Global Warming Debate: Edwards, Clinton & Kucinich Win

Today may be remembered as a pivotal day in dealing with the increasingly urgent problem of global warming.

In Valencia, Spain, the world's climate scientists are struggling to finalize a consensus report that the world's governments will sign.

"There is real urgency," said Bert Metz from the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, who co-chaired the IPCC working group on options for mitigating climate change.

"We need to peak emissions within 10 years if we are to keep the global temperature rise to 2C. If we leave it for 25 years, we're already committed to 3C."

Handily, [this] IPCC summary also tells you what those temperature rises translate to in terms of impacts.

Two Celsius means about one third of species at risk of extinction, decreased cereal production in the tropics, most coral reefs bleached.

Three Celsius puts millions more people at risk of coastal flooding, decreased cereal production at all latitudes and widespread death of coral reefs.

Coincidentally, today was the League of Conservation Voters/Grist forum on global warming in Los Angeles. All Democratic and Republican candidates were invited - only Clinton, Edwards, and Kucinich showed up.

Here is Devilstower's summary:

Dennis Kucinich is obviously enthusiastic about this topic, and his personal efforts are admirable.  However, when pressed on specifics, he wandered off topic and rarely gave any details of how he would implement his broad ideas.  A good performance, but I doubt it will pull in anyone who wasn't already a fan.

Hillary Clinton, as she has in many debates, comes off as polished, self-possessed, and competent.  That may make her seem a little stiff and cold to some people, but after eight years of Bush, competent seems hugely attractive.  Her plan seems solid, and her calls for US leadership in this area were very welcome.  However, she often seemed more interested in inserting Al Gore or Barbara Boxer's name into an answer (each of which drew expected applause) than delivering a concise response.

John Edwards hit the ground running -- almost literally.  He tore into the subject at a pace that made me breathless just listening to him, and he was more willing than the other candidates to make definitive statements. He hearkened back to Kennedy, and made a call to national sacrifice, but he didn't spend all his time stomping the big emotional notes, and was ready with more information when it came to costs, funding, etc.  Edwards also seemed the best informed on the latest UN report.

Todd Beeton also gives the edge to Edwards:

Edwards was in his element at this forum. The audience loves him and he is coming off really well. This forum actually gave him the perfect opportunity to expand on his calls for an end to lobbyist influence and for unequivocal bold leadership -- "no half measures." This forum pretty much crystallized the primary difference between Clinton and Edwards. The choice couldn't be more clear. While Kucinich is in the clouds, Clinton has her feet planted firmly on the ground, Edwards is somewhere in between, in a good way.

Congratulations to Edwards, Clinton, and Kucinich - but where the hell were all the other candidates on the most important issue of the century???