Showing posts with label roger harrabin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label roger harrabin. Show all posts

Wednesday, 9 April 2014

World 'needs Plan B' on climate - IPCC report





Waves at Newhaven

Related Stories


The world needs a Plan B on climate change because politicians are failing to reduce carbon emissions, according to a UN report.

It warns governments if they overshoot their short-term carbon targets they will have to cut CO2 even faster in the second half of the century to keep climate change manageable.

If they fail again, they will have to suck CO2 out of the atmosphere.

This could be achieved by burning wood and capturing the CO2 emissions.

The gas could then be stored in rocks underground.

But a leaked draft of the UN report also says that the technology for carbon dioxide removal is untested at such a scale.

The authors warn that carbon removal systems may encounter resistance from the public - and if the policy goes wrong, it could damage forests and ecosystems..........

 

Government responses

Some comments on the draft text of the forthcoming UN report
  • Russia: "There are no CDR (Carbon Dioxide Removal) technologies by now. In the best case, they are pilot projects and small-scale experiments. [The idea] looks unrealistic.
  • UK: "[The] technologies [are] not proven and may not be available. There is a significant risk that the [summary document] misleads policy-makers into thinking that mitigation action (cutting emissions) could be delayed with little increased climate risk.
  • Germany: "Please indicate that CDR technologies are not currently available and would be associated with high risks and adverse side-effects."





..........The final draft report to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) adopts a new tone of realism in the face of repeated failures by governments to meet their rhetoric on climate change with action.

It warns that governments are set to crash through the global CO2 safety threshold by 2030. Humans have tripled CO2 emissions since 1970, it says - and emissions have been accelerating rather than slowing.

The experts advise governments that it will be cheaper overall to cut the greenhouse gas before 2030 if they want to hold emissions at 430-480ppm CO2 - a level that's calculated to bring a 66% chance of staying within a desired 2C threshold of warming by the end of the century.

These are not recommendations - the IPCC isn't allowed to make them - but they are an acknowledgement that many countries appear to lack the will or the ability to cut emissions.

A Greenpeace spokesman said: "This new report captures the choices we face. It's not too late; we can still avoid the worst impacts of global warming but only if the clean energy technologies that can slash carbon pollution are given the green light.

"The more we wait, the more it will cost. The sooner we act, the cheaper it will be."

But Bob Ward, from the LSE's Grantham Institute, said it was crucial to reach safe levels by 2100.

"We are in a much worse situation politically than we were seven years ago," he said.

"The current lack of action means that we may have to consider overshoot scenarios, which would be better than abandoning our temperature target threshold of 2 degrees. Some people think there's a degree of political dishonesty in allowing governments to claim they will keep to their targets in the short term."

The report says emissions are running at the high end of projections. Concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere are likely to break the 450ppm threshold by 2030. It adds that current pledges by governments made at climate summits in Copenhagen and Cancun currently exceed this cautionary limit.

The share of clean energy sources needs to triple or even quadruple by 2050, relative to 2010, the final draft explains. Delaying emissions reductions beyond 2030 will increase the challenge of bringing down CO2 to a safe level by the end of the century.

The report will be discussed by government representatives and experts through the week.

Follow Roger on Twitter.

Saturday, 8 December 2012

Climate Compensation Row at Doha.


The solution of climate change compensation, and the like for the developing world is probably quite simple. The US could create its own money electronically to deal with it. In other words, Green Quantitative Easing, or rather Facilitation Finance in Transfinancial Economics.

RS



December 2012 Last updated at 14:51



Protest Protesters hit out at the "hot air" surplus some nations want to carry over into the next Kyoto Protocol commitment period

Related Stories

Frustration at slow progress of the UN climate talks bubbled over when a spokesman for small island states (AOSIS) rounded on rich nations.
US representative Jonathan Pershing had been discussing plans to compensate poor nations for losses due to damage from climate change.
But AOSIS spokesman Ronald Jumeau condemned wealthy countries for their lack of urgency.
The UN talks are into their second week in the Qatari capital.
Mr Jumeau said that there would be no need for talk about compensation if the rich had cut their emissions in previous meetings.
"The Doha caravan seems to be lost in the sand," he told a joint news conference. "As far as ambition is concerned, we are lost.
"We're past the mitigation (emissions cuts) and adaptation eras. We're now right into the era of loss and damage. What's next after that? Destruction? Disappearance of some of our islands?
"We're already into the era of re-location. But after loss and damage there will be mass re-locations if we continue with this loss of ambition."
The issue of compensation for climate losses looks set to become a major focus for negotiations at the conference.
The task of the meeting is to wind up negotiations under talks associated with the existing Kyoto Protocol on cutting emissions of greenhouse gases, and move towards a new treaty in 2015 binding all nations, rich and poor in tackling climate change.
Developing countries are attempting to bolt down as many commitments as possible and they sense that there may be some movement on a new mechanism for loss and damage.
The idea is being backed in a petition to governments by 44 NGOs representing millions of people concerned about the impacts of climate change. It has been led by Care.
"The first and foremost response must be to immediately and dramatically cut emissions and help vulnerable countries and ecosystems adapt to new climate realities, " it says. "Governments must now also recognize that we are in a "third era" and redress the permanent loss and damage from climate impacts.
"Given historic inaction by developed countries we are heading for the biggest social injustice of our time."
They urge governments to establish a formal mechanism for loss and damage (the word "compensation" is being avoided; some nations, including the US won't countenance it because of the implication of guilt). They also want the UN to monitor and assess losses, and to find new approaches for addressing loss and damage, particularly for slow-onset events like, say, sea level rise.
Nick Mabey from the think-tank E3G told BBC News it was useful that the issue of long-term risk might become embedded in the negotiations. There were costs, he said, to avoiding action to cut emissions:
"The debate on loss and damage brings an important new dimension to the climate negotiations. The costs of failing to reduce climate risk must be internalised in the negotiations or agreement will be reached merely by lowering ambition for mitigation ."
"With a truly global agreement now possible in 2015, countries must now decide how much climate risk they are willing to take and what they are willing to do to reduce their exposure."
Mr Jumeau, from the Seychelles, went out of his way to praise the UK for its leadership on climate change, especially for its re-stated pledges of increased finance to help poor nations get clean energy - £1.8bn by 2015.
Germany followed by promising to increase its contributions further.
A spokesman for the UK delegation told BBC News: "The UK is still taking part in important negotiations around loss and damage. So far, we have indentified a number of areas where parties agree and we are working hard to find common agreement on the way forward."
Back in the UK, the Chancellor George Osborne was facing complaints from some Conservatives that money was going on climate finance when budgets were being cut for services in Britain.
His gas strategy, published alongside the Autumn Statement, confirms that he wants to review and maybe scrap the UK's unilateral targets on reducing emissions