Who pays the price?

According to a new scientific study, six species of coral are under threat of extinction in the Caribbean due to toxic runoff and rising temperatures from global warming.

Meanwhile, we are being told that a "compromise" was made on the issue of climate change at the G-8 Summit. As always with the mainstream media, symbolism is presented as substance.
According to the BBC,

"Leaders of the G8 nations have agreed to seek "substantial" cuts in emissions in an effort to tackle climate change. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the G8 would negotiate within a UN framework to seek a replacement for the Kyoto Protocol by the end of 2009. No mandatory target was set for the cuts, but Mrs Merkel's preference for a 50% emissions cut by the year 2050 was included in the agreed statement. Developing nations should also cut emissions, the leaders agreed." [Emphasis added]

So this is not an agreement, but a promise that some replacement for the Kyoto protocol will be negotiated two years from now. Why do we need a replacement? Because the US refused to sign the Kyoto protocol, which called for 60% emissions cuts by 2050.

But even if the U.S. does agree to this reduced cut (by no means guaranteed), is that enough? One of the problems with projecting cuts based on current trends is the non-linearity of climatic trends. According to a new study, one of the world's main carbon dioxide sinks, the Southern Ocean around Antartica, is now so C02-saturated that it is beginning to "fail" as an absorber of carbon dioxide.

According to the UK Independent, "As a result, atmospheric CO2 levels may rise faster and bring about rising temperatures more quickly than previously anticipated. Stabilising the CO2 level, which must be done to bring the warming under control, is likely to become much more difficult, even if the world community agrees to do it. "