EcoRadio

Category: Climate chaos

The atmosphere is to the earth as a layer of varnish is to a desktop globe. It is thin, fragile and essential for preserving the items on the surface.150 years of burning fossil fuel have overloaded the atmosphere to the point where the earth is ill. It now has a fever. Read the detailed article, Soothing Gaia’s Fever for an evocative account of that analogy. The items listed here detail progress on coordinating 6.5 billion people in the most critical project undertaken by humanity. 

  • Climate talks end in acromony as UN and EU accuse US of endangering deal

     

     

    In addition, the US and Europe put themselves on a collision course with the world’s poorest countries by repeating demands that the existing Kyoto treaty be scrapped in favour of a single new international treaty.

     

    It was announced by the UN that more than 40 heads of state have agreed to go to Copenhagen, including Gordon Brown and others from Europe, Africa and South America, and many more are expected. It is recognition that the only way a legally binding deal will be concluded is with the highest level political involvement.

     

    Ironically, the involvement of the heads of state will give negotiators much less time to bridge what appears to be nearly insurmountable gaps between positions, thereby forcing the talks to continue well into 2010. Earlier this week, the US, EU and UK accepted that an enforceable deal would take at least six months to finalise.

     

    “Little progress was made [this week] on the key issues of emission targets and finance that would allow developing countries to limit their emissions and adapt to climate change,” said Yvo de Boer, the UN director of the talks. “Without these two pieces of the puzzle in place we will not have a deal. Leadership at the highest level is now required to unlock the pieces”.

     

    The 130 developing countries represented by the G77 group said today they would walk out of Copenhagen if rich countries did not offer far deeper emission cuts and more money. “If there are no ambitious targets and timetables in the first few days then there will definitely be a reaction,” said Lumumba Di-Aping, chair of the G77.

     

    Jonathan Pershing, the US chief negotiator, denied the US was holding up the talks by not naming a figure for its cuts and refused to say whether the US would go to Copenhagen with a figure. “If we were to do a 17% reduction or a 20% cut I’m not sure it would make a difference to the talks,” he said.

     

    But the UN, EU and NGOs all said the US was endangering years of negotiations, and hopes of tackling global warming, if it did not come up with firm targets. “We need a figure from the US. It is very important for a deal to have the biggest emitter there with a concrete figure which should be legally binding,” said Anders Torrson, the Swedish chief negotiator.

     

    “A US target is essential. If the US can deliver that target [in Copenhagen] that will give a critical signal,” said de Boer.

     

    NGOs said there was everything still to play for. “This is the darkest hour. There is enough time. Consensus is not forming around a weak deal. That is only wishful thinking by industrialised countries. Developing countries are fighting for their survival,” said Greenpeace climate director Martin Kaiser.

     

    “The EU countries should be prepared to cut themselves loose from the US or risk losing a climate deal. World leaders cannot wait while the US plays catch-up. Rich countries are using the US as an excuse to put their national interests above alleviating the suffering of the millions of people,” said Antonio Hill, climate adviser for Oxfam.

     

    In a series of impassioned speeches, poor countries accused the US and EU of putting the talks and planet at risk. “They are negotiating for themselves and not humanity,” said Angelica Navarro, Bolivian ambassador to Switzerland. “They must go beyond the individual interests of each country and put the interests of the world first.”

     

    However, progress was made on a technology agreement, reducing emissions from deforestation in poor countries, and ways to distribute funds to help countries adapt to climate change.

     

    Centres of technological excellence are likely to be set up around the world which would have staff trained to help poor countries with renewable energy.

  • Democrats make progress on climate but bill’s future remains uncertain

     

    Republicans had boycotted the bill drafting sessions, demanding a more time for the Environmental Protection Agency to conduct a detailed analysis of how much the bill will cost the economy and ordinary consumers.

    Boxer defended her decision to go ahead with the vote despite the boycott.

    “The committee and Senate rules that have been in place during Republican and Democratic majorities are there to be used when the majority feels it is in the best interest of their states and of the nation to act,” she said in a statement.

    The EPA has done an extensive analysis of a climate change bill passed by the House of representatives in June, and Boxer said it would be uneconomical to order a new study of what are essentially very similar proposals. But Boxer’s move angered Republicans as well as some moderate Democrats who have reservations about the bill. A powerful Democrat on her committee, Max Baucus of Montana, voted no today. making the final count 11-1.

    He said in a statement he was worried that the 20% target was too high and that he wanted more protection for agriculture. But he added: “I’m going to work to get climate change legislation that can get 60 votes, get through the US Senate and signed into law.”

    The bill’s prospects are also threatened by twin defeats this week for
    Democrats in governors’ elections in New Jersey and Virginia. Senators,
    especially those from coal producing and rust belt states who had earlier
    raised concerns that the climate bill could be a “jobs killer” are now much
    more likely to distance themselves from Barack Obama’s agenda.

    “The question is, do people think we’re tending to the things they care
    about?” John Rockefeller, a Democrat from West Virginia who has been on the fence on climate change, told reporters. “Don’t think people in my state
    are going to stand up and start cheering about Copenhagen,” Rockefeller
    said.

    Other Democratic senators – whose support for a climate change law had
    already been doubtful – said they would now have to think carefully about
    economic consequences of energy reform. “People need to be saying slow it
    down and don’t add more to the deficit,” said Ben Nelson a Democrat from
    Nebraska. “And what have many of us been talking about? We don’t want to
    see anything added to the deficit unless there’s cost containment.”

    Boxer reportedly defied advice from the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid,
    to give the Republicans until next Tuesday to end their boycott. She also
    disregarded four moderate Republican senators whose support is seen as
    critical to the bill’s passage. The senators wrote to the EPA on Wednesday
    warning they could not support a bill without a detailed cost analysis from
    the agency.

    “We have a keen interest in ensuring that cost estimates, models and other
    data critical to the legislative process be made available to members of
    Congress and the public in a timely manner,” the four senators wrote. “We
    cannot support legislation without this information.”

    However, John Kerry who is leading an effort to craft a broader climate and
    energy bill that would allow offshore drilling and expand nuclear power,
    said the vote would not hurt prospects of action on global warming. “This
    is and has always been a big lift,” he said.

    Kerry said earlier that growing support for climate change legislation in
    the business community and the opportunities for different regions in the
    US would eventually overpower other arguments. He also said that the US
    chamber of commerce, which has been opposing the climate change bill, now
    seemed to be adopting a more nuanced position.

  • Danger in power of lobbyists to erode coastal planning policy

    Media Release

    >From Sylvia Hale, Greens MP, Spokesperson for Planning

    6 November 2009

     
    Danger in power of lobbyists to erode coastal planning policy

    The impact of lobbyists on discussions around climate change and
    planning is irresponsible and will put an immense strain on resources as
    Australia and NSW seek to deal with issues around climate change,
    including sea level rise, say The Greens.

    “ Groups such as the Urban Development Institute of Australia’s NSW
    executive, who have criticised the NSW Government’s Sea Level Rise
    Policy Statement , contain representatives from some of the biggest
    developers and largest political donors in NSW”, said Sylvia Hale, NSW
    Greens spokesperson on Planning.

    “UDIA’s NSW Branch Councillors include representatives of Boral,
    Johnson Property Group, Lend Lease, Australand, Stockland, Brown
    Consulting and Greenfields Development Company, who between them have
    donated over $1.4 million to Labor and Coalition parties over the last
    ten years. These companies are all big players in the development
    industry in NSW who have a direct financial interest in opposing a
    precautionary coastal planning system.

    “The costs of failing to conservatively manage our coastline and
    estuaries is already becoming apparent, as rises in sea level and
    increased storm activity have affected existing coastal development up
    and down the coast.

    “Continuing coastal land releases in the same way as in the past will
    cost untold millions of dollars as State and Local Governments will be
    expected to clean up the mess as low lying lands are permanently
    inundated, and beaches and estuaries erode.

    “The repudiation of the climate science by property developers is an
    appalling example of naked self interest and deserves the strongest
    condemnation. These companies are interested in nothing but their own
    short-term interests, and it is the role of government to act in the
    long-term interests of people and the environment.

    “Already real sea level rise data indicates nearly half a metre rise
    by 2050, and that’s before melting ice caps are taken into account.

    “Many people around NSW will no doubt share the concerns of The
    Greens that the relationship between the development industry, the
    Government and Opposition is such that the very proper concerns raised
    in the NSW Sea Level Policy Statement will be overridden. Once again the
    development lobby is looking to win out over the broader interests of
    the people and environment of NSW”, said Ms Hale.

     Further information: Colin Hesse (02) 9230 3030 or 0401 719 124
    —
    Another message from the Greens Media mailing list.

    Too many messages? Don’t unsubscribe – try switching to a daily digest.
    You can unsubscribe or change your subscription settings here:
    <http://lists.greens.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/options/media>
    Or send an email to <media-unsubscribe@lists.greens.org.au>

  • US scales down hopes of global climate change treaty in Copenhagen

     

    “We have to be honest in the process and deal with the realities that we don’t have time in these four weeks to put the language together and flesh out every crossed t and dotted i of a treaty,” said John Kerry, who chairs the Senate foreign relations committee.

    Todd Stern, the state department climate change envoy, agreed. “It doesn’t look like it’s on the cards for December,” he said. “We should make progress towards a political agreement that hits each of the main elements.”

    The scaling back of US ambitions follows a growing international consensus that a binding legal agreement on global warming could not be reached at Copenhagen – now just 32 days away. The US shift resets expectations for what will be accomplished at Copenhagen, once billed by the UN as a last chance to avoid catastrophic global warming.

    Stern, in comments to the house foreign relations committee today, said his comments playing down prospects for a binding treaty at Copenhagen reflected the views of senior US politicians including Ed Markey, the author of a climate change bill passed in June. Stern insisted that negotiators were intent on producing a blueprint in Copenhagen that would lead to a binding legal agreement “perhaps next year or as soon as possible”.

    He said: “We want something beyond certainly a declaration that we are going to keep working on this. We want a real agreement.” However, the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, said today that a delay of a year before a legally binding treaty was signed would be too long, given the threat posed by greenhouse gas emissions.

    Kerry, speaking at a National Journal seminar, said he was looking for countries to begin to put in place firm commitments at Copenhagen that would then be enshrined in international law by the end of 2010. “What I am looking for is a binding and real political agreement where the world comes together in Copenhagen with an agreement for fixed reductions that are measurable, verifiable and reportable Then you set either a June or July date or the Mexico date in December next year and work on the language in that year.”

    However, Kerry acknowledged even that scaled back notion of success hinged on the US Congress passing a climate change law, which seems unlikely because of strong Republican opposition to the possible costs of emissions cuts.

    As chair of the foreign relations committee, Kerry will play a pivotal role in getting any treaty ratified by the Senate. He said he was working with a Republican senator, Lindsey Graham, and the one-time Democrat Joe Lieberman to build support for the bill among Republicans and conservative Democrats. The three were meeting later today with the White House, the energy secretary, Stephen Chu, and the interior secretary, Ken Salazar, to craft a bill that would pass in the Senate — and have the support of the Obama administration.

    Kerry said the reduced role for Copenhagen could work out to the world’s advantage — allowing extra time for America, China, and the international community to co-ordinate their efforts. “The president can go China next week, sit with the Chinese and make clear what he is prepared to do, make clear what the Senate is prepared do. What the house has done has been made clear. so you are in a range, and the Chinese and everyone else enter into a political agreement which does not have the force of law till a year later,” he said.

    “We in effect have sealed a deal,” he said. “It works out be a fairly logicial step by step incremental process”

    In Barcelona, at the last negotiating meeting before Copenhagen, rich countries piled pressure on Africa not to derail the climate talks after the poorest countries in the world shocked the UN by walking out of the official talks, demanding that their concerns be met.

    The chair of the Africa group of nations, Kamel Djemouai, was recalled from Barcelona by the Algerian government and other African delegations reportedly received “strong” phone calls from their capitals urging them not to imperil the last negotiations before Copenhagen. Algeria admitted that its negotiator had been recalled but it was denied that this was related to Africa’s stand.

    The African bloc complained that rich nations’ carbon cuts were far too small to avoid catastrophic climate change, and refused to participate until more was done. The move forced the UN to abandon several sessions and reschedule others to give rich countries more time to debate emissions cuts. Countries have agreed to devote 60% of the remaining time to those discussions.

    France has been supportive of Africa’s position ahead of the climate change talks in Copenhagen. But French negotiators are known to have been angered and dismayed by the African move. “They are shooting themselves in the foot,” said one French diplomat.

  • Ruidd singled out in Africa climate boycott

     

    A key African negotiator named Kevin Rudd, along with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, in his criticisms, saying the greenhouse gas reduction targets set by developed nations are too low.

    It is a blow to those who are hoping for an international climate change agreement in the Danish capital.

    Mr Lumumba Di-Aping has questioned just how serious developed nations are in committing to a binding legal agreement and sticking to it.

    “The issue about whether there is a politically binding agreement and a legally binding agreement; I do not know of anything called politically binding agreement,” he said.

    “If there is anything that you know about politics and politically manifestos is that they’re worth very little.

    “Tell me of any politician who delivered on his political manifesto. Was it Gordon Brown? Was it Kevin Rudd?”

    Australia says it will reduce emissions by at least 5 per cent and up to 25 per cent if there is a world deal.

    Mr Di-Aping says it should be 40 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020.

    “You have to live to the ambition that saves the world. In Africa’s words, it is 40 minimum,” he said.

    Australian Greens Senator Christine Milne says the African nations should be commended for taking such a strong stand.

    “The Africans are doing absolutely the right thing. The developing world is suffering, people are dying right now,” she said.

    “They are saying it is time that we had science-based targets that give the planet a chance, that in fact give their people a chance for a start.

    “And that is where the G77 naming Kevin Rudd as one of the people with a manifesto that is virtually meaningless demonstrates that Australia’s targets are too weak.

    “We have to lift our game and do the right thing and put 40 per cent on the table in Copenhagen.”

     

    Positive spin

     

    But Climate Change Minister Penny Wong was at the talks and has put a positive spin on how things have gone.

    “The talks in Barcelona were good. We obviously still have an enormous amount of work to do. This is a very tough set of negotiations,” she said.

    “We have countries who have very different views, coming from very different places.”

    There might be an enormous amount of work to do but there is not much time left.

    Senator Wong says she is hopeful the Copenhagen talks will see a deal done.

    “We’ve said for some time what we need is an effective political agreement at Copenhagen,” she said.

    “This is an opportunity we can’t let pass and that’s what the government is continuing to work towards.

    “I think we all know that’s still something we need to work towards. Again I say there is an agreement there to be had.”

  • Climate talks must consider water

    The importance of water must not be overlooked when negotiators come to the table for the Copenhagen climate talks in December.

    This will be the central message of a day of campaigning by senior UN officials, NGOs and governments held to coincide with the ongoing UNFCCC talks in Barcelona this week.

    The latest version of the negotiating text on water adaptation, which will form part of the COP15 agenda, has removed specific reference to water management as part of a climate change adaptation strategy.

    Many leading voices believe that while greenhouse gases are bound to be the key consideration, water should not be sidelined in the debate and are now lobbying to have the issue reinistated on the texts.

    Speakers at the Water Day in Barcelona on Tuesday, November 3 include Pasquale Steduto, chairman of UN-Water, Xianfu Lu, programme officer, Adaptation, Technology and Science Programme, UNFCCC and Danish Ambassador Niels Pultz.

    Sam Bond