Hungary, a major seller of carbon credits, will weaken its credibility in the growing international carbon markets by using revenues to prop up its budget rather than green its energy production, WWF-Hungary has warned.
Imre Szabo, the Minister of Environment, announced that “the Ministry will cut its annual budget this year by freezing 67 million Euros from its 2009 Kyoto carbon trading revenues”.
According to WWF-Hungary, this will not improve the budget balances, create jobs or decrease the country’s energy dependence on gas and oil but it will bring into question the validity of Hungarian carbon credits.
Hungary had recently settled deals with Spain of 6.6 million AAUs (Assigned Amount Units is the trading unit of the Kyoto carbon trading system) and Belgium of two million AAUs – on the basis of projects to be undertaken through the country’s planned Green Investment Scheme (GIS).
“The Belgians have already criticised Hungary for being late with greening projects and freezing carbon trade revenues will only frustrate them even more”, said György Dallos, climate change programme officer of WWF Hungary.
The Hungarian government already has a track-record in undermining carbon trading revenues, WWF said. Although the Ministry of Environment had prepared the draft of the National Allocation Plan for the years 2008 to 2012 a year ago, the Budapest government has been unable to have it approved by the European Commission so far.
The delay is estimated to have cost Hungary Euro five million due to an inability to fully participate in auction revenues under the European Quota Trading System (ETS) at a time when higher prices prevailed.
Halting or slowing the pace of investment in green technologies is also running counter to world trends of increasing such spending.
“President Barack Obama, Prime Minister Gordon Brown as well the Canadian, the German, the Australian and many other governments agree with Sir Nicholas Stern that supporting green investments in energy efficiency and renewables is an effective tool to save and even create millions of jobs and decrease energy bills,” Dallos said.
The German “Alliance for Work an Environment” programme saved and created 145000 jobs and saw 342000 flats had been retrofitted for energy efficiency in the difficult recession period of the German construction industry between 2001 and 2006, Dallos noted.
“If 1.8 million badly insulated Hungarian family houses were insulated within a five year period, it would create tens of thousands of jobs all over the country,” Dallos said.
“In addition to that, 1.5 million cubic metres of imported Russian gas, as well as three million tons of greenhouse gases, would be saved annually, thereby reducing energy costs. This would bring relief to millions of Hungarians.”
Other WWF Hungary proposals for new and sustainable energy politics include saving hundreds of millions of Euros by eliminating the current gas price support system and increasing “ridiculously low” mining fees on lignite could cut budget deficits and decrease energy dependency.
Additionally the Government could also stop supporting the Vertes Coal Plant through the “coal penny” system collected on every Kilowatt-Hour consumed in the country.
Another efficient way to save government money is stopping the state owned Hungarian Energy Company (MVM) to build a new lignite plant which would never reach a break even given current conditions.
“MVM, the largest state owned company, is sitting on piles of cash thanks to the exceptionally high profits in the last two years,” Dallos said. “So far the government has hardly touched these profits in order to establish a new sustainable energy policy for a brighter future of Hungary.”
Showing posts with label Awards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Awards. Show all posts
President Obama Calls for Carbon Cap, More Clean Energy Investment
Naming energy as one of the three areas of investment "that are absolutely critical to our economic future," President Barack Obama called for a greater investment in clean energy technologies and a cap on carbon emissions. "We have known for decades that our survival depends on finding new sources of energy, yet we import more oil today than ever before," noted the president in his address to Congress. The president noted that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) provides a key investment that will save or create 3.5 million jobs, including jobs "constructing wind turbines and solar panels ... and expanding mass transit." He also noted that the ARRA will double the US supply of renewable energy in the next three years. Claiming that "the country that harnesses the power of clean, renewable energy will lead the 21st century," President Obama declared that "it is time for America to lead again."
"We will soon lay down thousands of miles of power lines that can carry new energy to cities and towns across this country," said the president, "and we will put Americans to work making our homes and buildings more efficient, so that we can save billions of dollars on our energy bills. But to truly transform our economy, protect our security, and save our planet from the ravages of climate change, we need to ultimately make clean, renewable energy the profitable kind of energy. So I ask this Congress to send me legislation that places a market-based cap on carbon pollution and drives the production of more renewable energy in America. And to support that innovation, we will invest USD15 billion a year to develop technologies like wind power and solar power; advanced biofuels, clean coal, and more fuel-efficient cars and trucks built right here in America."
President Obama also pointed out the example of Greensburg, Kansas, "a town that was completely destroyed by a tornado, but is being rebuilt by its residents as a global example of how clean energy can power an entire community, how it can bring jobs and businesses to a place where piles of bricks and rubble once lay." DOE, by the way, was heavily involved in the effort to rebuild Greensburg using renewable energy and green building principles.
"We will soon lay down thousands of miles of power lines that can carry new energy to cities and towns across this country," said the president, "and we will put Americans to work making our homes and buildings more efficient, so that we can save billions of dollars on our energy bills. But to truly transform our economy, protect our security, and save our planet from the ravages of climate change, we need to ultimately make clean, renewable energy the profitable kind of energy. So I ask this Congress to send me legislation that places a market-based cap on carbon pollution and drives the production of more renewable energy in America. And to support that innovation, we will invest USD15 billion a year to develop technologies like wind power and solar power; advanced biofuels, clean coal, and more fuel-efficient cars and trucks built right here in America."
President Obama also pointed out the example of Greensburg, Kansas, "a town that was completely destroyed by a tornado, but is being rebuilt by its residents as a global example of how clean energy can power an entire community, how it can bring jobs and businesses to a place where piles of bricks and rubble once lay." DOE, by the way, was heavily involved in the effort to rebuild Greensburg using renewable energy and green building principles.
President’s Proposed EPA Budget Provides Strengthened Environmental Protection
The Obama administration today proposed a budget of USD10.5 billion for the US Environmental Protection Agency, the largest in the agency’s 39-year history. The increase of USD3 billion from 2008 funding levels will further ensure the protection of public health and the environment for all Americans.
“The president’s budget proposes critical resources to protect the American people and the places where they live, work and play,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “We are no longer faced with the false choice of a strong economy or a clean environment. The president’s budget shows that making critical and responsible investments in protecting the health and environment of all Americans will also lead to a more vibrant and stable economy. With these proposed resources, and the president’s strong environmental agenda, it should be overwhelmingly clear that EPA is back on the job.”
Last week, President Obama announced the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which includes USD7.22 billion for EPA-administered projects and programs to protect human health and the environment.
Some key highlights of 2010 budget initiatives include:
• USD3.9 billion for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund grants to support approximately 1,000 clean water projects and 700 drinking water projects - this year’s largest single investment. In addition to the funds recently invested through the ARRA, this funding is a critical step in addressing the water infrastructure needs in thousands of communities across the country. EPA will work with state and local partners to develop a sustainability policy, including management and pricing, conservation, security and a plan for adequate long-term state and municipal funding for future capital needs.
• A new USD475 million, multi-agency Great Lakes Initiative to protect the world’s largest fresh water resource. EPA will coordinate with federal partners, states, tribes, localities and other entities to protect, maintain and restore the chemical, biological and physical integrity of the lakes. EPA and its partners will address invasive species, non-point source pollution, habitat restoration, contaminated sediment and other critical issues.
• A USD19 million increase for the greenhouse gas emissions inventory and related activities that will provide data critical for implementing a comprehensive climate change bill. EPA’s funding for climate change investments is the foundation for working with key stakeholders and Congress to develop an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions approximately 83 per cent below 2005 levels by 2050.
• Strengthening EPA’s core research, enforcement and regulatory capabilities. The budget request also proposes reinstating the Superfund excise taxes that expired. Reinstating the Superfund taxes would collect over USD1 billion annually to fund the cleanup of the nation’s most contaminated sites.
More information on EPA’s FY 2010 budget request: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/
“The president’s budget proposes critical resources to protect the American people and the places where they live, work and play,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “We are no longer faced with the false choice of a strong economy or a clean environment. The president’s budget shows that making critical and responsible investments in protecting the health and environment of all Americans will also lead to a more vibrant and stable economy. With these proposed resources, and the president’s strong environmental agenda, it should be overwhelmingly clear that EPA is back on the job.”
Last week, President Obama announced the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which includes USD7.22 billion for EPA-administered projects and programs to protect human health and the environment.
Some key highlights of 2010 budget initiatives include:
• USD3.9 billion for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund grants to support approximately 1,000 clean water projects and 700 drinking water projects - this year’s largest single investment. In addition to the funds recently invested through the ARRA, this funding is a critical step in addressing the water infrastructure needs in thousands of communities across the country. EPA will work with state and local partners to develop a sustainability policy, including management and pricing, conservation, security and a plan for adequate long-term state and municipal funding for future capital needs.
• A new USD475 million, multi-agency Great Lakes Initiative to protect the world’s largest fresh water resource. EPA will coordinate with federal partners, states, tribes, localities and other entities to protect, maintain and restore the chemical, biological and physical integrity of the lakes. EPA and its partners will address invasive species, non-point source pollution, habitat restoration, contaminated sediment and other critical issues.
• A USD19 million increase for the greenhouse gas emissions inventory and related activities that will provide data critical for implementing a comprehensive climate change bill. EPA’s funding for climate change investments is the foundation for working with key stakeholders and Congress to develop an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions approximately 83 per cent below 2005 levels by 2050.
• Strengthening EPA’s core research, enforcement and regulatory capabilities. The budget request also proposes reinstating the Superfund excise taxes that expired. Reinstating the Superfund taxes would collect over USD1 billion annually to fund the cleanup of the nation’s most contaminated sites.
More information on EPA’s FY 2010 budget request: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/
UN Reaches Landmark Agreement to Reduce Global Mercury Pollution
Obama Administration Reverses US Position, Takes Leadership Role in Negotiations
Representatives from more than 140 countries today committed to reduce global mercury pollution, which will help protect the world's citizens from the dangerous neurotoxin. This agreement was propelled by the United States' reversal in policy, which also influenced policy reversals of other countries, including China and India. The announcement is a historic step forward in the fight against mercury pollution, according to scientists and policy experts at the Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC).
"This is great news for reducing mercury pollution around the world, and shows a commitment from the Obama Administration to international environmental issues," said Susan Egan Keane, policy analyst for NRDC. "The United States has taken a leadership role that will chart a new course on mercury protections around the world. We have set a strong example that is already influencing others to do the same."
The committed countries will reduce risks to human health and the environment from mercury by coordinating global cuts in the use and release of mercury into our air, water and land. The United Nations Environment Program Governing Council, which is meeting this week in Nairobi, Kenya, will now develop a legally binding treaty to be enacted by 2013. The treaty will include actions to reduce global mercury pollution and human exposure to the chemical, by reducing intentional use of mercury in industrial processes and products and reducing emissions from coal plants and smelters. It will also address the problems posed by mercury waste sites.
"Today we have won a momentous human health victory that will reduce illness and save lives both here and abroad," said Keane. "This globally coordinated plan will substantially reduce mercury contamination in fish, prevent the contamination of our water, and shield our children from a dangerous chemical."
Mercury is a dangerous neurotoxin and global pollutant that moves thousands of miles from its original source. Its travels through air and water, accumulating in large predatory fish, and poisons people mainly through the consumption of contaminated fish, including tuna. It is especially dangerous for pregnant women, babies and small children, as it can gravely impede brain development.
Coal-fired power plants are the largest source of mercury air emissions worldwide, emitting 50 tons of mercury pollution every year in the US alone. As the price of oil has risen, coal has become a more economically attractive source of energy in countries where it is abundant and inexpensive. Currently, coal-fired power plants supply 75 per cent of China's energy; in the next eight years, China was expected to add more than 560 new coal plants, a pace of more than one new plant each week. Chemical manufacturing facilities in the European Union, India and China and small-scale gold mines in the developing world are also among the biggest mercury pollution sources.
NRDC has worked to enact mercury protections at the national and global levels for decades. Last year, NRDC successfully advocated for a new US ban on the export of mercury, working closely with members of Congress, including the bill's sponsor, then-Senator Obama.
Representatives from more than 140 countries today committed to reduce global mercury pollution, which will help protect the world's citizens from the dangerous neurotoxin. This agreement was propelled by the United States' reversal in policy, which also influenced policy reversals of other countries, including China and India. The announcement is a historic step forward in the fight against mercury pollution, according to scientists and policy experts at the Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC).
"This is great news for reducing mercury pollution around the world, and shows a commitment from the Obama Administration to international environmental issues," said Susan Egan Keane, policy analyst for NRDC. "The United States has taken a leadership role that will chart a new course on mercury protections around the world. We have set a strong example that is already influencing others to do the same."
The committed countries will reduce risks to human health and the environment from mercury by coordinating global cuts in the use and release of mercury into our air, water and land. The United Nations Environment Program Governing Council, which is meeting this week in Nairobi, Kenya, will now develop a legally binding treaty to be enacted by 2013. The treaty will include actions to reduce global mercury pollution and human exposure to the chemical, by reducing intentional use of mercury in industrial processes and products and reducing emissions from coal plants and smelters. It will also address the problems posed by mercury waste sites.
"Today we have won a momentous human health victory that will reduce illness and save lives both here and abroad," said Keane. "This globally coordinated plan will substantially reduce mercury contamination in fish, prevent the contamination of our water, and shield our children from a dangerous chemical."
Mercury is a dangerous neurotoxin and global pollutant that moves thousands of miles from its original source. Its travels through air and water, accumulating in large predatory fish, and poisons people mainly through the consumption of contaminated fish, including tuna. It is especially dangerous for pregnant women, babies and small children, as it can gravely impede brain development.
Coal-fired power plants are the largest source of mercury air emissions worldwide, emitting 50 tons of mercury pollution every year in the US alone. As the price of oil has risen, coal has become a more economically attractive source of energy in countries where it is abundant and inexpensive. Currently, coal-fired power plants supply 75 per cent of China's energy; in the next eight years, China was expected to add more than 560 new coal plants, a pace of more than one new plant each week. Chemical manufacturing facilities in the European Union, India and China and small-scale gold mines in the developing world are also among the biggest mercury pollution sources.
NRDC has worked to enact mercury protections at the national and global levels for decades. Last year, NRDC successfully advocated for a new US ban on the export of mercury, working closely with members of Congress, including the bill's sponsor, then-Senator Obama.
Obama Starts Delivering on Environmental Promises
Not in recent memory has the word of a politician meant so much to so many. Barrack Obama said repeatedly his plan to stimulate the economy would directly be related to the environmental cleansing of the United States. True to his word it looks like that is exactly what he intends to do.
But can he do it? Two of the tougher questions are:
1. Can the US really turn around its past reluctance to embrace environmental issues?
2. Will the infamous US federal bureaucracy and political partisanship hold back needed reforms?
Since his inauguration he has done several things that show that he will be true to his word.
He signed an executive order directing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to re-examine whether states should be allowed to impose their own tougher auto emission standards rather than a less onerous national standard. California sought to impose its own standard which was tougher than that imposed by previous administrations, and 13 other states agreed to adopt similar legislation.
He has also announced a task force with a first order of business to find ways to create new jobs that pay well; reduce pollution; and lessen America’s reliance on foreign oil. By embracing the path to a greener economy Obama is placing America in a situation where they can be leaders in the environmental movement rather than not so innocent bystanders.
Most recently, he has ordered quicker and new efforts to make appliances more energy efficient. The thinking is that more energy efficient appliances like stoves, lamps, dishwashers, washers and dryers will save consumers money and help with the stimulus of the economy. While the appliances may be more expensive in the short term the White House estimates that the tighter standards could save consumers more than USD500 billion over the next 30 years.
President Obama said in his first days, as President, that he would strive to have the amount of electricity generated by renewable resources equal to 10 per cent of the United States usage by 2012. This is a lofty goal and one that has the support of the environmental community.
It may be early but if President Obama continues with this path and along the way gets the support of the environmental movement it will be very hard to beat him in 4 years no matter who the opposing candidate is. More importantly, future presidential candidates will have no choice but to see what kind of power the environmental movement can bring to them.
In the interim we would do well to pay attention to the message that President Obama is trying to deliver. More pointedly, who is the US learning from – Europe, Asia or even Canada?
A question we all might ask of ourselves is "What am I willing or able to do to help him?"
But can he do it? Two of the tougher questions are:
1. Can the US really turn around its past reluctance to embrace environmental issues?
2. Will the infamous US federal bureaucracy and political partisanship hold back needed reforms?
Since his inauguration he has done several things that show that he will be true to his word.
He signed an executive order directing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to re-examine whether states should be allowed to impose their own tougher auto emission standards rather than a less onerous national standard. California sought to impose its own standard which was tougher than that imposed by previous administrations, and 13 other states agreed to adopt similar legislation.
He has also announced a task force with a first order of business to find ways to create new jobs that pay well; reduce pollution; and lessen America’s reliance on foreign oil. By embracing the path to a greener economy Obama is placing America in a situation where they can be leaders in the environmental movement rather than not so innocent bystanders.
Most recently, he has ordered quicker and new efforts to make appliances more energy efficient. The thinking is that more energy efficient appliances like stoves, lamps, dishwashers, washers and dryers will save consumers money and help with the stimulus of the economy. While the appliances may be more expensive in the short term the White House estimates that the tighter standards could save consumers more than USD500 billion over the next 30 years.
President Obama said in his first days, as President, that he would strive to have the amount of electricity generated by renewable resources equal to 10 per cent of the United States usage by 2012. This is a lofty goal and one that has the support of the environmental community.
It may be early but if President Obama continues with this path and along the way gets the support of the environmental movement it will be very hard to beat him in 4 years no matter who the opposing candidate is. More importantly, future presidential candidates will have no choice but to see what kind of power the environmental movement can bring to them.
In the interim we would do well to pay attention to the message that President Obama is trying to deliver. More pointedly, who is the US learning from – Europe, Asia or even Canada?
A question we all might ask of ourselves is "What am I willing or able to do to help him?"
Russia’s Step Forward on Renewable Energy
The Russian leadership has begun to task the Ministry of Energy and regional authorities with creating conditions for the greater use of renewable energy in electricity generation by Russian utility companies.
On January 8, 2009, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin signed an executive directive which calls for an increase in the energy efficiency of the Russian electric power sector on the basis of renewable energy sources. The directive sets several specific targets for expanding the share of renewable energy in electricity generation from less than the current one per cent to 1.5 per cent in 2010, 2.5 per cent in 2015, and 4.5 per cent by 2020.
Hydropower plants with a capacity of more than 25 megawatts (MW) are not included in these figures, but the targets do include small hydro power plants, as well as tidal, geothermal, wind, solar, and biomass sources, according to a RusHydro presentation in the fall of 2008.
For example, Russia’s wind-power capacity (estimated at 12 MW in 2005) is projected to increase tenfold to 120 MW in 2010, 1,500 MW in 2015, and 7,000 MW (or 7GW) by 2020. (For comparison, Canada’s installed wind energy capacity reached about 2.3 GW in 2008, supplying about one per cent of the country’s electricity demand. United States wind energy capacity grew by 50 per cent in 2008 to 25.1 GW.)
To meet the targets set in the directive, the Russian Ministry of Energy is tasked with taking a large number of measures, including deciding on pricing for electricity produced from renewables; attracting private investment for new and existing projects; engaging domestic industrial sectors and services; improving statistical reporting on the use of renewables in electricity generation; and raising public awareness about renewable energy sources.
The federal policy on the use of renewables in electricity generation through 2020 is, however, more than declarative. On the basis of the directive, the Ministry of Energy is to engage federal agencies and utilities and seek their input and cooperation in order to fulfil the tasks outlined in the directive. The directive should also spur regional governments "to make provisions in their development programs" for measures that foster the implementation of the new government policy.
Implications of the Directive
RusHydro, a Russian state-controlled company and the world’s second largest producer of hydro-based electricity after Canada’s Hydro-Quebec, already produces approximately 15 per cent of the country’s electricity. The company has ambitious investment plans for new large and small hydro power projects and a vision for the development of the domestic wind power sector.
However, the company’s 2009 investment commitment (about USD13 million) for small hydro, wind, and tidal power projects is conditional on the allocation of federal budget subsidies. RusHydro relies on legislative and executive support for the expanded use of renewable energy sources. If Putin’s directive is followed up with more executive orders (as RusHydro expects it will be in 2009), then this will in all likelihood influence domestic utilities and manufacturers.
There could also be greater use of renewables in future years if foreign and domestic investors in Russian utilities see cost-effective opportunities for generating additional income from renewables and remain committed to expanding the use of clean energy sources. Likewise, Russian industrial manufacturers will produce and supply equipment if there is growing demand for their services. Foreign suppliers of equipment and engineering services may come to see this as an area where partnerships and even joint ventures would be welcome.
Over the long-term, renewable energy initiatives can potentially create "green" jobs for blue collar workers and professionals. However, before this happens, legal and regulatory issues would have to be addressed.
Challenges to Implementation
The presidential directive cites numerous hurdles to the growth of electricity generation based on renewable energy sources, but also outlines comprehensive measures to address these concerns. If federal and regional authorities choose to cooperate with interested parties, domestic and/or foreign, more investment in small hydro, wind and solar power projects is likely to follow. These projects will be limited by geographical factors, of course, and, to some extent, by competition for the attention of Russian authorities preoccupied with the present difficult financial and economic situation.
Success stories of foreign companies engaged in renewable energy business can encourage more Russians to think "green," not only in terms of how these projects impact the environment, but also in terms of potential profit-making opportunities.
On January 8, 2009, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin signed an executive directive which calls for an increase in the energy efficiency of the Russian electric power sector on the basis of renewable energy sources. The directive sets several specific targets for expanding the share of renewable energy in electricity generation from less than the current one per cent to 1.5 per cent in 2010, 2.5 per cent in 2015, and 4.5 per cent by 2020.
Hydropower plants with a capacity of more than 25 megawatts (MW) are not included in these figures, but the targets do include small hydro power plants, as well as tidal, geothermal, wind, solar, and biomass sources, according to a RusHydro presentation in the fall of 2008.
For example, Russia’s wind-power capacity (estimated at 12 MW in 2005) is projected to increase tenfold to 120 MW in 2010, 1,500 MW in 2015, and 7,000 MW (or 7GW) by 2020. (For comparison, Canada’s installed wind energy capacity reached about 2.3 GW in 2008, supplying about one per cent of the country’s electricity demand. United States wind energy capacity grew by 50 per cent in 2008 to 25.1 GW.)
To meet the targets set in the directive, the Russian Ministry of Energy is tasked with taking a large number of measures, including deciding on pricing for electricity produced from renewables; attracting private investment for new and existing projects; engaging domestic industrial sectors and services; improving statistical reporting on the use of renewables in electricity generation; and raising public awareness about renewable energy sources.
The federal policy on the use of renewables in electricity generation through 2020 is, however, more than declarative. On the basis of the directive, the Ministry of Energy is to engage federal agencies and utilities and seek their input and cooperation in order to fulfil the tasks outlined in the directive. The directive should also spur regional governments "to make provisions in their development programs" for measures that foster the implementation of the new government policy.
Implications of the Directive
RusHydro, a Russian state-controlled company and the world’s second largest producer of hydro-based electricity after Canada’s Hydro-Quebec, already produces approximately 15 per cent of the country’s electricity. The company has ambitious investment plans for new large and small hydro power projects and a vision for the development of the domestic wind power sector.
However, the company’s 2009 investment commitment (about USD13 million) for small hydro, wind, and tidal power projects is conditional on the allocation of federal budget subsidies. RusHydro relies on legislative and executive support for the expanded use of renewable energy sources. If Putin’s directive is followed up with more executive orders (as RusHydro expects it will be in 2009), then this will in all likelihood influence domestic utilities and manufacturers.
There could also be greater use of renewables in future years if foreign and domestic investors in Russian utilities see cost-effective opportunities for generating additional income from renewables and remain committed to expanding the use of clean energy sources. Likewise, Russian industrial manufacturers will produce and supply equipment if there is growing demand for their services. Foreign suppliers of equipment and engineering services may come to see this as an area where partnerships and even joint ventures would be welcome.
Over the long-term, renewable energy initiatives can potentially create "green" jobs for blue collar workers and professionals. However, before this happens, legal and regulatory issues would have to be addressed.
Challenges to Implementation
The presidential directive cites numerous hurdles to the growth of electricity generation based on renewable energy sources, but also outlines comprehensive measures to address these concerns. If federal and regional authorities choose to cooperate with interested parties, domestic and/or foreign, more investment in small hydro, wind and solar power projects is likely to follow. These projects will be limited by geographical factors, of course, and, to some extent, by competition for the attention of Russian authorities preoccupied with the present difficult financial and economic situation.
Success stories of foreign companies engaged in renewable energy business can encourage more Russians to think "green," not only in terms of how these projects impact the environment, but also in terms of potential profit-making opportunities.
The Wildlife Society Recommends Wildlife Policy Priorities
The Wildlife Society (TWS), drawing on more than 70 years of experience working on wildlife policy with federal, state, and local governments, has offered a series of recommendations to the new US administration and Congress that provide an overview of major issues facing wildlife managers and conservationists.
“There are several major challenges facing us today,” says Dr Michael Hutchins, CEO of TWS. “With a new administration and a new Congress in place, we have an opportunity to make real advances on addressing climate change and a wide range of other critical issues in wildlife management and conservation. Those advances can only occur, however, if wildlife policy relies on science and is developed in a transparent manner.”
At TWS, “part of our mission is to ensure the responsible management of wildlife resources for the benefit of society,” says Hutchins. To that end, the Society has outlined for Congress nine specific areas of concern, along with actions the TWS membership would like to see move forward. The nine priority areas include:
• Global Climate Change: Congress should pass comprehensive climate change legislation that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and allocates a per cent of the revenue generated through the auction of emissions credits to a natural resource adaptation program to mitigate the effects of climate change on fish and wildlife at both state and federal levels.
• Funding for Wildlife Management and Conservation: Federal environment and natural resource programs should be robustly funded commensurate with their needs. In addition, state agencies should receive dedicated, assured funding from the federal government to implement their Wildlife Action Plans.
• Farm Bill: The relevant agencies should request, and Congress should appropriate, full funding for Farm Bill conservation programs, such as the Conservation Reserve Program and Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program.
• Clean Water Act: The jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act should be restored to include intermittent streams and intrastate, geographically isolated wetlands.
• Energy Development: Energy development must be done responsibly. The benefits and costs, including possible negative and lasting effects on wildlife and habitat from all forms of energy development, including alternative energy, should be considered and acknowledged at each step in the development process.
• Endangered Species: The Endangered Species Act should be strengthened to increase the effectiveness of threatened and endangered species conservation.
• Invasive Species: TWS encourages effective laws and regulations at the state and federal levels that control the spread of invasive species.
• Sportsmen’s Heritage: The hunting, trapping, and fishing heritage of this country should be sustained through access programs that provide places for the public to hunt, trap, and fish, and through educational programs to attract and retain hunters, trappers, and anglers.
• Professional Societies: The Federal conflict-of-interest statute should be amended to exclude scientific and professional societies so that service in leadership positions within these organisations is allowed and encouraged. Such service reduces isolation, keeps professionals up-to-date on cutting-edge issues in the profession, and makes them more efficient at managing our natural resources.
For a copy of the complete recommendations, please visit www.wildlife.org.
“There are several major challenges facing us today,” says Dr Michael Hutchins, CEO of TWS. “With a new administration and a new Congress in place, we have an opportunity to make real advances on addressing climate change and a wide range of other critical issues in wildlife management and conservation. Those advances can only occur, however, if wildlife policy relies on science and is developed in a transparent manner.”
At TWS, “part of our mission is to ensure the responsible management of wildlife resources for the benefit of society,” says Hutchins. To that end, the Society has outlined for Congress nine specific areas of concern, along with actions the TWS membership would like to see move forward. The nine priority areas include:
• Global Climate Change: Congress should pass comprehensive climate change legislation that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and allocates a per cent of the revenue generated through the auction of emissions credits to a natural resource adaptation program to mitigate the effects of climate change on fish and wildlife at both state and federal levels.
• Funding for Wildlife Management and Conservation: Federal environment and natural resource programs should be robustly funded commensurate with their needs. In addition, state agencies should receive dedicated, assured funding from the federal government to implement their Wildlife Action Plans.
• Farm Bill: The relevant agencies should request, and Congress should appropriate, full funding for Farm Bill conservation programs, such as the Conservation Reserve Program and Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program.
• Clean Water Act: The jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act should be restored to include intermittent streams and intrastate, geographically isolated wetlands.
• Energy Development: Energy development must be done responsibly. The benefits and costs, including possible negative and lasting effects on wildlife and habitat from all forms of energy development, including alternative energy, should be considered and acknowledged at each step in the development process.
• Endangered Species: The Endangered Species Act should be strengthened to increase the effectiveness of threatened and endangered species conservation.
• Invasive Species: TWS encourages effective laws and regulations at the state and federal levels that control the spread of invasive species.
• Sportsmen’s Heritage: The hunting, trapping, and fishing heritage of this country should be sustained through access programs that provide places for the public to hunt, trap, and fish, and through educational programs to attract and retain hunters, trappers, and anglers.
• Professional Societies: The Federal conflict-of-interest statute should be amended to exclude scientific and professional societies so that service in leadership positions within these organisations is allowed and encouraged. Such service reduces isolation, keeps professionals up-to-date on cutting-edge issues in the profession, and makes them more efficient at managing our natural resources.
For a copy of the complete recommendations, please visit www.wildlife.org.
Public Support Grows for Spending on Mass Transit and Infrastructure
Public support is growing for expenditures on mass transit and infrastructure and remains high for education and health care, according to a National Opinion Research Centre survey at the University of Chicago that has been following spending trends for 35 years.
The General Social Survey asked people a consistent set of questions, including whether more or less money should be spent on a priority. If more people thought more money should be spent on a category than said less should be spent, the category received a positive score. The spending priorities received a negative score when the reverse was true.
“Mass transportation moved up three positions in the ranking of 22 spending priorities, and now is 10th place with a score of +40.8. This is an increase of 15.5 points from 2002,” said Tom W. Smith, Director of the General Social Survey at NORC and author of the report, “Trends in National Spending Priorities, 1973-2008.” “The especially sharp rise from 2006 to 2008 probably reflects the increased demand for mass transportation due to high gas prices in the first half of 2008.”
In 13th place on the survey came support for highways and bridges, with a score of +35.5 in 2008. Both the rank and score for infrastructure spending set record lows in 2004, but support increased in 2006 and shot up in 2008 following the Minneapolis bridge collapse in August 2007, Smith said.
The survey was based on face-to-face interviews with 2,023 randomly selected people throughout the country and was most recently conducted April through September 2008. With support from the National Science Foundation, the biennial survey is widely used by social scientists and is considered one of the most reliable reports on public opinion in the country.
“Despite a dislike of taxes (in 2008, 57 per cent said their own federal income tax was too high), more people have always favoured increases in spending than cuts,” Smith said.
As in other recent surveys, spending on education topped the list in 2008. “In absolute terms, support for educational spending has been very high and changed little since 1989,” Smith said. It had a score of +68.4 in 2008. After a first-place rank in 2004, health finished second in 2008 with a score of +68.1.
“In nine surveys since 1990, health topped the list twice, and education finished first seven times. Moreover, they both are consistently ahead of the next group of spending areas,” Smith said.
Support for more spending for assistance to the poor has grown in recent years. Now in third place at +62.1, assistance to the poor has strongly rebounded from a 10th-place showing in 1996. It showed its top relative finish in 2002-08 and had its best score (+63.5) in 2004.
The survey also asked people if they were willing to spend more on welfare and found that support has hit a record high, moving it to 19th place in 2008 with a record-high score of -12.8. The priority has regained considerable ground from a near-record low of -49.3 in 1994. (Its low point was -49.6 in 1977).
“Welfare has always been favoured much less than assistance to the poor. People like the idea of the government helping those with low-incomes, but consider welfare a failed program,” Smith said. “Part of the rise in support for welfare reflects a positive response to the welfare reforms of the mid-1990s.”
Other top priorities include the environment, fourth at +58.7; social security, fifth at +55.7; halting crime, seventh at +55.0; assistance for child care, seventh at +47.6; and dealing with drug addiction, eighth at +47.2. “These spending areas are not only close in absolute terms, but have frequently switched relative positions in recent years,” Smith said.
The bottom priorities (18th through 21st) include assistance to big cities, welfare, defence and space exploration. In last place at 22nd was foreign aid, with a score of -52.3. Spending on foreign aid has always been the least-popular spending priority for Americans, the survey has found.
SOURCE: THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
The General Social Survey asked people a consistent set of questions, including whether more or less money should be spent on a priority. If more people thought more money should be spent on a category than said less should be spent, the category received a positive score. The spending priorities received a negative score when the reverse was true.
“Mass transportation moved up three positions in the ranking of 22 spending priorities, and now is 10th place with a score of +40.8. This is an increase of 15.5 points from 2002,” said Tom W. Smith, Director of the General Social Survey at NORC and author of the report, “Trends in National Spending Priorities, 1973-2008.” “The especially sharp rise from 2006 to 2008 probably reflects the increased demand for mass transportation due to high gas prices in the first half of 2008.”
In 13th place on the survey came support for highways and bridges, with a score of +35.5 in 2008. Both the rank and score for infrastructure spending set record lows in 2004, but support increased in 2006 and shot up in 2008 following the Minneapolis bridge collapse in August 2007, Smith said.
The survey was based on face-to-face interviews with 2,023 randomly selected people throughout the country and was most recently conducted April through September 2008. With support from the National Science Foundation, the biennial survey is widely used by social scientists and is considered one of the most reliable reports on public opinion in the country.
“Despite a dislike of taxes (in 2008, 57 per cent said their own federal income tax was too high), more people have always favoured increases in spending than cuts,” Smith said.
As in other recent surveys, spending on education topped the list in 2008. “In absolute terms, support for educational spending has been very high and changed little since 1989,” Smith said. It had a score of +68.4 in 2008. After a first-place rank in 2004, health finished second in 2008 with a score of +68.1.
“In nine surveys since 1990, health topped the list twice, and education finished first seven times. Moreover, they both are consistently ahead of the next group of spending areas,” Smith said.
Support for more spending for assistance to the poor has grown in recent years. Now in third place at +62.1, assistance to the poor has strongly rebounded from a 10th-place showing in 1996. It showed its top relative finish in 2002-08 and had its best score (+63.5) in 2004.
The survey also asked people if they were willing to spend more on welfare and found that support has hit a record high, moving it to 19th place in 2008 with a record-high score of -12.8. The priority has regained considerable ground from a near-record low of -49.3 in 1994. (Its low point was -49.6 in 1977).
“Welfare has always been favoured much less than assistance to the poor. People like the idea of the government helping those with low-incomes, but consider welfare a failed program,” Smith said. “Part of the rise in support for welfare reflects a positive response to the welfare reforms of the mid-1990s.”
Other top priorities include the environment, fourth at +58.7; social security, fifth at +55.7; halting crime, seventh at +55.0; assistance for child care, seventh at +47.6; and dealing with drug addiction, eighth at +47.2. “These spending areas are not only close in absolute terms, but have frequently switched relative positions in recent years,” Smith said.
The bottom priorities (18th through 21st) include assistance to big cities, welfare, defence and space exploration. In last place at 22nd was foreign aid, with a score of -52.3. Spending on foreign aid has always been the least-popular spending priority for Americans, the survey has found.
SOURCE: THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
Traceable Timber Amendments Strengthen Europe's Illegal Logging Proposals
Europe's proposed new timber regulations have been transformed from a ramshackle statement of intent to a credible framework for controlling the illegal trade in timber, following the European Parliament’s environment committee acceptance of key amendments improving traceability, monitoring and enforcement.
“The amendments introduced today give all players in the timber supply chain clearer indications about the system they need to establish to prove the legality of their timber and provide clearer and more certain consequences to those who continue to flout the rules,” said Anke Schulmeister, Forest policy Officer at WWF.
“We congratulate the committee for having the foresight to recognise the inadequacies of the draft regulation proposed by the European commission and having the courage to do the necessary carpentry to this draft law.”
Today’s amendments give operators of the supply chain clear indications about the traceability system they need to establish. They also improved investigative capabilities in European countries, which hold responsibility for stopping illegal products at the borders and applying penalties.
WWF believes this is a milestone to stop massive forest destruction worldwide, and a much needed improvement of the new EU timber law proposed by the European Commission.
"If applied correctly, the law has the potential to dramatically reduce illegal logging in tropical countries, slow deforestation and uphold the rights of indigenous peoples," said Schulmeister.
"Lots of companies in Europe have already shown their willingness to guarantee that only legal wood products are placed on the market. Now it is crucial that the agreement passes the final test with the European Parliament and Council."
The debate on a timber law for Europe started more than five years ago and has now reached its crucial phase, as the EU is about to make fundamental decisions to free its market from wood products that have been harvested, processed and sold illegally.
WWF estimates that 16-19 per cent of European wood imports in 2006 came from illegal sources, between 26.5 and 31 million cubic metres of timber, with much of this timber coming through Russia and Finland.
The amended laws will now be considered by the European Parliament and the Agriculture Council, with WWF urging both parties to support today's amendments.
“The amendments introduced today give all players in the timber supply chain clearer indications about the system they need to establish to prove the legality of their timber and provide clearer and more certain consequences to those who continue to flout the rules,” said Anke Schulmeister, Forest policy Officer at WWF.
“We congratulate the committee for having the foresight to recognise the inadequacies of the draft regulation proposed by the European commission and having the courage to do the necessary carpentry to this draft law.”
Today’s amendments give operators of the supply chain clear indications about the traceability system they need to establish. They also improved investigative capabilities in European countries, which hold responsibility for stopping illegal products at the borders and applying penalties.
WWF believes this is a milestone to stop massive forest destruction worldwide, and a much needed improvement of the new EU timber law proposed by the European Commission.
"If applied correctly, the law has the potential to dramatically reduce illegal logging in tropical countries, slow deforestation and uphold the rights of indigenous peoples," said Schulmeister.
"Lots of companies in Europe have already shown their willingness to guarantee that only legal wood products are placed on the market. Now it is crucial that the agreement passes the final test with the European Parliament and Council."
The debate on a timber law for Europe started more than five years ago and has now reached its crucial phase, as the EU is about to make fundamental decisions to free its market from wood products that have been harvested, processed and sold illegally.
WWF estimates that 16-19 per cent of European wood imports in 2006 came from illegal sources, between 26.5 and 31 million cubic metres of timber, with much of this timber coming through Russia and Finland.
The amended laws will now be considered by the European Parliament and the Agriculture Council, with WWF urging both parties to support today's amendments.
Putin Puts Writing on 'Walls of Death' in Russia
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has proposed outlawing fishing with drift nets, otherwise known as “walls of death”, following a lengthy campaign by fishermen and politicians in Kamchatka as well as local organisations including WWF-Russia.
Drift nets are used to catch fish migrating in open sea. Each net can be several kilometres long and their use results in a large bycatch of sharks, turtles, seabirds and marine mammals which are usually thrown back dead into the ocean.
Large-scale ocean drift netting was banned by the UN in international waters in 2002 and near-shore drift netting is carefully regulated in US and EU waters. In the Russian Far East two kinds of ocean drift net fishing exist: Japanese, in accordance with the bilateral agreement with Russia, and the so-called “scientific” drift netting. Both are principally aimed at the highly prized sockeye salmon and it is estimated that 60,000 tons of other less valuable salmon are discarded annually.
Over the past three months WWF-Russia, together with the Kamchatka coalition “Save the Salmon Together”, has collected signatures in support of a ban on drift net fishing. The coalition, supported by WWF, unites local NGOs, fishermen and representatives of the Kamchatka legislative and executive authorities.
The Kamchatka coastal fishermen, including indigenous people, have been fighting for several years for a ban on drift net fishing. Now, according to the press service of the Kamchatka Parliament (Duma), Prime Minister Putin has given orders for documents to be prepared on the complete ban of drift nets in Russian waters.
“We welcome this proposal because we consider ocean drift netting to be environmentally dangerous and there are better ways of catching fish,” said Konstantin Zgurovsky, Head of WWF-Russia Marine Programme.
It is not for nothing that drift nets are called walls of death. Pacific salmon and marine mammals including whales, dolphins, seabirds and even threatened species such as the Short-tailed Albatross get caught in the nets.
Another consequence of drift net fishing is that the nets become a barrier for fish on their way from the ocean to the rivers to spawn, thus depriving local fishermen of their potential catch.
“This month in Kamchatka there will be a public hearing on the drift net ban and there are some commercial interests of people who want to continue using the drift net, so the struggle is not over,” said Zgurovsky.
Drift nets are used to catch fish migrating in open sea. Each net can be several kilometres long and their use results in a large bycatch of sharks, turtles, seabirds and marine mammals which are usually thrown back dead into the ocean.
Large-scale ocean drift netting was banned by the UN in international waters in 2002 and near-shore drift netting is carefully regulated in US and EU waters. In the Russian Far East two kinds of ocean drift net fishing exist: Japanese, in accordance with the bilateral agreement with Russia, and the so-called “scientific” drift netting. Both are principally aimed at the highly prized sockeye salmon and it is estimated that 60,000 tons of other less valuable salmon are discarded annually.
Over the past three months WWF-Russia, together with the Kamchatka coalition “Save the Salmon Together”, has collected signatures in support of a ban on drift net fishing. The coalition, supported by WWF, unites local NGOs, fishermen and representatives of the Kamchatka legislative and executive authorities.
The Kamchatka coastal fishermen, including indigenous people, have been fighting for several years for a ban on drift net fishing. Now, according to the press service of the Kamchatka Parliament (Duma), Prime Minister Putin has given orders for documents to be prepared on the complete ban of drift nets in Russian waters.
“We welcome this proposal because we consider ocean drift netting to be environmentally dangerous and there are better ways of catching fish,” said Konstantin Zgurovsky, Head of WWF-Russia Marine Programme.
It is not for nothing that drift nets are called walls of death. Pacific salmon and marine mammals including whales, dolphins, seabirds and even threatened species such as the Short-tailed Albatross get caught in the nets.
Another consequence of drift net fishing is that the nets become a barrier for fish on their way from the ocean to the rivers to spawn, thus depriving local fishermen of their potential catch.
“This month in Kamchatka there will be a public hearing on the drift net ban and there are some commercial interests of people who want to continue using the drift net, so the struggle is not over,” said Zgurovsky.
Stimulus Plan Will Create Sustainable Jobs That Will Protect Public Health
The economic recovery plan signed by President Obama will create three to four million quality, sustainable jobs with many protecting our country’s public health and our environment.
“Through the President’s stimulus package, green initiatives will play a significant role in powering economic recovery,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “EPA’s portion of the plan will create good, sustainable jobs that help produce cleaner drinking water, purer air, environmentally friendly urban and rural re-development, and reduced greenhouse gases. This is a perfect example of economic growth and environmental protection working hand in hand to the benefit of all Americans.”
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 specifically includes USD7.22 billion for projects and programs administered by EPA. These programs will protect and promote both green jobs and a healthier environment. These environmental areas include:
• USD4 billion for assistance to help communities with water quality and waste water infrastructure needs and USD2 billion for drinking water infrastructure needs. A portion of the funding will be targeted toward green infrastructure, water and energy efficiency, and environmentally innovative projects.
• USD100 million for competitive grants to evaluate and clean up former industrial and commercial sites.
• USD300 million for grants and loans to help regional, state and local governments, tribal agencies, and non-profit organisations with projects that reduce diesel emissions.
• USD600 million for the cleanup of hazardous sites.
• USD200 million for cleanup of petroleum leaks from underground storage tanks.
The new law is geared for performance and unprecedented transparency. Preference will be given to projects that can be started and completed expeditiously, and EPA intends to move designated funds to states as quickly as possible. All funding will be monitored by EPA’s Inspector General, which will receive USD20 million for oversight and review. Announcements of grants will be posted on the Web to ensure transparency.
“Through the President’s stimulus package, green initiatives will play a significant role in powering economic recovery,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “EPA’s portion of the plan will create good, sustainable jobs that help produce cleaner drinking water, purer air, environmentally friendly urban and rural re-development, and reduced greenhouse gases. This is a perfect example of economic growth and environmental protection working hand in hand to the benefit of all Americans.”
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 specifically includes USD7.22 billion for projects and programs administered by EPA. These programs will protect and promote both green jobs and a healthier environment. These environmental areas include:
• USD4 billion for assistance to help communities with water quality and waste water infrastructure needs and USD2 billion for drinking water infrastructure needs. A portion of the funding will be targeted toward green infrastructure, water and energy efficiency, and environmentally innovative projects.
• USD100 million for competitive grants to evaluate and clean up former industrial and commercial sites.
• USD300 million for grants and loans to help regional, state and local governments, tribal agencies, and non-profit organisations with projects that reduce diesel emissions.
• USD600 million for the cleanup of hazardous sites.
• USD200 million for cleanup of petroleum leaks from underground storage tanks.
The new law is geared for performance and unprecedented transparency. Preference will be given to projects that can be started and completed expeditiously, and EPA intends to move designated funds to states as quickly as possible. All funding will be monitored by EPA’s Inspector General, which will receive USD20 million for oversight and review. Announcements of grants will be posted on the Web to ensure transparency.
Decisive Action Needed as Warming Predictions Worsen
Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are rising more rapidly than expected, increasing the danger that without aggressive action to reduce emissions the climate system could cross a critical threshold by the end of the century, warns a leading member of the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Studies indicate that greenhouse warming could trigger a vicious cycle of feedback, in which carbon dioxide released from thawing tundra and increasingly fire-prone forests drives global temperatures even higher.
Chris Field, director of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology and co-chair of the IPCC Working Group, will address these issues at a symposium titled "What Is New and Surprising since the IPCC Fourth Assessment?" at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in Chicago. The IPCC Fourth Assessment, for which Field was a coordinating author, was published in 2007. As co-chair, Field will oversee the Working Group Report on the predicted impacts of climate change for the IPCC Fifth assessment, scheduled to be published in 2014. The Fifth Assessment will incorporate the results of new studies that predict more severe changes than did previous assessments.
"The data now show that greenhouse gas emissions are accelerating much faster than we thought," says Field. "Over the last decade developing countries such as China and India have increased their electric power generation by burning more coal. Economies in the developing world are becoming more, not less carbon-intensive. We are definitely in unexplored terrain with the trajectory of climate change, in the region with forcing, and very likely impacts, much worse than predicted in the fourth assessment."
New studies are also revealing potentially dangerous feedbacks in the climate system that could convert current carbon sinks into carbon sources. Field points to tropical forests as a prime example. Vast amounts of carbon are stored in the vegetation of moist tropical forests, which are resistant to wildfires because of their wetness. But warming temperatures and shifting rainfall patterns threaten to dry the forests, making them less fireproof. Researchers estimate that loss of forests through wildfires and other causes during the next century could boost atmospheric concentration of CO2 by up to 100 parts per million over the current 386 ppm, with possibly devastating consequences for global climate.
Warming in the Arctic is expected to speed up the decay of plant matter that has been in cold storage in permafrost for thousands of years. "There is about 1,000 billion tons of carbon in these soils," says Field. "When you consider that the total amount of carbon released from fossil fuels since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution is around 350 billion tons, the implications for global climate are staggering."
"The IPCC fourth assessment didn't consider either the tundra-thawing or tropical forest feedbacks in detail because they weren't yet well understood," he says. "But new studies are now available, so we should be able to assess a wider range of factors and possible climate outcomes. One thing that seems to be certain, however, is that as a society we are facing a climate crisis that is larger and harder to deal with than any of us thought. The sooner we take decisive action, the better our chances are of leaving a sustainable world to future generations."
Chris Field, director of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology and co-chair of the IPCC Working Group, will address these issues at a symposium titled "What Is New and Surprising since the IPCC Fourth Assessment?" at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in Chicago. The IPCC Fourth Assessment, for which Field was a coordinating author, was published in 2007. As co-chair, Field will oversee the Working Group Report on the predicted impacts of climate change for the IPCC Fifth assessment, scheduled to be published in 2014. The Fifth Assessment will incorporate the results of new studies that predict more severe changes than did previous assessments.
"The data now show that greenhouse gas emissions are accelerating much faster than we thought," says Field. "Over the last decade developing countries such as China and India have increased their electric power generation by burning more coal. Economies in the developing world are becoming more, not less carbon-intensive. We are definitely in unexplored terrain with the trajectory of climate change, in the region with forcing, and very likely impacts, much worse than predicted in the fourth assessment."
New studies are also revealing potentially dangerous feedbacks in the climate system that could convert current carbon sinks into carbon sources. Field points to tropical forests as a prime example. Vast amounts of carbon are stored in the vegetation of moist tropical forests, which are resistant to wildfires because of their wetness. But warming temperatures and shifting rainfall patterns threaten to dry the forests, making them less fireproof. Researchers estimate that loss of forests through wildfires and other causes during the next century could boost atmospheric concentration of CO2 by up to 100 parts per million over the current 386 ppm, with possibly devastating consequences for global climate.
Warming in the Arctic is expected to speed up the decay of plant matter that has been in cold storage in permafrost for thousands of years. "There is about 1,000 billion tons of carbon in these soils," says Field. "When you consider that the total amount of carbon released from fossil fuels since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution is around 350 billion tons, the implications for global climate are staggering."
"The IPCC fourth assessment didn't consider either the tundra-thawing or tropical forest feedbacks in detail because they weren't yet well understood," he says. "But new studies are now available, so we should be able to assess a wider range of factors and possible climate outcomes. One thing that seems to be certain, however, is that as a society we are facing a climate crisis that is larger and harder to deal with than any of us thought. The sooner we take decisive action, the better our chances are of leaving a sustainable world to future generations."
Putin Petitioned Over Siberian Power Station
A petition jointly organised by WWF-Russia and signed by more than 8,000 people was handed in to Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin against the construction of a hydro-electric power station in Siberia that would threaten the indigenous population as well as the local ecosystem.
The construction project, in the Evenk municipal district, could drive as many as 2,000 Evenki out of their homes and deer-herding pasture lands and, according to the evaluation data, one million hectares of unique larch forest would be flooded.
These forests are almost unaffected by human agricultural activity and so are very important for biological diversity conservation and ecological balance maintenance, not only in Russia but for the whole planet. They play a crucial role in carbon balance maintenance and global climate change control.
The petition was handed in by WWF-Russia, Greenpeace-Russia, the Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North as well as other non-governmental organisations. In 1988 the Soviet Union cancelled plans to construct a giant dam at the same site after Mikhail Gorbachev questioned the policy of building giant hydro-power stations.
“The building of the Turukhansk (now Evenk) Hydropower Station was rejected at the end of the 80s because of the results of serious environmental and economic examinations,” said Mikhail Kreindlin of Greenpeace-Russia. “The revival of this project will mean a return to the most dreadful times in the ex-USSR administrative command system.”
Such a large hydro-technical construction could cause irreversible changes to the environment of an area much greater than the construction zone itself. One of the three radioactive underground nuclear explosion areas in the flood plain of Tunguska would certainly be flooded as a result of the construction.
The construction project, in the Evenk municipal district, could drive as many as 2,000 Evenki out of their homes and deer-herding pasture lands and, according to the evaluation data, one million hectares of unique larch forest would be flooded.
These forests are almost unaffected by human agricultural activity and so are very important for biological diversity conservation and ecological balance maintenance, not only in Russia but for the whole planet. They play a crucial role in carbon balance maintenance and global climate change control.
The petition was handed in by WWF-Russia, Greenpeace-Russia, the Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North as well as other non-governmental organisations. In 1988 the Soviet Union cancelled plans to construct a giant dam at the same site after Mikhail Gorbachev questioned the policy of building giant hydro-power stations.
“The building of the Turukhansk (now Evenk) Hydropower Station was rejected at the end of the 80s because of the results of serious environmental and economic examinations,” said Mikhail Kreindlin of Greenpeace-Russia. “The revival of this project will mean a return to the most dreadful times in the ex-USSR administrative command system.”
Such a large hydro-technical construction could cause irreversible changes to the environment of an area much greater than the construction zone itself. One of the three radioactive underground nuclear explosion areas in the flood plain of Tunguska would certainly be flooded as a result of the construction.
President Obama Orders Swift Action on Appliance Efficiency Standards
President Barack Obama has issued a memorandum last week that instructs Department of Energy (DOE) to take all necessary steps to finalise new appliance efficiency standards as quickly as possible. As noted by the president, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA) set certain deadlines for DOE to set energy efficiency standards for a broad class of residential and commercial products, and in 2005, DOE was sued for allegedly failing to meet the deadlines and other requirements of the EPCA. In November 2006, DOE entered into a consent decree, under which DOE agreed to publish the final rules for 22 product categories by specific deadlines, the latest of which is June 30, 2011. In addition, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) directed DOE to establish energy standard for additional product categories.
Although DOE has made progress on meeting its consent decree, the agency remains subject to deadlines on 15 of the 22 product categories, as well as a number of additional product categories added by the EISA. President Obama directed DOE to focus its efforts on the five energy efficiency rules with deadlines prior to August 8, 2009 and then to prioritise its efforts, tackling first the standards that will result in the greatest savings, while still meeting all applicable deadlines. The president announced the new memorandum on a visit to DOE, during which he spoke primarily about his economic stimulus plan. Regarding the efficiency standards, he noted that they will avoid the use of "tremendous amounts" of energy. "We'll save through these simple steps, over the next thirty years, the amount of energy produced over a two-year period by all the coal-fired power plants in America," said the president.
Although DOE has made progress on meeting its consent decree, the agency remains subject to deadlines on 15 of the 22 product categories, as well as a number of additional product categories added by the EISA. President Obama directed DOE to focus its efforts on the five energy efficiency rules with deadlines prior to August 8, 2009 and then to prioritise its efforts, tackling first the standards that will result in the greatest savings, while still meeting all applicable deadlines. The president announced the new memorandum on a visit to DOE, during which he spoke primarily about his economic stimulus plan. Regarding the efficiency standards, he noted that they will avoid the use of "tremendous amounts" of energy. "We'll save through these simple steps, over the next thirty years, the amount of energy produced over a two-year period by all the coal-fired power plants in America," said the president.
Green Light for Solar Panels in Scotland
The majority of householders in Scotland will be able to install solar panels and other energy generating equipment without planning permission from now on, although government ministers have yet to decide whether to exempt wind turbines and air-source heat pumps.
Ground-source and water-source heat pumps will get the green light, as will flues for biomass systems which use organic materials. The move was announced by finance secretary John Swinney, who said the concession would cut red tape, help householders cut heating bills and reduce emissions.
“By encouraging greater use of micro-generation technologies we are letting householders play their part in reducing emissions while creating new jobs in an emerging industry,” said Swinney.
Solar panels will be allowed if they are on a pitched roof or on a wall and do not protrude more than 200mm. But permission will still be needed for panels on the walls of buildings containing flats, and extra safeguards would apply in conservation areas or work heritage sites.
Elizabeth Leighton, Senior Policy Officer with WWF Scotland, said: “This move will help fuel the micro-generation revolution we need to fight climate change and fuel poverty. Now home owners can begin to realise the full energy producing potential of their homes without the hassle and unnecessary restrictions.
“However, while the rules have been relaxed for some householders, those in flats who want to install micro-renewables on outside walls have been left out in the cold. We see no reason why flat dwellers should not have Permitted Development Rights, the same as residents of other buildings.”
“We urge the Scottish Government to engage with the industry as soon as possible to resolve permitted development rights on wind turbines and air source heat pumps without delay so the full package is available to all home owners.”
Ground-source and water-source heat pumps will get the green light, as will flues for biomass systems which use organic materials. The move was announced by finance secretary John Swinney, who said the concession would cut red tape, help householders cut heating bills and reduce emissions.
“By encouraging greater use of micro-generation technologies we are letting householders play their part in reducing emissions while creating new jobs in an emerging industry,” said Swinney.
Solar panels will be allowed if they are on a pitched roof or on a wall and do not protrude more than 200mm. But permission will still be needed for panels on the walls of buildings containing flats, and extra safeguards would apply in conservation areas or work heritage sites.
Elizabeth Leighton, Senior Policy Officer with WWF Scotland, said: “This move will help fuel the micro-generation revolution we need to fight climate change and fuel poverty. Now home owners can begin to realise the full energy producing potential of their homes without the hassle and unnecessary restrictions.
“However, while the rules have been relaxed for some householders, those in flats who want to install micro-renewables on outside walls have been left out in the cold. We see no reason why flat dwellers should not have Permitted Development Rights, the same as residents of other buildings.”
“We urge the Scottish Government to engage with the industry as soon as possible to resolve permitted development rights on wind turbines and air source heat pumps without delay so the full package is available to all home owners.”
Greece Says Yes to Clean Energy, No to New Coal and Nuclear
Greece has outlined an energy future of strong support for renewable energy, with development minister Kostis Hatzidakis ruling out investment in new coal-fired of nuclear power plants.
The announcement was especially gratifying to WWF-Greece, founder with other partners of a “No-to-coal” coalition which has enlisted strong community support, particularly in areas proposed or suggested for new coal-fired plants.
“We congratulate Mr Hatzidakis for ending the coal drama and the rumours regarding the introduction of nuclear energy,” said WWF Greece CEO Demetres Karavellas.
“We feel that our efforts to prove that Greece does not need coal power plants and nuclear energy have been justified. Today, we can be more optimistic that Greece might make the necessary shift towards a more sustainable and competitive green economy.”
WWF Greece last November published a low carbon energy vision for the country which proposed CO2 emissions reductions of close to 70 per cent by 2050, outlining specific ways to achieve the reductions.
“No-to-coal” involved WWF Greece working together with local authorities in seven different sites that would have been affected by new coal power plants as well as organising mass rallies for outside the Greek Parliament.
The initiative also involved locally specific “yet-to-renewables” campaigns, offering alternative less polluting, destructive and disruptive power solutions.
The government change of stance on the issue was signalled by legislative changes to streamline and assist investment in renewable energy and by Hatzidakis emerging from a cabinet meeting in late January to say "We want 2009 to be the year of renewable energy sources."
WWF Greece plans to intensify its efforts over the next few months to ensure that Greece plays a positive role within the EU in the critical negotiations towards getting a new and adequate global climate deal at the UN climate change conference at Copenhagen in December.
The announcement was especially gratifying to WWF-Greece, founder with other partners of a “No-to-coal” coalition which has enlisted strong community support, particularly in areas proposed or suggested for new coal-fired plants.
“We congratulate Mr Hatzidakis for ending the coal drama and the rumours regarding the introduction of nuclear energy,” said WWF Greece CEO Demetres Karavellas.
“We feel that our efforts to prove that Greece does not need coal power plants and nuclear energy have been justified. Today, we can be more optimistic that Greece might make the necessary shift towards a more sustainable and competitive green economy.”
WWF Greece last November published a low carbon energy vision for the country which proposed CO2 emissions reductions of close to 70 per cent by 2050, outlining specific ways to achieve the reductions.
“No-to-coal” involved WWF Greece working together with local authorities in seven different sites that would have been affected by new coal power plants as well as organising mass rallies for outside the Greek Parliament.
The initiative also involved locally specific “yet-to-renewables” campaigns, offering alternative less polluting, destructive and disruptive power solutions.
The government change of stance on the issue was signalled by legislative changes to streamline and assist investment in renewable energy and by Hatzidakis emerging from a cabinet meeting in late January to say "We want 2009 to be the year of renewable energy sources."
WWF Greece plans to intensify its efforts over the next few months to ensure that Greece plays a positive role within the EU in the critical negotiations towards getting a new and adequate global climate deal at the UN climate change conference at Copenhagen in December.
EPA Revisits California Waiver Decision
The US Environmental Protection Agency will reconsider its decision denying California permission to set standards controlling greenhouse gases from motor vehicles.
The waiver request was made by California on December 21, 2005, to allow the state the right to control greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. The request was denied by the then EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson on March 6, 2008.
On January 26, shortly after taking office, President Barack Obama requested that EPA revisit the matter of the denial.
“EPA has now set in motion an impartial review of the California waiver decision,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “It is imperative that we get this decision right, and base it on the best available science and a thorough understanding of the law.”
The Clean Air Act gives EPA the authority to allow California to adopt its own emission standards for motor vehicles due to the seriousness of the state’s air pollution challenges. There is a long standing history of EPA granting waivers to the state of California.
EPA believes that there are significant issues regarding the agency’s denial of the waiver. The denial was a substantial departure from EPA’s long standing interpretation of the Clean Air Act’s waiver provisions.
EPA received on January 21, 2009, a letter from California outlining several issues for Administrator Jackson to review and reconsider about the previous denial of the waiver. Many other states are interested in adopting California’s standards. Stakeholders and the public have expressed concerns.
EPA will take public comment concerning the reconsideration of the waiver for a period of 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. There will also be a public hearing to be held in March in Washington, D.C.
The waiver request was made by California on December 21, 2005, to allow the state the right to control greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. The request was denied by the then EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson on March 6, 2008.
On January 26, shortly after taking office, President Barack Obama requested that EPA revisit the matter of the denial.
“EPA has now set in motion an impartial review of the California waiver decision,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “It is imperative that we get this decision right, and base it on the best available science and a thorough understanding of the law.”
The Clean Air Act gives EPA the authority to allow California to adopt its own emission standards for motor vehicles due to the seriousness of the state’s air pollution challenges. There is a long standing history of EPA granting waivers to the state of California.
EPA believes that there are significant issues regarding the agency’s denial of the waiver. The denial was a substantial departure from EPA’s long standing interpretation of the Clean Air Act’s waiver provisions.
EPA received on January 21, 2009, a letter from California outlining several issues for Administrator Jackson to review and reconsider about the previous denial of the waiver. Many other states are interested in adopting California’s standards. Stakeholders and the public have expressed concerns.
EPA will take public comment concerning the reconsideration of the waiver for a period of 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. There will also be a public hearing to be held in March in Washington, D.C.
US Blocks Trawlers from Following Retreating Arctic Ice
Commercial fishing in US Arctic waters is to be banned at least until its effects are understood, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council has decided.
In the most powerful application yet of the precautionary principle to fisheries, the council said its prohibition should stay in force until impacts of commercial fishing in previously ice covered waters are fully understood.
“This is a courageous and ethical move by Alaska’s fishermen,” said Bill Fox, Vice President of Fisheries with WWF-US. WWF, along with other groups, has been lobbying for a ban on commercial fishing in the Arctic until a fisheries management plan for the region is developed.
“We do not know enough about the ecology of these areas to allow them to be fished commercially. Until we have that information in hand, we should not tamper with these vulnerable ecosystems, particularly at a time when climate change is already threatening them.”
Council member Bill Tweit, of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, said, “Traditional knowledge and the precautionary principle is applied here which is important in the scientific management of fisheries in the Arctic," while Nicole Ricci of US State Department described the decision as “a pioneering piece of domestic regulation which will provide international leadership for fisheries management in the Arctic.”
The Arctic ice cover has been eroding rapidly over the past few years as a result of global climate change, with Arctic warming levels being about twice the global average.
Summer 2007 set a record for the minimum extent of Arctic sea ice at 4.3 million square kilometres, with 2008 close behind. The summer ice cover has fallen by more than 40 per cent from the 1980s, opening around 1.3 million square kilometres of the Arctic to fishing, oil exploration and shipping.
Arctic ecosystems are considered extremely fragile and slow to recover from disruptions or damage. Fish stocks are particularly sensitive to ocean temperatures with even small changes resulting extremely unpredictable shifts in the locations and productivity of the stocks. Even a small commercial fishery in the Arctic could have substantial impacts.
Also uncovered by the retreating ice are significant gaps in regulatory cover over the national and international waters of the Arctic. Welcome as the new US moves are, they apply to only a small proportion of Arctic waters.
“We urge other Arctic countries to follow the lead of the US,” said Fox. “Many of the fish stocks and other elements of the marine ecosystem cross more than one country’s jurisdiction and while the US move is helpful, it is not sufficient unless other Arctic nations take similar steps."
“This is a perfect example of why the Arctic needs a better legal and regulatory framework so that we can take coordinated steps to protect both the environment and the welfare of Arctic communities.”
Kodiak fisherman and council member Duncan Fields said he had "been persuaded to support this plan by testimony from those in Western Alaska. I've also been informed and persuaded by the tremendous voices in the environmental community and the many faces who contributed from their organisations."
In the most powerful application yet of the precautionary principle to fisheries, the council said its prohibition should stay in force until impacts of commercial fishing in previously ice covered waters are fully understood.
“This is a courageous and ethical move by Alaska’s fishermen,” said Bill Fox, Vice President of Fisheries with WWF-US. WWF, along with other groups, has been lobbying for a ban on commercial fishing in the Arctic until a fisheries management plan for the region is developed.
“We do not know enough about the ecology of these areas to allow them to be fished commercially. Until we have that information in hand, we should not tamper with these vulnerable ecosystems, particularly at a time when climate change is already threatening them.”
Council member Bill Tweit, of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, said, “Traditional knowledge and the precautionary principle is applied here which is important in the scientific management of fisheries in the Arctic," while Nicole Ricci of US State Department described the decision as “a pioneering piece of domestic regulation which will provide international leadership for fisheries management in the Arctic.”
The Arctic ice cover has been eroding rapidly over the past few years as a result of global climate change, with Arctic warming levels being about twice the global average.
Summer 2007 set a record for the minimum extent of Arctic sea ice at 4.3 million square kilometres, with 2008 close behind. The summer ice cover has fallen by more than 40 per cent from the 1980s, opening around 1.3 million square kilometres of the Arctic to fishing, oil exploration and shipping.
Arctic ecosystems are considered extremely fragile and slow to recover from disruptions or damage. Fish stocks are particularly sensitive to ocean temperatures with even small changes resulting extremely unpredictable shifts in the locations and productivity of the stocks. Even a small commercial fishery in the Arctic could have substantial impacts.
Also uncovered by the retreating ice are significant gaps in regulatory cover over the national and international waters of the Arctic. Welcome as the new US moves are, they apply to only a small proportion of Arctic waters.
“We urge other Arctic countries to follow the lead of the US,” said Fox. “Many of the fish stocks and other elements of the marine ecosystem cross more than one country’s jurisdiction and while the US move is helpful, it is not sufficient unless other Arctic nations take similar steps."
“This is a perfect example of why the Arctic needs a better legal and regulatory framework so that we can take coordinated steps to protect both the environment and the welfare of Arctic communities.”
Kodiak fisherman and council member Duncan Fields said he had "been persuaded to support this plan by testimony from those in Western Alaska. I've also been informed and persuaded by the tremendous voices in the environmental community and the many faces who contributed from their organisations."
Turkey Signs Up to Kyoto, Looks Forward to Copenhagen
Turkey has ratified the Kyoto Protocol, following an overwhelming vote in the national parliament.
The decision fulfils a promise first revealed by Turkish President Abdullah Gül at WWF’s international conference in Bodrum, Turkey, in May 2008. A month later, Turkey signed the protocol, becoming the 178th nation to do so, but it required ratification to come into effect.
WWF and other environmental NGOs and civil society organisations had long pressed for the decision over government fears it would impede development. Turkey’s ratification leaves only the United States and Kazakhstan as the only significant large nations still in the Kyoto cold.
Also a probable factor in the decision has been pressure for Turkey to close the gap between its environmental standards and those of Europe.
“Everyone should embrace this protocol,” said Veysel Eroğlu, Turkey's Minister of Environment and Forest, while addressing the parliament after the vote. He added that the government was taking necessary precautions for a better environment in the country.
Being late in participating in the Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, Turkey misses the possibility of becoming a “party” to the protocol and benefiting from its financial tools. Meanwhile, ratifying the Protocol does not imply putting significant amount of additional burden on Turkey until 2012. Turkey was not a party to UNFCCC in 1992 when the Kyoto Protocol was being negotiated. Turkey was not in the Annex B of the Protocol, which includes 39 developed countries that are obliged to reduce their emissions to 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012.
“We welcome the decision taken by the Turkish Government, though it was rather late,” said Dr Filiz Demirayak, CEO of WWF-Turkey.
“Turkey ranks the first in terms of its rate of emission increase and has to take considerable steps under current circumstances and future predictions.
“We should consider Kyoto and the post-Kyoto process as an opportunity to improve the quality of life for our people, rather than a barrier against development. It is also important for us to reduce its ecological footprint and take steps on the road to sustainable development."
Dr Demirayak also proposed that “a voluntary commitment of keeping the emission rate at its current level at least until 2012 would be meaningful under the framework of ratifying the protocol and this achievement would be stimulating meeting new targets which would be set in 2012 Copenhagen process”.
The decision fulfils a promise first revealed by Turkish President Abdullah Gül at WWF’s international conference in Bodrum, Turkey, in May 2008. A month later, Turkey signed the protocol, becoming the 178th nation to do so, but it required ratification to come into effect.
WWF and other environmental NGOs and civil society organisations had long pressed for the decision over government fears it would impede development. Turkey’s ratification leaves only the United States and Kazakhstan as the only significant large nations still in the Kyoto cold.
Also a probable factor in the decision has been pressure for Turkey to close the gap between its environmental standards and those of Europe.
“Everyone should embrace this protocol,” said Veysel Eroğlu, Turkey's Minister of Environment and Forest, while addressing the parliament after the vote. He added that the government was taking necessary precautions for a better environment in the country.
Being late in participating in the Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, Turkey misses the possibility of becoming a “party” to the protocol and benefiting from its financial tools. Meanwhile, ratifying the Protocol does not imply putting significant amount of additional burden on Turkey until 2012. Turkey was not a party to UNFCCC in 1992 when the Kyoto Protocol was being negotiated. Turkey was not in the Annex B of the Protocol, which includes 39 developed countries that are obliged to reduce their emissions to 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012.
“We welcome the decision taken by the Turkish Government, though it was rather late,” said Dr Filiz Demirayak, CEO of WWF-Turkey.
“Turkey ranks the first in terms of its rate of emission increase and has to take considerable steps under current circumstances and future predictions.
“We should consider Kyoto and the post-Kyoto process as an opportunity to improve the quality of life for our people, rather than a barrier against development. It is also important for us to reduce its ecological footprint and take steps on the road to sustainable development."
Dr Demirayak also proposed that “a voluntary commitment of keeping the emission rate at its current level at least until 2012 would be meaningful under the framework of ratifying the protocol and this achievement would be stimulating meeting new targets which would be set in 2012 Copenhagen process”.
Getting a New Global Deal on Climate Change
EU foresees major role for carbon trading in efforts to tackle climate change
In a paper outlining its position ahead of international climate talks, the commission says the costs of containing global warming are likely to soar in years to come – adding euro175 billion to the world's annual bill by 2020. More than half that amount will be needed in developing countries like China and India.
The EU and other economic powers should help defray the costs of reducing greenhouse gases emitted by developing nations.
The paper presents various options for increasing international funding, including requiring countries to contribute according to their income and level of emissions. Another option would be to auction some emission allowances on a carbon market.
In return, all developing nations, except the very poorest, should limit growth in emissions by adopting development strategies that produce fewer greenhouse gases. These strategies should include curbing tropical deforestation, as trees and plants absorb carbon dioxide.
The EU has already taken bold action of its own to tackle climate change, taking steps to scale back emissions. Now it is keen to build on that success at the talks in Copenhagen in December. The UN is organising the conference for the purpose of securing a new and more ambitious global commitment to tackling climate change. The current treaty, the Kyoto Protocol, expires at the end of 2012.
The EU will urge developed countries to commit to an overall 30 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 (compared with 1990 levels). The contribution would vary by country, depending on income, population, level of emissions and past efforts to reduce emissions. Compliance should be monitored and enforced.
The commission also foresees a major role for emissions trading, and will seek to build a global carbon market. A growing number of countries including the US, New Zealand and Australia are looking to set up schemes similar to the EU carbon market introduced in 2005. The scheme caps overall CO2 emissions, but allows businesses to buy and sell credits amongst themselves.
As some climate change is inevitable, the Copenhagen agreement should also provide a framework to help countries adapt. And it should ensure support for poor nations vulnerable to extreme weather such as drought, storms and floods.
In a paper outlining its position ahead of international climate talks, the commission says the costs of containing global warming are likely to soar in years to come – adding euro175 billion to the world's annual bill by 2020. More than half that amount will be needed in developing countries like China and India.
The EU and other economic powers should help defray the costs of reducing greenhouse gases emitted by developing nations.
The paper presents various options for increasing international funding, including requiring countries to contribute according to their income and level of emissions. Another option would be to auction some emission allowances on a carbon market.
In return, all developing nations, except the very poorest, should limit growth in emissions by adopting development strategies that produce fewer greenhouse gases. These strategies should include curbing tropical deforestation, as trees and plants absorb carbon dioxide.
The EU has already taken bold action of its own to tackle climate change, taking steps to scale back emissions. Now it is keen to build on that success at the talks in Copenhagen in December. The UN is organising the conference for the purpose of securing a new and more ambitious global commitment to tackling climate change. The current treaty, the Kyoto Protocol, expires at the end of 2012.
The EU will urge developed countries to commit to an overall 30 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 (compared with 1990 levels). The contribution would vary by country, depending on income, population, level of emissions and past efforts to reduce emissions. Compliance should be monitored and enforced.
The commission also foresees a major role for emissions trading, and will seek to build a global carbon market. A growing number of countries including the US, New Zealand and Australia are looking to set up schemes similar to the EU carbon market introduced in 2005. The scheme caps overall CO2 emissions, but allows businesses to buy and sell credits amongst themselves.
As some climate change is inevitable, the Copenhagen agreement should also provide a framework to help countries adapt. And it should ensure support for poor nations vulnerable to extreme weather such as drought, storms and floods.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)