Greens are a quantum jump above those of the do-nothing, BAU Lib-Labs and the social policies of the Greens are in agreement with the views of about half the Australian population. The Socialists have similar pro-environment and pro-Humanity polices but are more rigorous and less pragmatic than the typically middle class Greens. Sensible, pro-environment, pro-Humanity Australians – and indeed like people worldwide – have little choice but to vote 1 Green or to vote 1 Socialist.

From 2001 and until recently, Denmark was run by a liberal-conservative government supported by a far right nationalist party. Although holding a narrow majority of seats in parliament, this constellation pulled through a constant flow of tax breaks and privatizations made possible by feeding the Danish People’s Party lumps of – excuse me – xenophobic policies in turn for their votes. This dictatorship of a majority if there ever was one – more often than not, the remaining near-half of parliament was held from influence – is set to end, it appears, not to be replaced by a corresponding red block of parties.

Firstly, because the Social Democrats have wowed to end it. Traumatized by the Iraq war, in which Denmark participated on the most narrow of parliamentary majorities, they have promised to work for a change of law to require 2/3, not 50%, of the votes for such serious decisions as wars. Secondly, because the traditional power balances of the parties were shattered by voters this time. The victors, the Socialist People’s Party especially, lost eight seats combined and must rely on two supporting parties – the centrist Danish Social Liberal Party and the Marxist Red-Green Alliance – who in turn earned eight seats each. That and the occasionally possible deal with some of the right wing parties. Actual democracy, everyone is hoping.

What is certain to end and even be somewhat reversed is the xenophobic policies. The mechanism of buying capitalist laws with racist or nationalist laws have been exhausted. Recently Germany was angered by Denmark reinstating border controls although abandoned everywhere in the European Union and Danes – leftist, centrist and moderately rightist alike – have witnessed too many disputes with NGOs over international law and humanitarian treaties. But will a fully “red” government replace the old one? No. Although, ironically, they were the most critical of the opposition parties when immigration laws were ever tightened, the differences between the centrists and the Marxists are too many and too big.

But there is something else the entire opposition has in common: green policies! If they live up to the promises their political programs share we can expect some of the following from the next Danish government:

• Actual legislation on CO2 targets and reduction rate – CO2 emissions reduced by at least 40% by 2020
• Half of electricity from wind and biogas produced from all major agricultural manure by 2020
• Fossil energy replaced with renewable energy in electricity and heating sector by 2035
• Gross energy consumption to be reduced by at least 40% and fossil energy for transport phased out by 2050
• Accelerated construction of planned off shore wind farms, new near-shore wind farms and new turbines on land
• Increased energy saving requirements of energy companies and increased funding for energy research and development
• Accelerated energy renovation of public buildings and public housing
• Copenhagen road paywall, investment in improved public transport, accelerated infrastructure for electric cars and a tax on flight tickets

Often visitors to Denmark express respect for our wind mills and green initiatives. Our country is mentioned in documentaries and international news for our sustainable solutions and bicyclists. The truth is, for the past ten years we have been showing off efforts of the Social Democratic 1990s. While the Danish People’s Party and the Liberal Party harbored some of the last climate change deniers (allowing only rare environmental initiatives supported by the Conservatives) Denmark was left behind by other Scandinavian and European countries on being green. Germans now both recycle more and build windmills at least as good as ours. We botched COP15, remember?

But Denmark is now back among the most ambitious of nations. And the first half of 2012 the new Danish government will hold Presidency of the Council of the European Union. So, see you in a second, green Europe.

Source of green policy summary: Information.dk / Og vinderen blev det grønne Danmark. A decent summary of the election in English at The Economist / A left turn for Denmark.

This means that the climate was the big loser in this election as the current governments climate policy have been called a failure by heavy environmental organisations and even won greenwash awards.

But nonetheless the Greens in Sweden managed to get 7,2% of the votes, or 25 of the 349 seats in the parliament. The best election result ever for the Greens in Sweden. This is an 2% increase since the last election and it results in the Greens becoming the third major political force in Sweden.

Monica Frassoni and Philippe Lamberts, Co-Spokespersons for the European Greens, said in a statement that:

"This is an excellent result for the Swedish Greens and we would like to congratulate the Greens’ leaders, Maria Wetterstrand and Peter Eriksson, and all the party’s activists and staff, for waging a strong and positive campaign which appealed to a large part of the Swedish electorate."

"We know that the Swedish Greens will continue to focus on real solutions to the problems currently facing Sweden and will fight hard for environmental sustainability including increased investment in renewables rather than dangerous and inefficient nuclear power, the Green New Deal and an economy that serves citizens’ interests."

If you want you can learn more about the Swedish Greens over at the European Greens website.

But another very tragic and sad effect of the election yesterday night is that Sweden now has joined the many other European countries with far-right extremist parties in their parliaments. The Swedish Democrats, which is a political party based on racist and nazi values, gained a shocking 5.7% of the votes, or 20 of the 349 seats in the Swedish parliament. So it’s a very sad day for democracy in Sweden as well as around Europe that these dark forces gains more and more power.

The election result is still very uncertain as none of the two main political blocks gained majority. So we will have to wait and see until at the end of this week how the new political landscape in Sweden will look like.

Key to Swedish Political Parties:

Government (right/centre-right):
Moderates (M)
Centre Party (C)
Liberal Party (FP)
Christian Democrats (KD)

Opposition (left/centre-left):
Social Democrats (S)
Green Party (MP)
Left Party (V)

Opposition (extreme far-right):
Swedish Democrats (SD)

During the last four years with a right-wing Government in Sweden the pace of emissions reductions decreased from 1.5% to 0.6% per year, and the slow pace is expected to continue. In other words this means that Sweden will miss the EU climate targets by a long shot. With the current rate Sweden won’t reach an 80% reduction in emissions until in 2205 or later, the report says. Climate scientists are recommending a 40% reduction in emissions by 2020, but Sweden won’t reach this level until around year 2062. And an upcoming international climate ranking from the WWF shows that Sweden have lost its former top position to countries such as Germany, Denmark and Ireland. Recently the Society for Nature Conservation (SSNC) issued a harsh report showing that the last 4 years of environmental policies in Sweden have been a failure.

- A passive and cowardly climate policy involves great risks. Sweden may lag behind in development if we have such low aspirations that we need not do anything. Investment and research into new technologies will end up in other countries, as well as the introduction of products with the latest environmental technology. We risk losing lots of jobs, especially in rural areas, “said Maria Wetterstrand, spokesperson for the Green Party in Sweden.

A general election will be held in Sweden in nine days. And according to Peter Eriksson, spokesperson for the Green Party in Sweden, ” there are clear differences” between the different political sides:

- When it comes to climate policies there are clear differences in this election. We need to invest in modern high-speed trains, make our homes energy efficient and expand public transportations. The current government says no to all of this. But why should Sweden have slower trains than the rest of the world?

- The red-green parties wants to increase the pace of the climate work in Sweden again. Our goals and measures will lead to a reduction in emissions by over 2% per year. This will put Sweden again in line with the international climate goals, Erikson said.

Read more about the Swedish government and its climate-wrecking efforts:
- Swedish Government Wins Greenwash Award
- The Swedish government is bad for the environment
- The Swedish government completes its climate wrecking track record with a pro-nuclear vote

“The Greens won a historic first Westminster seat early this morning as the party’s leader, Caroline Lucas, overturned a 5,000-strong Labour majority to take the Brighton Pavilion constituency. After a nail-biting eight-hour count, Green activists cheered and yelled in delight as it was confirmed that Lucas, 49, had seen off Labour by about 1,300 votes. In a tight, three-way race the Conservatives were less than 3,000 votes further back.”

After the result was declared Caroline Lucas thanked the voters, fellow Green Party members and supporters who have helped the Greens win this historic victory. But she also criticized the media and the voting system which she says is “fundamentally undemocratic”:

“Thanks to the confidence that the voters of Brighton Pavilion have shown, Green principles and policies will now have a voice in Parliament. Policies such as responding to climate change with a million new ‘green’ jobs in low-carbon industries, fair pensions and care for older people, and stronger regulation of the banks will be heard in the House of Commons, ” she said.

“They have shown that they are prepared to put their trust in the Greens, despite the overwhelming national media focus on the three largest parties and a voting system that is fundamentally undemocratic.”

It’s great to see that the green political winds still blows strong throughout Europe. For example, in Sweden general elections will be held this September. And the Swedish Greens have gone from being one of the smallest political parties to the third biggest party (out of seven different parties) and a real power in Swedish politics with record high voter support in pre-election polls. The European Greens co-Spokespersons Philippe Lamberts and Monica Frassoni said in a statement that:

“This is a truly remarkable breakthrough for the Green Party of England and Wales and we know that Greens all over Europe and indeed throughout the world are delighted by this result. We would like to send our warmest congratulations to Caroline Lucas and her whole team of activists and volunteers who have been working so tirelessly over the past weeks and months to get the Greens’ message of social justice, fairness and environmental sustainability across to voters.”

Read more: George Monbiot says that the new “Green MP is welcome addition to British politics and reflects the transformation of the party”. In an interview with the BBC, Caroline Lucas says that this “is the start of a new political force in Westminster”. And the Guardian wonders what’s next for Caroline Lucas and the Green party after election success?

Photo credit: rockcohen

Green political parties from across Europe made a successful European parliament election this past week. The European Greens gained 11 new seats in the parliament and will now have a total of 46 Green MEPs, an increase with 31%. The Greens/EFA Group is now likely to have 53 MEPS (46 Greens and 7 EFA MEPs).

“To have increased the number of Green MEPs from 35 to 46 is a great success. Our showing is even more remarkable when you consider that we have 11 more seats than before in a parliament with 49 fewer MEPS and that all other groups have shrunk”, said EGP Co-Spokesperson Philippe Lamberts, who has been elected a MEP for the Belgian French-speaking Green Party Ecolo.

In France the green political party Europe-Ecologie gained 16% of the votes and will thus send 13 green MEPs to the European parliament. Belgium, Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Finland are other countries where the greens will receive more MEPs than from the last EU election. In Greece 3.48% of the people voted for Ecologoi-Prasinoi and as a result Greece will be able to send their first green MEP to the European Parliament.

“The Greek Greens’ campaign demonstrated European solidarity as an Austrian-Greek Green stood as a candidate to support the Greek party”.

“What our 31% increase in seats proves beyond any shadow of a doubt is that the Greens are a major political force to be reckoned with and that we are gaining the trust of more and more voters, not only in our traditional areas like the environment and climate policy and human rights, but also economics and social policy“, Lamberts said.

The greens across Europe will together and stronger than ever work hard to gain support in the parliament for their €500 billion new Green Deal which will help solve the economic crisis and save our climate.

EGP Co-Spokesperson Ulrike Lunacek, who was also elected a MEP for the Austrian Greens and managed to maintain their 2 seats despite heavy waves of rightwing populism, thanked all the people who dared to “Think Big, Vote Green”.

“We will fight hard on their behalf for a Green New Deal for Europe, which was at the heart of our common election campaign and obviously appealed to many voters, including many who had never voted Green before,” she said. “The Green New Deal would not only create 5 million new Green-Collar jobs in 5 years but would also help fight climate change as 500 billion Euros of public and private funds would be invested in renewables, energy efficiency and other future-oriented technologies”.

I am happy to see that the Greens has a growing support among the voters across Europe, and that they will with the support of the voters get at least 10 more seats in the EU parliament. And I am happy to see that Sweden (for now) isn’t taking part in the Europe-wide trend of sending far-right extremist, racists and anti-democratic political parties to the European Parliament.

Election Results

The Green election results can be found below:

Watch:

via Vote or Die 2009

The upcoming European Elections are just a few days away. And when it comes to saving the climate this EU election is one of the more important ones. And I believe it’s definitely something you must take part in if you care the slightest about the climate, your children and their future, the environment or just the well state of your country.

But how, when and on who should you vote for? Don’t worry! Green Blog got you covered. You can find out when the deadline for voting is in your country by using this map here. And here you will find a complete list of green political parties that you can vote for around Europe.

Find your country’s green party and vote for it in the upcoming EU election. It really isn’t harder than that! This is our chance to vote for change. Don’t waste it.

Photo credit: rockcohen

The upcoming European Elections are just a few weeks away. And when it comes to saving the climate this EU election is one of the more important ones. And I believe it’s definitely something you must take part in if you care the slightest about the climate, your children and their future, the environment or just the well state of your country.

As you probably already know by now time is no longer on our side when it comes to fighting man-made climate change. We need radical actions now if we are to have the slightest chance to stop the worst doomsday scenarios. That is why this election is so important. Because whatever you like it or not the decisions which are being made in the European Parliament affects all member states. So this is our chance to vote for meaningful actions against climate change that will affect politics and regulations both in Europe and around the world. Don’t wait until the next European Parliament elections in 2014, because then it will be too late.

How to vote?

If you live in one of the 27 member states of the European Union, and are eligible to vote, you can take part in the election and help save out climate by voting for a green political party. Yes, you read right. I am asking you to vote for a political party that might not be the right party for you personally in terms of your political views or ideology. But this is such an important, almost a once in a lifetime, election for the climate and the future of our civilization which require us to vote for political parties that actually stands for real actions against climate change.

When to vote?

The elections will take place in early June and all member states votes on different dates. For example the UK voting will be on the 4th and in Sweden the voting is not until the 7th. You can find out when the deadline for voting is in your country by using this map here.

Who should you vote for?

Because Europe has so many different political parties it’s hard to tell exactly which party should get your vote. That is why I think the easiest way to decide is to choose a political party that is a member of the European Greens (They have even set up a website to promote their candidates and their new green deal for Europe which will help solve the economic crisis and save our climate).

The following parties listed below are members of the European Greens:

• Albania: Partia e Gjelber
• Austria: Die Grünen
• Belgium: Ecolo OR Groen!
• Bulgaria: Bulgarian Green Party/Bulgarian Greens
• Cyprus: Cyprus Green Party
• Czech Republic: Strana Zelenych
• Estonia: Eestimaa Rohelised
• Finland: Vihreät De Gröna
• France: Les Verts
• Germany: Bündnis90/Die Grünen
• Greece: Ecologoi-Prasinoi
• Hungary: Zöld Demokraták Szövetsége
• Ireland: Comhaontas Glas
• Italy: Federazione dei Verdi
• Latvia: Latvijas Zala Partija
• Luxembourg: déi gréng
• Malta: Alternattiva Demokratika
• Moldova: Partidul Ecologist din Moldova “Aliante Verde” (PEM AVE)
• Netherlands: De Groenen OR GroenLinks
• Poland: Zieloni 2004
• Portugal: Partido Ecologista “Os Verdes”
• Romania: The Green Party
• Slovakia: Strana Zelenych (SZ)
• Slovenia: Stranka mladih Slovenije (SMS)
• Spain: Los Verdes OR Iniciativa per Catalunya Verds (ICV)
• Sweden: Miljöpartiet de Gröna
• United Kingdom: The Green Party of England & Wales OR Scottish Green Party

Find your country’s green party and vote for it in the upcoming EU election. It really isn’t harder than that!

This is our chance to vote for change. Don’t waste it.

The people have spoken. And they have clearly chosen Barack Obama as the next President of the United States of America. Hopefully the election outcome will result in USA moving away from its current destructive climate and environmental politics and policies. Hopefully well-needed change will come to USA, and the world.

People, leaders and organisations from around the world hurry to congratulate Obama and his running mate Biden while hoping that this will be a new “fresh” chapter in U.S. relations and politics.

The current French Presidency of the Council of Ministers of the European Union said in a statement that “the European Union is ready to work closely with Mr Barack Obama and his administration” to together combat “the challenges of the 21st century” in “a spirit of mutual trust and dialogue”:

“Because the world aspires to peace and stability, the European Union sees in this election the promise of a reinforced transatlantic partnership, a partnership that serves the universally shared values that inspire the people of Europe and the United States, a partnership that will enable us to face together the challenges of the 21st century.

The European Union is ready to work closely with Mr Barack Obama and his administration and to make concrete proposals at the appropriate time, in a spirit of mutual trust and dialogue.”

The President of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, said that “we need to change the current crisis into a new opportunity. We need a new deal for a new world.”

“This is a time for a renewed commitment between Europe and the United States of America.

I want to assure US President elect Obama of the support of the European Commission and of my personal support in forging this renewed commitment to face together the many challenges ahead of us.

We need to change the current crisis into a new opportunity. We need a new deal for a new world. I sincerely hope that with the leadership of President Obama, the United States of America will join forces with Europe to drive this new deal. For the benefit of our societies, for the benefit of the world.”

In a statement John Passacantando, Greenpeace USA Executive Director, congratulated not just Obama but also “the American people for backing a candidate who stood up for real change in a time of deep economic trouble”:

“We also congratulate the American people for backing a candidate who stood up for real change in a time of deep economic trouble. Among the most daunting issues America faces today is the crisis of global warming, and the American people backed the candidate who ran on a clear platform of taking the bold, science-based action needed to solve that crisis.”

The Greenpeace’s Making Waves blog congratulates Obama, but also wants to remind him about the promises he made during the election campaign:

“We’re non-partisan here at Greenpeace. We don’t have any permanent allies or enemies. We support policies, not politicians. We endorse deeds, not words. So even while a lot of us (in our personal capacity as human beings and not Greenpeace employees) are jumping up and down this morning with glee, we want to take a moment to remind you of the promises you made in your election campaign.”

[…]

“When the oil company sharks and the coal industry crooks and the nuclear energy shisters begin to gather at your door, please remember what you promised us in this election. Please remember the reasons you gave us to hope.”

Brent Blackwelder, President, Friends of the Earth Action, said that energy was a key issue in the election and that “Barack Obama and the new Congress can help the United States fulfill its potential to again be a world leader in the provision of clean energy”:

“Our country is in a tough spot. Our outdated energy infrastructure and reliance on fossil fuels are damaging the economy, endangering our national security, and threatening the planet with an unprecedented environmental and human catastrophe in the form of climate disruption. But these challenges also provide an opportunity to move forward, as wind, solar, and efficiency projects can happen quickly. Barack Obama and the new Congress can help the United States fulfill its potential to again be a world leader in the provision of clean energy. It’s our job to hold their feet to the fire and ensure they do so.”

Henrik Hasselknippe, the global head of carbon analysis for Point Carbon, a research company based in Norway, said that Obama will be a blessing for the clean energy businesses and that the international climate talks have “been on hold” and just waited “for a new U.S. administration to take office”:

“You could say that international climate talks have been on hold for the past few years with everyone in reality just waiting for a new U.S. administration to take office,” said Henrik Hasselknippe, the global head of carbon analysis for Point Carbon, a research company based in Oslo, Norway.

Mr. Hasselknippe said the victory for Mr. Obama was a boon for clean energy businesses because of an expectation that “it would be easier to get international negotiations going with a Democrat in the White House.” He noted that Mr. Obama had proposed more ambitious cuts in greenhouse gas emissions for U.S. industry than John McCain, the Republican candidate who conceded defeat.”

Kate Hampton, head of policy at Climate Change Capital, a British investment company with $1.6bn under management, welcomed the election outcome while saying that Bush “had held back the growth of green business”:

“We cannot overstate how divisive the Bush administration was, how far behind the United States now is in the transition to the local carbon economy and how high expectations are now,” said Ms. Hampton. Mr. Obama “is a supporter of cap and trade and will push for more auctioning of carbon allowances, which is a good thing as it gives the US income to spend on other low carbon economy measures.”

Ms. Hampton also said she hoped that Obama would recognize that a “transition to the new economy will create jobs and profit” and build an “approach which is consistent with what the governments of the UK and France have been saying.”

Ricken Patel, from Avaaz.org, said in an email that “after 8 long years of Bush” there would finally be “a fresh start”:

“Obama’s victory brings a chance for the US to finally join with the world community to take on pressing challenges on climate change, human rights, and peace.

After years, even decades of distrust, let’s seize this moment of unity, reconciliation and hope to send a message of warm congratulations and invitation to work together to the new President and the American people.”

Green Blog recently endorsed Barack Obama and Joe Biden. Because when it comes to environmental, energy and climate issues, only Obama stood out as the strong and aggressive candidate with a detailed and comprehensive plan to tackle these problems. Now we need to put pressure on Obama and his administration so that the promises he have made will not be forgotten.