Jump to content

2011 United Nations Climate Change Conference: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→How to solve climate crises?: We should examine the consumption of goods including all their life cycle emissions rather than limit in the national boundaries. This will include also the emissions abroad
Reverted 5 edits by Watti Renew (talk): 1) Greenpeace is not a BLPRS 2) For all of the sections, including the ones you added, we need a connection to the CONFERENCE. (TW)
Line 34: Line 34:
=== Private persons, companies or politicians? ===
=== Private persons, companies or politicians? ===
According to Swedish Professor Christian Azar it may be even dangerous to accuse the private persons of their emissions if this discussion will focus the problem solution in a wrong way. The political decisions are more effective.<ref>Chriastian Azar: Makten over klimatet, Bonnier hösten 2008 <small>(from editors memory, please check)</small></ref> Both private persons and companies act when there are political and economical incentives in place. Climate change can be solved by political decision.{{cn|date=December 2011}}
According to Swedish Professor Christian Azar it may be even dangerous to accuse the private persons of their emissions if this discussion will focus the problem solution in a wrong way. The political decisions are more effective.<ref>Chriastian Azar: Makten over klimatet, Bonnier hösten 2008 <small>(from editors memory, please check)</small></ref> Both private persons and companies act when there are political and economical incentives in place. Climate change can be solved by political decision.{{cn|date=December 2011}}

=== We have the technology. Who is Holding Us Back? ===
We have the technology today to ensure a transition to a greener, safer and more equitable economy. In Durban, it’s time for governments to listen to the people, not the polluting corporations. Carbon-intensive industry is preventing effective climate legislation. The Dirty Dozen represent those corporate polluters that are holding us back from a global deal to limit and reverse GHG emissions worldwide.<br>
1. [[Jorma Ollila]] [[Royal Dutch Shell]], 2. [[Shell Canada | Lorraine Mitchell]],, toimitusjohtaja, [[Shell]], Canada, 3. David Collyer [[Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers| Canadian Association of Petroleum]], 4. [[Thomas Donohue]] [[US Chamber of Commerce]], 5. [[Lakshmi Mittal]] [[ArcelorMittal]], 6. [[Jürgen R. Thumann]] [[BusinessEurope]], 7. [[David Koch]] and [[Charles Koch]] [[Koch Industries]], 8. [[Marius Kloppers]] [[BHP Billiton]], 9. Dr. [[BASF | Kurt Bock]] [[BASF]], 10. [[Jean-Guy Carrier]] [[International Chamber of Commerce]], 11.[[ American Petroleum Institute | Jack N. Gerard]] [[American Petroleum Institute]] and 12. [[ Eskom | Brian Dames]], [[Eskom]] <ref>[http://www.greenpeace.org/international/Global/international/publications/climate/2011/391%20-%20WhosHoldingUsBack.pdf Who is Holding Us Back, How carbon-intensive industry is preventing effective climate legislation] Greenpeace November 2011 </ref>

=== Financing coal 2005-2011 ===
New coal investments risk seriously the scientifically estimated carbon emissions decline needed. The world’s financial markets are carrying an enormous carbon bubble and that is not fit to manage the transition to a low-carbon economy. For the short-term gains banks are setting the stage for long-term catastrophic climate change .<ref name=Urgewald11> [http://urgewald.org/artikel/klimakiller-banken Bankrolling climate change] 30. November 2011 urgewald, groundWork, Earthlife Africa Johannesburg and BankTrack p. 15</ref>

Top investment and commercial banks financing coal investments during 2005-2011 were [[JPMorgan Chase]], [[Citi]], [[Bank of America]], [[Morgan Stanley]], [[Barclays]], [[Deutsche Bank]], [[Royal Bank of Scotland]], [[BNP Paribas]], [[Credit Suisse]] and [[UBS]]. Top twenty banks have provided over 171 billion Euros to the coal industry since 2005 to start of December 2011.<ref name=Urgewald11> [http://urgewald.org/artikel/klimakiller-banken Bankrolling climate change] 30. November 2011 urgewald, groundWork, Earthlife Africa Johannesburg and BankTrack p. 15-19</ref>


== How to solve climate crises? ==
== How to solve climate crises? ==


=== [[Polluter pays principle]] ===
=== [[Polluter pays principle]] ===
[[Polluter pays principle]] is supported by public to cover all climate change caused external costs.<ref name=Worldwatch>[[State of the World]] 2009, [[Robert Engelman]] [[Worldwatch Institute]]</ref> {{cn|date=December 2011}} The climate gas emission have been proposed to be calculated from the year 1750 or 1950.<ref name=Worldwatch>[[State of the World]] 2009, [[Robert Engelman]] [[Worldwatch Institute]]</ref> {{page?|date=December 2011}} According to [[Stern Report]] the benefits of strong, early action considerably outweigh the costs.<ref>[http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/4/3/Executive_Summary.pdf Sir Nicholas Stern: Stern Review : The Economics of Climate Change, Executive Summary,10/2006]</ref>
[[Polluter pays principle]] is supported by public to cover all climate change caused external costs.{{cn|date=December 2011}} The climate gas emission have been proposed to be calculated from the year 1750 or 1950. <ref>[[State of the World]] 2009, [[Robert Engelman]] [[Worldwatch Institute]]</ref>{{page?|date=December 2011}} According to [[Stern Report]] the benefits of strong, early action considerably outweigh the costs.<ref>[http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/4/3/Executive_Summary.pdf Sir Nicholas Stern: Stern Review : The Economics of Climate Change, Executive Summary,10/2006]</ref>


Coal-fired power stations have been estimated to cause world wide €356 billion minimum damage in 2007 and €356 trillion in ten years.<ref>[http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/true-cost-coal.pdf Delf 2008 p.9]</ref>
Coal-fired power stations have been estimated to cause world wide €356 billion minimum damage in 2007 and €356 trillion in ten years.<ref>[http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/true-cost-coal.pdf Delf 2008 p.9]</ref>
Line 54: Line 45:
{{confusing section|date=December 2011}}
{{confusing section|date=December 2011}}
A scheme to protect [[tropical forest]]s [[deforestation]] by carbon credits is discussed. Concern includes corruption and fair use of trees between industry and local communities.<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/sep/24/redd-reducing-emissions-from-deforestation Deforestation </ref>
A scheme to protect [[tropical forest]]s [[deforestation]] by carbon credits is discussed. Concern includes corruption and fair use of trees between industry and local communities.<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/sep/24/redd-reducing-emissions-from-deforestation Deforestation </ref>

=== All life cycle emissions ===
According to Christel Cederberg (Sweden) we should examine the consumption of goods including all their life cycle emissions rather than limit in the national boundaries. This will include also the emissions abroad.<ref>Christel Cederberg, SIK, Institut för Livsmedel och Bioteknik AB Klima frågan på bordet, Formas Fokuserar Stockholm 2008 page 87 {{sv}}</ref> British government funded in 2007 [[Carbon Trust]] climate marks project.<ref>Klima frågan på bordet, Formas Fokuserar Stockholm 2008 page. 162-168 {{sv}}</ref> According to the Swedeish study the energy label should include both emissions and energy sources data not to forget the environmental load of other energy types, like nuclear.<ref>Klima frågan på bordet, Formas Fokuserar Stockholm 2008 {{sv}}</ref> Labels would provide true free market to select sustainable products based on [[Renewable energy commercialization|new renewable energy sources]] for the individuals, companies and public procurements at city and state levels.


== Statements==
== Statements==
Line 87: Line 75:
*[http://custom-made.org.uk/2011/05/30/s-africa-sets-out-its-stall-ahead-of-durban-climate-change-conference/ Interview with Edna Molewa, South Africa’s Minister for Water and Environmental Affairs, on Durban meeting and common strategy] - broadcast on [[Radio France Internationale]]
*[http://custom-made.org.uk/2011/05/30/s-africa-sets-out-its-stall-ahead-of-durban-climate-change-conference/ Interview with Edna Molewa, South Africa’s Minister for Water and Environmental Affairs, on Durban meeting and common strategy] - broadcast on [[Radio France Internationale]]
*[http://www.ipcc.ch/ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]
*[http://www.ipcc.ch/ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]
*[http://www.unep.org/pdf/UNEP_bridging_gap.pdf Bridging the Emissions Gap A UNEP Synthesis Report] [[United Nations Environment Programme]] November 2011
*[http://www.unep.org/pdf/UNEP_bridging_gap.pdf/ Bridging the Emissions Gap A UNEP Synthesis Report] [[United Nations Environment Programme]] November 2011
*[http://www.foei.org/en/what-we-do/climate-and-energy Climate and energy] Friends of the Earth
*[http://www.foei.org/en/what-we-do/climate-and-energy Climate and energy] Friends of the Earth


Revision as of 14:52, 7 December 2011

United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP17/CMP7)
Information
Date:28/11/2011 - 9/12/2011
Location:Durban, South Africa
Webpagecop17-cmp7durban.com

The 2011 United Nations Climate Change Conference is an ongoing conference, held in Durban, South Africa, from 28 November to 9 December 2011.[1]

The conference is officially referred to as the 17th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 17) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the 7th session of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties (CMP 7) to the Kyoto Protocol. In addition, the two permanent subsidiary bodies of the UNFCCC – the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) – are likely to hold their 35th sessions. The 2010 United Nations Climate Change Conference extended the mandates of the two temporary subsidiary bodies – the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP) and the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG-LCA) – so they are expected to meet as well.

A primary focus of the conference is to secure a global climate agreement as the Kyoto Protocol's first commitment period (2008–2012) is about to end.[2] It is also expected to focus on "finalising at least some of the Cancun Agreements", reached at the 2010 Conference, such as "co-operation on clean technology", as well as "forest protection, adaptation to climate impacts, and finance - the promised transfer of funds from rich countries to poor in order to help them protect forests, adapt to climate impacts, and "green" their economies".[3]

A month before the Conference began, the BBC highlighted two contentious proposals which had been submitted - one by Russia, the other by Papua New Guinea, both aiming to amend the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Russia's proposal[4] would bring about a "periodic review" whereby countries currently categorised as "poor" could be recategorised as "rich", and thus obliged to shoulder greater obligations in the combat against climate change. BBC Environment correspondant Richard Black commented that the proposal would be "provocative and explosive, if Russia pushes it", because potentially affected countries, such as China and Brazil, would "push back very strongly". Papua New Guinea's proposal[5], submitted by Ambassador Kevin Conrad with the support of Mexico, would introduce a "last resort" mechanism to break any deadlocks in climate change negotiations through a three-quarters majority vote, thus clarifying the decision-making process under the Convention. Describing the proposal as "intriguing", Black noted that although it would theoretically enable developing countries to use their numerical superiority to adopt any kind of world-wide binding obligation, in practical terms they would still need the approval of rich countries to secure funding.[3]

Who is responsible?

Per capita

The World dirty top countries were in 2009 (tonnes/capita): 1) Gibraltar 152, 2) Virgin Islands U,S 114, 3) Qatar 80, 4) Netherlands Antilles 51, 5) Bahrain 43. 6) United Arab Emirates 40, 7) Trinidad and Tobago 39, 8) Singapore 34, 9) Kuwait 10) Montserrat 29 11) Nauru 22, 12) Luxembourg 21.5 13) Australia 20 14) Brunei 19.5 15) Saudi Arabia 18.5.[6] All emissions from building and cement production are local but some people may argue that a share of fuels and/or goods are consumed abroad.[7]

Fossil fuels emission 2009

According to data from the US Energy Information Administration, the top five countries by fossil fuels emissions (CO2) in 2009 were: 1) China: 7,710 million tonnes (mt) (25.4%) ahead of 2) US: 5,420 mt (17.8%), 3) India: 1,600 mt (5.3%), 4) Russia: 1,570 mt (5.2%) and 5) Japan: 1,100 mt (3.6%).[7]

All greenhouse gas emissions 2005

Among the top emitter of all greenhouse gas emissions in 2005 including building and deforestation: 1. China: 7,220 mt (16.4%), 2. US: 6,930 mt (15.7%), 3. Brazil: 2,860 mt (6.5%), 4. Indonesia: 2,050 mt (4.6%), 5. Russia: 2,030 mt (4.6%), 6. India: 1,870 mt (4.2%), 7. Japan: 1,390 mt (3.1%), 8. Germany: 1,010 mt (2.3%), 9. Canada: 810 mt (1.8%), and 10. Mexico: 700 mt (1.6%).[7]

Cumulative emissions between 1850 and 2007

In the cumulative emissions between 1850 and 2007: 1. US: 339,200 mt (28.8%) 2. China: 105,900 mt (9.0%), 3. Russia: 94,700 mt (8.0%), 4. Germany: 81,200 mt (6.9%), 5. UK: 68,800 mt (5.8%), 6. Japan: 45,600 mt (3.87%), 7. France: 32,700 mt (2.77%), 8. India: 28,800 mt (2.44%), 9. Canada: 25,7100 MT (2.2%) and 10. Ukraine: 25,400 mt (2.2%).[7]

Private persons, companies or politicians?

According to Swedish Professor Christian Azar it may be even dangerous to accuse the private persons of their emissions if this discussion will focus the problem solution in a wrong way. The political decisions are more effective.[8] Both private persons and companies act when there are political and economical incentives in place. Climate change can be solved by political decision.[citation needed]

How to solve climate crises?

Polluter pays principle

Polluter pays principle is supported by public to cover all climate change caused external costs.[citation needed] The climate gas emission have been proposed to be calculated from the year 1750 or 1950. [9][page needed] According to Stern Report the benefits of strong, early action considerably outweigh the costs.[10]

Coal-fired power stations have been estimated to cause world wide €356 billion minimum damage in 2007 and €356 trillion in ten years.[11]

Forests

A scheme to protect tropical forests deforestation by carbon credits is discussed. Concern includes corruption and fair use of trees between industry and local communities.[12]

Statements

IPCC

IPCC warned in November 2011 that extreme weather will strike as climate change takes hold. Heavier rainfall, storms and droughts can cost billions and destroy lives. Estimates suggest that every dollar invested in adaptation to climate change could save $60 in damages. [13]

Greenpeace

Greenpeace recommends the participants to:[14]

  • Ensure a peak in global emissions by 2015
  • Emission reductions: Close the gap between politics and science
  • Ensure that the Kyoto Protocol continues and provide a mandate for a comprehensive legally binding instrument
  • Deliver the necessary climate finance
  • Set up a framework for protecting forests in developing countries
  • Address the needs of the most vulnerable countries and communities
  • Ensure global cooperation on technology and energy finance
  • Ensure international transparency in assessing and monitoring country commitments and actions
  • Ensure transparency, democracy and full participation in the UNFCCC process

See also

References

  1. ^ http://unfccc.int/meetings/unfccc_calendar/items/2655.php
  2. ^ Carrington, Damian (14 December 2010). "Cancún deal leaves hard climate tasks to Durban summit in 2011". Guardian Weekly. Retrieved 4 December 2011.
  3. ^ a b "Durban: A summit of small steps?", BBC, 31 October 2011
  4. ^ "Proposal from the Russian Federation to amend article 4, paragraph 2 (f), of the Convention"
  5. ^ "Proposal from Papua New Guinea and Mexico to amend Articles 7 and 18 of the Convention"
  6. ^ World carbon dioxide emissions data by country: China speeds ahead of the rest Guardian 31 January 2011
  7. ^ a b c d Which nations are most responsible for climate change? Guardian 21 April 2011 Cite error: The named reference "Guardian2010" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
  8. ^ Chriastian Azar: Makten over klimatet, Bonnier hösten 2008 (from editors memory, please check)
  9. ^ State of the World 2009, Robert Engelman Worldwatch Institute
  10. ^ Sir Nicholas Stern: Stern Review : The Economics of Climate Change, Executive Summary,10/2006
  11. ^ Delf 2008 p.9
  12. ^ [http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/sep/24/redd-reducing-emissions-from-deforestation Deforestation
  13. ^ Extreme weather will strike as climate change takes hold, IPCC warns Guardian 18 November 2011
  14. ^ Greenpeace targets November 23, 2011



Stub icon

This United Nations–related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_United_Nations_Climate_Change_Conference&oldid=464575011"