UN scientists are to consider moves such as putting mirrors in space and sprinkling iron in the sea in an attempt to cut global warming, the head of the IPCC said.
Speaking at the climate change conference in Cancun, Dr Rajendra Pachauri said the next report on global warming by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will not only look at the threat of rising temperatures but so-called "geo-engineering" options that could actually reverse warming.
The announcement implies that scientists are losing faith in a global deal to stop temperature rise by limiting emissions.
There are already low expectations for the latest round of UN talks being held in a luxury beach resort on the east coast of Mexico.
More than 190 countries are meeting at the heavily-guarded Moon Palace Hotel to try and find a way to limit emissions so that temperatures rise stays below 3.6F (2C).
The IPCC is responsible for setting out the scientific basis on which the talks are based.
Addressing the opening conference, Dr Pachauri said if mankind continues to pump out greenhouse gases at the current rate the world could experience catastrophic warming within the next fifty years.
He said the threat is so great that the fifth assessment report (AR5), due to be presented to the UN in 2014, will look at "geo-engineering options".
"The AR5 has been expanded and will in future focus on subjects like clouds and aerosols, geo-engineering and sustainability issues," he said.
Later this year IPCC "expert groups" will meet in Peru to discuss geo-engineering.
Options include putting mirrors in space to reflect sunlight or covering Greenland in a massive blanket so it does not melt.
Sprinkling iron filings in the ocean "fertilises" algae so that it sucks up CO2 and "seeding clouds" means that less sunlight can get in.
Other options include artificial "trees" that suck carbon dioxide out of the air, painting roofs white to reflect sunlight and man-made volcanoes that spray sulphate particles high in the atmosphere to scatter the sun's rays back into space.
Many have argued that the process could make climate change worse through unintended consequences.
Earlier this year the IPCC was forced to undergo a review after it was revealed that the last report to the UN, the AR4, included the mistaken claim that the Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035. Critics called for the chairman to resign.
But Dr Pachauri insisted the review made the panel stronger than ever.
"We are confident that the IPCC will emerge stronger as a result of this exercise and live up to the expectations of the global community," he said.
The UN talks in Cancun are designed to find a way to limit global emissions in order to prevent global warming. However at the moment a treaty is unlikely as the world's two biggest emitters, China and the US, will not agree to legally binding targets.
Chris Huhne, the Climate Change Secretary, has already warned that a global deal is unlikely this time, although he insists the talks can make progress by agreeing on different aspects of the agreement such as forestry and climate finance.
Opening the talks, Felipe Calderón, the President of Mexico, insisted it was still possible for the world to reach a deal.
"Climate change is already a reality for us," he told delegates. "During the next two weeks, the whole world will be looking at you. It would be a tragedy not to overcome the hurdle of national interests."
Tuesday, 30 November 2010
Ed Miliband's green energy targets 'unrealistic'
Ed Miliband signed Britain up to "unrealistic" green energy targets without ''clear plans'' of how they would be hit while he was energy secretary, a committee of MPs said.
A ''greater sense of urgency and purpose'' is needed at the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) to help meet targets agreed while Labour were in power, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) said.
Britain signed up to a legally binding European Union target to supply 15 per cent of all energy from renewable sources by 2020 when Mr Miliband, now Labour leader, was in charge of the department.
Margaret Hodge, the Labour MP and PAC chairwoman, said progress on renewable energy targets had been ''unacceptably slow'' over the last decade, highlighting that the proportion of the UK's electricity from renewables rose from 2.7 per cent in 2000 to just 6.7 per cent last year.
This is ''well short'' of a 10 per cent target set for 2010 but which will not be delivered until 2012.
That raised doubts about the UK's ability to hit the 2020 EU target, she said, while longer term carbon reduction goals were also in doubt.
''New, and substantially more demanding, targets are now in place,'' Ms Hodge said.
''The department will have to have a greater sense of urgency and purpose if it is to achieve the dramatic increase in renewable energy supplies needed to meet them.
''We are concerned that the department agreed to the legally binding EU target to supply 15% of the UK's energy from renewable sources by 2020 without clear plans, targets for each renewable energy technology, estimates of funding required or understanding how the rate at which planning applications for onshore wind turbines were being rejected might affect progress.
''As for meeting the longer term 2050 target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80%, the department has yet to set out the timescale against which innovations in renewable energy technology will be required.''
The report also found Decc does not know whether spending on renewable energy has achieved value for money, is taking too long to review subsidy rates and lacks a clear strategy for reducing carbon emissions.
More than £180 million set aside to support renewable energy technologies was left unspent – described as a ''wasted opportunity – and Decc does not control swathes of funding despite being responsible for meeting targets, the MPs said as they proposed a series of recommendations.
The MPs said Decc was relying on a ''massive growth'' in wind power and needs to take account of a 40 per cent attrition rate at the planning stage.
A renewable energy strategy was only published last year and work on a detailed delivery plan did not begin until January 2010, with publication not due until April next year.
The lack of a ''coherent plan'' meant the department ''does not know whether value for money has been achieved from previous spending on renewable energy technologies''.
The committee called on Decc to be more flexible with its review of subsidy rates, saying: ''The department will need to act more quickly in response to changing circumstances, which may require it to move away from rigid review timetables that could result in delayed investment or increased costs for the bill payers who fund the subsidies.''
And it urged the department, now led by Lib Dem Secretary of State Chris Huhne, to build up a clearer picture of what funding has been channelled through other bodies it does not control.
Tory committee member Matt Hancock (West Suffolk) said: ''It is clear that over the past 10 years there has not been a consistent plan to tackle climate change
''Given the priority that everyone attaches to this, it is critical that the Government turns that around.''
A ''greater sense of urgency and purpose'' is needed at the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) to help meet targets agreed while Labour were in power, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) said.
Britain signed up to a legally binding European Union target to supply 15 per cent of all energy from renewable sources by 2020 when Mr Miliband, now Labour leader, was in charge of the department.
Margaret Hodge, the Labour MP and PAC chairwoman, said progress on renewable energy targets had been ''unacceptably slow'' over the last decade, highlighting that the proportion of the UK's electricity from renewables rose from 2.7 per cent in 2000 to just 6.7 per cent last year.
This is ''well short'' of a 10 per cent target set for 2010 but which will not be delivered until 2012.
That raised doubts about the UK's ability to hit the 2020 EU target, she said, while longer term carbon reduction goals were also in doubt.
''New, and substantially more demanding, targets are now in place,'' Ms Hodge said.
''The department will have to have a greater sense of urgency and purpose if it is to achieve the dramatic increase in renewable energy supplies needed to meet them.
''We are concerned that the department agreed to the legally binding EU target to supply 15% of the UK's energy from renewable sources by 2020 without clear plans, targets for each renewable energy technology, estimates of funding required or understanding how the rate at which planning applications for onshore wind turbines were being rejected might affect progress.
''As for meeting the longer term 2050 target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80%, the department has yet to set out the timescale against which innovations in renewable energy technology will be required.''
The report also found Decc does not know whether spending on renewable energy has achieved value for money, is taking too long to review subsidy rates and lacks a clear strategy for reducing carbon emissions.
More than £180 million set aside to support renewable energy technologies was left unspent – described as a ''wasted opportunity – and Decc does not control swathes of funding despite being responsible for meeting targets, the MPs said as they proposed a series of recommendations.
The MPs said Decc was relying on a ''massive growth'' in wind power and needs to take account of a 40 per cent attrition rate at the planning stage.
A renewable energy strategy was only published last year and work on a detailed delivery plan did not begin until January 2010, with publication not due until April next year.
The lack of a ''coherent plan'' meant the department ''does not know whether value for money has been achieved from previous spending on renewable energy technologies''.
The committee called on Decc to be more flexible with its review of subsidy rates, saying: ''The department will need to act more quickly in response to changing circumstances, which may require it to move away from rigid review timetables that could result in delayed investment or increased costs for the bill payers who fund the subsidies.''
And it urged the department, now led by Lib Dem Secretary of State Chris Huhne, to build up a clearer picture of what funding has been channelled through other bodies it does not control.
Tory committee member Matt Hancock (West Suffolk) said: ''It is clear that over the past 10 years there has not been a consistent plan to tackle climate change
''Given the priority that everyone attaches to this, it is critical that the Government turns that around.''
US energy secretary warns of 'Sputnik moment' in green technology race
Steven Chu says US must invest urgently in research and innovation to keep pace with China and other countries
Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent guardian.co.uk, Monday 29 November 2010 21.15 GMT
The United States faces a "Sputnik moment" in the global clean energy race and risks falling far behind advances by China and other countries, the US energy secretary, Steven Chu, warned today.
Hours before the opening of the United Nations climate summit in Cancún, Chu said that the US urgently needed to invest in research and innovation – much as it responded to the Soviet Union's launch of the world's first space satellite in 1957 – if it wanted to remain a leader of innovation.
"We face a choice today. Are we going to continue America's innovation leadership or are we going to fall behind?" Chu said in a speech to the National Press Club in Washington.
Chu, a Nobel prize winner in physics, said his own career had been shaped by the orbit of that first space satellite. But, he said, over the last 15 years the US had steadily been losing ground to China and India in research and hi-tech manufacturing.
For the first time last year, the majority of US patents were awarded to inventors based outside America.
Meanwhile, China had emerged as the world's largest producer of wind and solar power, and was breaking ground on 30 new nuclear reactors. It now has the fastest high-speed trains in operation, with running speeds of 220mph.
Gao Guangsheng, a senior Chinese official for climate change policy, told a conference in California this month that China was gearing up for even bigger investment in clean energy technology in its next five-year plan.
Gao went on to tell the conference, which was hosted by California's governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, that China had reached its goal for wind power 10 years ahead of schedule.
"We set up a concrete conception of low carbon development," he said. But he doubted America could profit from China's example: "I am afraid China's experience of green development may not be useful for the United States because of different domestic situations."
Chu, however, in his speech today said the US could recapture its leadership position with investment in research and incentives for clean energy manufacturing.
"America still has the opportunity to lead in a world that essentially needs a new industrial revolution," he said. "But time is running out."
In his two years as energy secretary, Chu has served as Barack Obama's top salesman for clean energy technology, directing some $80bn (£51.3bn) of last year's economic recovery package to investment in advanced batteries, plug-in cars, and the smart grid.
He also touted the government's efforts to build research hubs for clean technology. "What I am trying to tell the American public is that this is an economic opportunity," he said. His comments echoed those of David Cameron at the weekend. Writing in the Observer, Cameron said: "I passionately believe that by recasting the argument for action on climate change away from the language of threats and punishments and into positive, profit-making terms, we can have a much wider impact."
Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent guardian.co.uk, Monday 29 November 2010 21.15 GMT
The United States faces a "Sputnik moment" in the global clean energy race and risks falling far behind advances by China and other countries, the US energy secretary, Steven Chu, warned today.
Hours before the opening of the United Nations climate summit in Cancún, Chu said that the US urgently needed to invest in research and innovation – much as it responded to the Soviet Union's launch of the world's first space satellite in 1957 – if it wanted to remain a leader of innovation.
"We face a choice today. Are we going to continue America's innovation leadership or are we going to fall behind?" Chu said in a speech to the National Press Club in Washington.
Chu, a Nobel prize winner in physics, said his own career had been shaped by the orbit of that first space satellite. But, he said, over the last 15 years the US had steadily been losing ground to China and India in research and hi-tech manufacturing.
For the first time last year, the majority of US patents were awarded to inventors based outside America.
Meanwhile, China had emerged as the world's largest producer of wind and solar power, and was breaking ground on 30 new nuclear reactors. It now has the fastest high-speed trains in operation, with running speeds of 220mph.
Gao Guangsheng, a senior Chinese official for climate change policy, told a conference in California this month that China was gearing up for even bigger investment in clean energy technology in its next five-year plan.
Gao went on to tell the conference, which was hosted by California's governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, that China had reached its goal for wind power 10 years ahead of schedule.
"We set up a concrete conception of low carbon development," he said. But he doubted America could profit from China's example: "I am afraid China's experience of green development may not be useful for the United States because of different domestic situations."
Chu, however, in his speech today said the US could recapture its leadership position with investment in research and incentives for clean energy manufacturing.
"America still has the opportunity to lead in a world that essentially needs a new industrial revolution," he said. "But time is running out."
In his two years as energy secretary, Chu has served as Barack Obama's top salesman for clean energy technology, directing some $80bn (£51.3bn) of last year's economic recovery package to investment in advanced batteries, plug-in cars, and the smart grid.
He also touted the government's efforts to build research hubs for clean technology. "What I am trying to tell the American public is that this is an economic opportunity," he said. His comments echoed those of David Cameron at the weekend. Writing in the Observer, Cameron said: "I passionately believe that by recasting the argument for action on climate change away from the language of threats and punishments and into positive, profit-making terms, we can have a much wider impact."
Climate talks: We must not allow Cancun to turn into Can'tCun
Rich, industrialised countries have warned us to keep our expectations low, but we will insist that they aim higher, says Bolivia's UN ambassador Pablo Solon
Pablo Solon
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 30 November 2010 08.00 GMT
As climate talks start this week in Cancun, the common refrain that pervades the media and some negotiators is of "low expectations." I wonder whose expectations they are talking about. Do they think the one million people in the Bolivian city El Alto, who face increasingly chronic water shortages from the disappearance of glaciers, have low expectations? Do they think Pacific islanders whose homelands will soon disappear beneath the rising sea have low expectations? I believe that the majority of humanity demands and has high expectations that our political leaders should act to stop runaway climate change.
The reality is that the talk of "low expectations" is a ploy by a small group of industrialised countries to obscure their obligations to act. They are playing politics with the planet's future. If the Cancun talks set sail with no wind, then no-one will be angered when they stall. Sadly, rather than express moral outrage, much of the media and even some environmental organisations have subscribed to this cynicism of the powerful. Last year we had Hopenhagen and worldwide public outrage when the richest nations failed to act. This year will it be Can'tCun and a whimper?
Visible evidence of climate change is all around us.It can be found almost daily on the TV screens of people in rich countries – Pakistan's floods, Russia's heatwave, the unprecedented Arctic snow melt – in Bolivia, we are struggling to cope everyday with limited resources and ever more unstable weather. This year a drought throughout Bolivia meant we had to provide emergency food aid to hundreds of thousands of people. As we see our high Andean mountains, revered as apus or spirits by our indigenous peoples, lose their white peaks, we feel a visceral loss of our culture and our history.
Every year we fail to act will only worsen an already serious crisis – and mean any measures we have to take must be even more radical. Yet in looking at how to break the logjam in Cancun, one constantly comes up against the US. Not only does the US have the largest historical responsibility for carbon emissions, its political leaders are also the least prepared to act. While developing countries like China are imposing electricity blackouts to meet climate targets, many in the US are still debating whether climate change exists.
Unfortunately the US responsibility goes further than just inaction; it effectively sabotaged international progress on climate change. At Copenhagen and in the year since, the US has been the prime instigator behind attempts to end the Kyoto Protocol, the only binding mechanism on climate change. Instead they harangue, bully, and insist that any climate negotiations must be based on the non-binding Copenhagen Accord which would take us backwards in the fight against climate change. Analysis by the UN of the pledges made so far under the Copenhagen Accord show that temperatures would rise by four degrees Celsius – a level that many scientists consider disastrous for human life and our ecosystems. Countries like mine that have refused to accept this death wish have had our climate funding withdrawn by the US.
It is important to remember that we have been in a similar situation before. In the negotiations for the Kyoto Protocol in the 1990s, the EU proposed relatively ambitious targets of 15% emissions reductions by 2010, and argued rightly then that domestic action should be the main means of achieving emissions targets. The US at first opposed any targets or timetables, then pushed for lowering overall targets for developed countries to 5% cuts by 2012, and insisted on allowing fraudulent carbon trading mechanisms to meet the targets. Their bullying prevailed, but it was all for nought, as the US Senate failed to ratify the Protocol and in 2001 President Bush formally withdrew. The rest of the world bent over backwards to involve the US, and even then they failed to act.
We can't allow this to happen again. It is wrong for a small handful of US Senators to hold the rest of humanity hostage. If the US cannot do what is right, it must step aside. Meanwhile, developed country blocks, such as the EU, must stop hiding behind US intransigence. They must commit urgently to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 50% before 2017.
Earlier this year, Bolivia held a Peoples' Summit on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, which brought together more than 30,000 people from 140 countries to advance effective proposals on climate change in the wake of the Copenhagen fiasco. It was inspiring because of the passion and commitment of the delegates, and because it was completely focused on tackling climate change and its root causes. Too often, subjected to intense lobbying by big corporations, the UN conferences on climate change are more preoccupied with inventing new market mechanisms to make money rather than stopping climate change. Against these powerful interests, Bolivia believes the only way forward for saving Mother Earth and its people is mass popular pressure. We must insist to our political leaders that we have the highest expectations from Cancun, because nothing less than the future of our grandchildren and our planet depends on it.
• Pablo Solon is the Bolivian ambassador to the UN
Pablo Solon
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 30 November 2010 08.00 GMT
As climate talks start this week in Cancun, the common refrain that pervades the media and some negotiators is of "low expectations." I wonder whose expectations they are talking about. Do they think the one million people in the Bolivian city El Alto, who face increasingly chronic water shortages from the disappearance of glaciers, have low expectations? Do they think Pacific islanders whose homelands will soon disappear beneath the rising sea have low expectations? I believe that the majority of humanity demands and has high expectations that our political leaders should act to stop runaway climate change.
The reality is that the talk of "low expectations" is a ploy by a small group of industrialised countries to obscure their obligations to act. They are playing politics with the planet's future. If the Cancun talks set sail with no wind, then no-one will be angered when they stall. Sadly, rather than express moral outrage, much of the media and even some environmental organisations have subscribed to this cynicism of the powerful. Last year we had Hopenhagen and worldwide public outrage when the richest nations failed to act. This year will it be Can'tCun and a whimper?
Visible evidence of climate change is all around us.It can be found almost daily on the TV screens of people in rich countries – Pakistan's floods, Russia's heatwave, the unprecedented Arctic snow melt – in Bolivia, we are struggling to cope everyday with limited resources and ever more unstable weather. This year a drought throughout Bolivia meant we had to provide emergency food aid to hundreds of thousands of people. As we see our high Andean mountains, revered as apus or spirits by our indigenous peoples, lose their white peaks, we feel a visceral loss of our culture and our history.
Every year we fail to act will only worsen an already serious crisis – and mean any measures we have to take must be even more radical. Yet in looking at how to break the logjam in Cancun, one constantly comes up against the US. Not only does the US have the largest historical responsibility for carbon emissions, its political leaders are also the least prepared to act. While developing countries like China are imposing electricity blackouts to meet climate targets, many in the US are still debating whether climate change exists.
Unfortunately the US responsibility goes further than just inaction; it effectively sabotaged international progress on climate change. At Copenhagen and in the year since, the US has been the prime instigator behind attempts to end the Kyoto Protocol, the only binding mechanism on climate change. Instead they harangue, bully, and insist that any climate negotiations must be based on the non-binding Copenhagen Accord which would take us backwards in the fight against climate change. Analysis by the UN of the pledges made so far under the Copenhagen Accord show that temperatures would rise by four degrees Celsius – a level that many scientists consider disastrous for human life and our ecosystems. Countries like mine that have refused to accept this death wish have had our climate funding withdrawn by the US.
It is important to remember that we have been in a similar situation before. In the negotiations for the Kyoto Protocol in the 1990s, the EU proposed relatively ambitious targets of 15% emissions reductions by 2010, and argued rightly then that domestic action should be the main means of achieving emissions targets. The US at first opposed any targets or timetables, then pushed for lowering overall targets for developed countries to 5% cuts by 2012, and insisted on allowing fraudulent carbon trading mechanisms to meet the targets. Their bullying prevailed, but it was all for nought, as the US Senate failed to ratify the Protocol and in 2001 President Bush formally withdrew. The rest of the world bent over backwards to involve the US, and even then they failed to act.
We can't allow this to happen again. It is wrong for a small handful of US Senators to hold the rest of humanity hostage. If the US cannot do what is right, it must step aside. Meanwhile, developed country blocks, such as the EU, must stop hiding behind US intransigence. They must commit urgently to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 50% before 2017.
Earlier this year, Bolivia held a Peoples' Summit on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, which brought together more than 30,000 people from 140 countries to advance effective proposals on climate change in the wake of the Copenhagen fiasco. It was inspiring because of the passion and commitment of the delegates, and because it was completely focused on tackling climate change and its root causes. Too often, subjected to intense lobbying by big corporations, the UN conferences on climate change are more preoccupied with inventing new market mechanisms to make money rather than stopping climate change. Against these powerful interests, Bolivia believes the only way forward for saving Mother Earth and its people is mass popular pressure. We must insist to our political leaders that we have the highest expectations from Cancun, because nothing less than the future of our grandchildren and our planet depends on it.
• Pablo Solon is the Bolivian ambassador to the UN
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
