Green house emissions caused by human activity have given as result significant global warming since the beginning of the industrial revolution. There is now an international consensus of leading experts worldwide that we are approaching a point where dangerous climate of devastating and unpredictable consequences (IPCC, 2007).
This year has been a crucial year for climate change in which a series of meetings have led to a final UNFCC summit in Copenhagen next week to develop a post-2012 agreement after Kyoto Protocol expiration. At this meeting parties will be asked to collaborate to reach an agreement that avoids dangerous climate change and significantly increases action on adaptation pursuant to the Bali Action Plan. Negotiations at The United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen (COP 15) will need to show progress on the five Building Blocks of the Bali Action Plan. This task will require take on ambitious, binding commitments to reduce their own emissions as well as to deliver the technical and financial means to help developing countries decarbonise their development and adapt to climate change.
The road to ratification of the Kyoto protocol proved to be difficult. It all started in 1985 with a conference in climate change organised by the world Meteorological Organisation (WMO) and United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) led the establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel in Climate Change (IPCC). Their first IPCC report was published on 1990 and after this lead to the UNFCC was opened at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. At this convention, later ratified in 1994, it was agreed that the atmosphere was a shared resource and that green house gases concentrations should be kept at a level to avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system and established a Conference of parties (COP) that would meet annually.
Developed countries (those in Annex I) accepted the responsibility to bear the compliance cost of those in Annex II (developing countries). The first COP was held in Berlin in which EU played leadership, in 1995 to negotiate a protocol. Mandate was finalised at Kyoto in 1997. Countries in Annex I agreed to reduce their 1990 emissions levels by 5.2% by 2012. The major emitters were allocated bigger targets.
The Kyoto protocol defined three flexible mechanisms: Joint implementation (JI), the Clean Development mechanism (CDM) and emission trading Scheme (ETS) that allowed countries from Annex I to implement emission reduction projects in other countries and the transfer or acquisition of emissions (IIEA, 2008).
The EU and its members states ratified the Kyoto Protocol on 31st May 2002 and after Russian joined in 2004, came finally into force in February 2005.
The outcome of the Kyoto Protocol is to avoid global mean temperature rising over 2 degrees Celsius to avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference with climate, and it is believed that stabilisation CO2 concentrations at 450 ppm will give 50% probability of achieving it. Unfortunately concentrations levels are dangerously approaching these levels and the opportunity to stabilise at 2 degrees is slowly vanishing by the lack of action.
All developed countries that signed to UNFCCC are subscribed to common but differentiated responsibility, regarding economic resources to adapt, levels of exposure, etc. Therefore approaches for post-2012 (possibly to 2020) will differ too. Nevertheless developed countries should demonstrate that reductions and economic development can coexist but still US holds the key.
The 14th Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP) and the 4th Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol held in Poznan last year it was evidenced that there is still a lack of political will or ability for reaching international agreement and leadership. Many issues were discussed such as the extend of the finance for adaptation fund for developing countries, Clean Development mechanism (CDM) integrity reforms to facilitate transparency to avoid conflict of interests, Emissions from Deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) negotiations suffered a step back, etc. Many of these decisions were hold back until next meeting at Copenhagen when US will be negotiating. Participants let Poznan without any clarification of legal outcome regarding Copenhagen (Santarious et al., 2008).
Some European countries’ per capita emissions are among the highest of all developed countries (EPA, 2008). And yet the most vulnerable countries condemned to first suffer the negative impacts of sever climate change are the less developed. Nevertheless considerable negative changes are projected to occur in European climate across the course of this century (IPCC, 2007).
In this line Europe is responsible for 10% of the global GHG’s emissions and yet it has always played leadership in negotiations. The target for the EU 25 reduction is 8% (divided among the member states) for 2008-2012 on the 1990 levels under the Kyoto protocol. Under the ‘Energy and Climate Package’, the European Council in 2007 agreed a further unilateral commitment to 20% reductions on the same levels by 2020 and 30% if other comparable developed countries joined. They also made a strong commitment to a 20% reduction by 2020 from renewable (20% of consumed energy and 10% of road fuel) and further reductions of 50-80% by 2050.
The European Environmental Agency stated that the fact that EU-15 reduced emissions by 2% during 1990-2005 (EEA, 2007) makes us likely to meet its Kyoto Target of-8%. The Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) will be reviewed post 2012 to establish a more fare trade system. This will imply changes the current allocation methodology by National Allocation Plans (NAPs), aviation emissions and free allocated permits will be eliminated by 2020.
We must take responsibility for our actions and act in consequence.Under such circumstances Spain and other countries have the opportunity not only to comply to EU and other international regulations, but demonstrating commitment, leadership and solidarity, walking towards a more sustainable and green efficiency and competitive economy to avoid dangerous global warming and environmental disaster and further collapse of our economy. If the worst is to be avoided emissions must be begin to be immediately reduced. Global emissions should peak by 2020 at the latest and decrease by at least 50% by 2050 as a matter of urgency becoming fuel free by the end of the century.
Regarding the magnitude of the challenge we also need a shift in thinking to manage to make a successful transition towards a low-carbon based economy. Appropriate institutional arrangements, new legislation (i.e: Climate Low) and coordinated implementation of the necessary measures should have been achieved if we are to meet carbon reduction targets. Has the Spanish government done his homework to face this challenge?.
We are approaching a very dangerous climate scenario in which inaction is not longer an option. The 19th century industrial revolution was a synonymous progress now a new clean energy revolution must be adopted, this time essentially to survive. Nevertheless there is still hope to reach an international agreement to seriously tackle climate change at next week’s summit in Copenhagen. But must act now, this is our last chance.
Silvia Caloca Casado, Dublin 7th December, 2009.
Bibliography
Brennan, P., Curtin. 2008. The Climate Change Challenge: Strategic Issues, Options and Implications. Institute of International and European Affairs Working group (IIEA), 2008. IBSN: 978-1-874109-94-5.
European Environment Agency, Annual European Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990-2005 and Inventory Report 2007(Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2007).
EPA (2008) Ireland’s National Green house Gas Emissions Projections to 2020 Report. Environmental Protection Agency. September 2008.ichhorst, U., Kiyar, D., Hermann, E.O., Rudoph, F., Sterk, W. and Watanable. 2008. Pit Stop Poznan. An analysis of Negotiations on the Bali Action Plan at the Stopover to Copenhagen. Wuppertal Institute for climate, Environment and Energy.
IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz, O.R. Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA., 851 pp.
Santarious,T., Arens, C., Eichhorst, U., Kiyar, D., Hermann, E.O., Rudoph, F., Sterk, W. and Watanable. 2008. Pit Stop Poznan. An analysis of Negotiations on the Bali Action Plan at the Stopover to Copenhagen. Wuppertal Institute for climate, Environment and Energy.
This year has been a crucial year for climate change in which a series of meetings have led to a final UNFCC summit in Copenhagen next week to develop a post-2012 agreement after Kyoto Protocol expiration. At this meeting parties will be asked to collaborate to reach an agreement that avoids dangerous climate change and significantly increases action on adaptation pursuant to the Bali Action Plan. Negotiations at The United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen (COP 15) will need to show progress on the five Building Blocks of the Bali Action Plan. This task will require take on ambitious, binding commitments to reduce their own emissions as well as to deliver the technical and financial means to help developing countries decarbonise their development and adapt to climate change.
The road to ratification of the Kyoto protocol proved to be difficult. It all started in 1985 with a conference in climate change organised by the world Meteorological Organisation (WMO) and United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) led the establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel in Climate Change (IPCC). Their first IPCC report was published on 1990 and after this lead to the UNFCC was opened at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. At this convention, later ratified in 1994, it was agreed that the atmosphere was a shared resource and that green house gases concentrations should be kept at a level to avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system and established a Conference of parties (COP) that would meet annually.
Developed countries (those in Annex I) accepted the responsibility to bear the compliance cost of those in Annex II (developing countries). The first COP was held in Berlin in which EU played leadership, in 1995 to negotiate a protocol. Mandate was finalised at Kyoto in 1997. Countries in Annex I agreed to reduce their 1990 emissions levels by 5.2% by 2012. The major emitters were allocated bigger targets.
The Kyoto protocol defined three flexible mechanisms: Joint implementation (JI), the Clean Development mechanism (CDM) and emission trading Scheme (ETS) that allowed countries from Annex I to implement emission reduction projects in other countries and the transfer or acquisition of emissions (IIEA, 2008).
The EU and its members states ratified the Kyoto Protocol on 31st May 2002 and after Russian joined in 2004, came finally into force in February 2005.
The outcome of the Kyoto Protocol is to avoid global mean temperature rising over 2 degrees Celsius to avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference with climate, and it is believed that stabilisation CO2 concentrations at 450 ppm will give 50% probability of achieving it. Unfortunately concentrations levels are dangerously approaching these levels and the opportunity to stabilise at 2 degrees is slowly vanishing by the lack of action.
All developed countries that signed to UNFCCC are subscribed to common but differentiated responsibility, regarding economic resources to adapt, levels of exposure, etc. Therefore approaches for post-2012 (possibly to 2020) will differ too. Nevertheless developed countries should demonstrate that reductions and economic development can coexist but still US holds the key.
The 14th Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP) and the 4th Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol held in Poznan last year it was evidenced that there is still a lack of political will or ability for reaching international agreement and leadership. Many issues were discussed such as the extend of the finance for adaptation fund for developing countries, Clean Development mechanism (CDM) integrity reforms to facilitate transparency to avoid conflict of interests, Emissions from Deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) negotiations suffered a step back, etc. Many of these decisions were hold back until next meeting at Copenhagen when US will be negotiating. Participants let Poznan without any clarification of legal outcome regarding Copenhagen (Santarious et al., 2008).
Some European countries’ per capita emissions are among the highest of all developed countries (EPA, 2008). And yet the most vulnerable countries condemned to first suffer the negative impacts of sever climate change are the less developed. Nevertheless considerable negative changes are projected to occur in European climate across the course of this century (IPCC, 2007).
In this line Europe is responsible for 10% of the global GHG’s emissions and yet it has always played leadership in negotiations. The target for the EU 25 reduction is 8% (divided among the member states) for 2008-2012 on the 1990 levels under the Kyoto protocol. Under the ‘Energy and Climate Package’, the European Council in 2007 agreed a further unilateral commitment to 20% reductions on the same levels by 2020 and 30% if other comparable developed countries joined. They also made a strong commitment to a 20% reduction by 2020 from renewable (20% of consumed energy and 10% of road fuel) and further reductions of 50-80% by 2050.
The European Environmental Agency stated that the fact that EU-15 reduced emissions by 2% during 1990-2005 (EEA, 2007) makes us likely to meet its Kyoto Target of-8%. The Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) will be reviewed post 2012 to establish a more fare trade system. This will imply changes the current allocation methodology by National Allocation Plans (NAPs), aviation emissions and free allocated permits will be eliminated by 2020.
We must take responsibility for our actions and act in consequence.Under such circumstances Spain and other countries have the opportunity not only to comply to EU and other international regulations, but demonstrating commitment, leadership and solidarity, walking towards a more sustainable and green efficiency and competitive economy to avoid dangerous global warming and environmental disaster and further collapse of our economy. If the worst is to be avoided emissions must be begin to be immediately reduced. Global emissions should peak by 2020 at the latest and decrease by at least 50% by 2050 as a matter of urgency becoming fuel free by the end of the century.
Regarding the magnitude of the challenge we also need a shift in thinking to manage to make a successful transition towards a low-carbon based economy. Appropriate institutional arrangements, new legislation (i.e: Climate Low) and coordinated implementation of the necessary measures should have been achieved if we are to meet carbon reduction targets. Has the Spanish government done his homework to face this challenge?.
We are approaching a very dangerous climate scenario in which inaction is not longer an option. The 19th century industrial revolution was a synonymous progress now a new clean energy revolution must be adopted, this time essentially to survive. Nevertheless there is still hope to reach an international agreement to seriously tackle climate change at next week’s summit in Copenhagen. But must act now, this is our last chance.
Silvia Caloca Casado, Dublin 7th December, 2009.
Bibliography
Brennan, P., Curtin. 2008. The Climate Change Challenge: Strategic Issues, Options and Implications. Institute of International and European Affairs Working group (IIEA), 2008. IBSN: 978-1-874109-94-5.
European Environment Agency, Annual European Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory 1990-2005 and Inventory Report 2007(Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2007).
EPA (2008) Ireland’s National Green house Gas Emissions Projections to 2020 Report. Environmental Protection Agency. September 2008.ichhorst, U., Kiyar, D., Hermann, E.O., Rudoph, F., Sterk, W. and Watanable. 2008. Pit Stop Poznan. An analysis of Negotiations on the Bali Action Plan at the Stopover to Copenhagen. Wuppertal Institute for climate, Environment and Energy.
IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz, O.R. Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA., 851 pp.
Santarious,T., Arens, C., Eichhorst, U., Kiyar, D., Hermann, E.O., Rudoph, F., Sterk, W. and Watanable. 2008. Pit Stop Poznan. An analysis of Negotiations on the Bali Action Plan at the Stopover to Copenhagen. Wuppertal Institute for climate, Environment and Energy.
Compañeros, agradecería el examen de este nuevo blog y su difusión si lo consideráis oportuno. Yo haría lo propio.
ResponderEliminarMuchas gracias
http://ustednoselocree.wordpress.com/
Hola, si con lo propio te refieres a hacermos mutua mecion en sendos blogs,
ResponderEliminarLe echaremos un vistazo y veremos lo que se tercia.
Un saludo
Sandra & Silvia Caloca