Can the World Unite to Combat Climate Change?

Author’s Note: This translation is a bit messy, but let’s ignore that for now and focus on the content.

Meetings, meetings, meetings... meetings about climate issues continue, but a good consensus has still not been reached, while climate deterioration is ongoing, and the situation is becoming more and more severe. Other ways to suppress the greenhouse effect are not yet mature... Where is the way to solve climate change?

Can the World Unite to Combat Climate Change?

An international agreement currently under discussion still faces huge differences.

By Paul Voosen

The latest round of preparatory talks for the United Nations climate conference ended today, with participants sadly stating: progress is so slow that it may mean an agreement on emissions cannot be reached at the Copenhagen meeting this December.

"If this opportunity is lost, the consequences will be unthinkable," noted Yvo de Boer, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In order to reach an agreement, he stated, "the pace of negotiations at the (next) meeting in Bangkok must be greatly accelerated."

Jonathan Pershing, the leader of the U.S. climate negotiation team, issued a warning for this. "If we do not have more action and consensus than what we have seen here, we will not reach any agreement," Pershing said.

Anders Turesson, Chairman of the EU Working Group and Sweden’s lead climate negotiator, said that although there are still many difficult problems (unresolved), this round of talks also showed a small glimmer of hope, such as reaching a consensus on "who should do what."

"What we are discussing now is a far-reaching change in industrial civilization," Turesson said. "If these ’stumbling blocks’ did not appear, we would instead feel very surprised."

Participants held a week of talks in Bonn, Germany, with the main goal of reducing the number of options in the negotiation text, which is as long as 200 pages. This negotiation text serves as the successor to the 1997 "Kyoto Protocol." Due to differences in opinion, it contains about 2,000 "notes" in brackets.

"We seem to be floating in a sea of brackets," de Boer said. After a week of discussion, this text has not significantly shrunk. Many disputes mainly depend on whether the U.S. Senate can pass the climate bill this autumn. Pershing made it clear that the United States will use all laws that can serve as a basis for legislation to strive for a carbon reduction agreement.

"Our focus is not to repeat the ’Kyoto Protocol’," Pershing said, recalling past climate treaties where the United States had compromised, but the Senate did not approve them. De Boer optimistically stated that after the House of Representatives passes the climate bill, the United States’ greenhouse gas emissions will be seen to drop by 13% compared to 1990, but this still does not reach the 20% target promised by the EU.

In the end, Europeans want to be in a comparable position with Americans. Pershing said that due to domestic constraints, it is not yet clear how to complete this. The U.S. position is to reach an agreement rather than stipulate a reduction ratio that satisfies every developed country. "It should be up to the country to decide relevant matters," Pershing said. For developing countries and regions, the United States is seeking some plans that are not legally bound by targets but are bound by actions, Pershing said. One example is a quantified (specified number) commitment regarding how Brazil will exploit forest resources.

If developing countries are to limit emissions to adapt to climate change, they will always seek development funds from developed countries. But so far, no developed country has suggested increasing the amount of this fund to more than 10 billion US dollars, participants said.

Meanwhile, according to Dessima Williams, the Permanent Representative of Grenada to the United Nations and Chairwoman of the Alliance of Small Island States, industrial countries are currently only promising to reduce emissions by 10-16% compared to 1990 at the negotiating table. Williams pointed out that if there are no other changes, these commitments will still cause the temperature to rise by more than 3 degrees Celsius. This level of warming is much higher than the goal established at the G8 summit held in L’Aquila, Italy, last month, which was to control the temperature rise to no more than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

In a recent report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change confirmed that a reduction of 25% to 40% compared to 1990 is necessary to avoid the worst impacts of climate change: heatwaves, floods, droughts, and sea-level rise.

More than 2,000 delegates met in Bonn this week. This meeting, which was designated as "informal," is the latest in a series of preparatory meetings leading up to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen this December. The next meeting will be held in Bangkok in late September, followed by Barcelona, Spain, in November.

Original article: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=climate-change-international-negotiations

Can the World Unite to Combat Climate Change?
Ongoing negotiations on an international agreement continue to face significant disagreement

By Paul Voosen

The latest round of preparatory talks for the U.N. climate conference concluded today with negotiators lamenting that the languid pace of talks could mean there won’t be a deal on emissions in Copenhagen this December.

"It would be incomprehensible if this opportunity were lost," said Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change. For any hope of a deal, he said, "the speed of the negotiations must be considerably accelerated at the [next] meeting in Bangkok."

The United States’ lead climate negotiator, Jonathan Pershing, added to the warnings.

"If we don’t have more movement and more consensus than we saw here, we won’t have an agreement," Pershing said.

Though the problems were many, there were also glimmers of hope in the current round, such as a collective agreement on what should be done, said Anders Turesson, Sweden’s lead climate negotiator and chairman of the E.U. working group.

"What we’re talking about is a profound change of industrial civilization," Turesson said. "It would be surprising if there weren’t stumbling blocks."

The negotiators were wrapping up a week of talks in Bonn, Germany, aimed at narrowing the number of options in the 200-page main negotiating document. This text, which will serve as the basis for negotiations for the successor to 1997’s Kyoto Protocol, is currently inundated with some 2,000 bracketed statements highlighting areas of disagreement.

"We seem to be afloat on a sea of brackets," de Boer said. The document has not been significantly slimmed down in the week’s discussions.

Much debate hinges on whether the U.S. Senate will pass climate legislation this fall. Pershing made it clear that the United States will use whatever domestic legislation it passes as the basis for its carbon reduction agreements.

"Our focus is not to repeat Kyoto," Pershing said, recalling the climate treaty that the United States helped negotiate but the Senate did not ratify.

The rosiest interpretations of the House’s recently passed climate bill would see U.S. greenhouse gas emissions dropping by up to 13 percent from 1990 levels, de Boer said, well below commitments made by the European Union to reduce its emissions by 20 percent.

In the end, Europeans want to be on comparative terms with the Americans, Turesson said. How that will be accomplished is unclear, given the domestic limits the United States faces.

The U.S. position is that the agreement that will emerge, rather than mandating a single percentage cut that will be met by every wealthy nation, "is something [that will be] conceived country by country," Pershing said.

From developing nations, the United States is seeking not legally binding targets but legally binding actions, Pershing said. One such example would be a quantified commitment from Brazil on how it will tackle deforestation.

Developing nations have been seeking financing from developed countries if they are to limit their emissions and adapt to climate change. So far, there has not been one proposal from developed nations that would raise more than $10 billion a year for such funding, negotiators said.

Meanwhile, the commitments currently on the table from industrial countries will only reduce emissions between 10 and 16 percent from 1990 levels, according to Dessima Williams, the permanent representative of Grenada to the United Nations and chairwoman of the Alliance of Small Island States.

Unless changed, these pledges will lead to temperature change of more than 3 degrees Celsius, Williams said.

Such a temperature increase is well above the goal agreed to by the world’s wealthiest nations at the Group of Eight summit in L’Aquila, Italy, last month. There, countries including the United States, Canada and Russia agreed to cap global warming at 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.

In its most recent report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change identified a 25 percent to 40 percent cut in emissions from 1990 levels as necessary to avoid the worst effects of climate change: heat waves, floods, droughts and rising sea levels.

More than 2,000 representatives met in Bonn this week. The consultation, which was characterized as "informal," is the latest in a series of meetings leading up to the U.N. climate change conference in Copenhagen this December. Further meetings will take place in Bangkok in late September and Barcelona, Spain, in November.

When reposting, please include the address of this article: https://kexue.fm/archives/81

For more detailed reposting matters, please refer to: Scientific Space FAQ