The International Institute for Sustainable Development ()
presents
CLIMATE-L NEWS
ISSUE
10
Download PDF ~
Download Text
Editor's note: Welcome to the tenth issue of Climate-L News, compiled
by Richard Sherman. If you should
come across a news article or have a submission for the next issue, please
send it directly to Richard.
CLIMATE-L News is an exclusive publication of IISD for the
CLIMATE-L list
and should not be reposted or republished to other lists/websites without
the permission of IISD (you can write Kimo
for permission.) If you have been forwarded this issue and would like to
subscribe to
CLIMATE-L.
Funding for the production of
CLIMATE-L (part of the IISD Reporting Services annual program) has been
provided by The Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Government of
Canada (through CIDA), the United States (through USAID), the Swiss Agency
for Environment, Forests and Landscape (SAEFL), the United Kingdom (through
the Department for International Development - DFID), the European
Commission (DG-ENV), the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the
Government of Germany (through German Federal Ministry of Environment - BMU,
and the German Federal Ministry of Development Cooperation - BMZ). General
Support for the Bulletin during 2003 is provided by the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP), the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and
Environment of Finland, the Government of Australia, the Ministry of
Environment and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Sweden, the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs and Trade of New Zealand, the Ministries of Foreign Affairs
and Environment of Norway, Swan International, the Japanese Ministry of
Environment (through the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
IGES) the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (through the
Global Industrial and Social Progress Research Institute - GISPRI), and the
Ministry for Environment of Iceland. If you like CLIMATE-L News, please
thank them for their support.
Contents
1)
UGANDA TO NEGOTIATE FOR ENVIRONMENT, New Vision (Kampala),
March 7, 2003
2)
CHINA TO HOLD INT'L SYMPOSIUM ON CLIMATE CHANGE, Peoples
Daily, March 7, 2003
3)
ITALY, GERMANY FACE OFF OVER ENERGY TAXES AS EU FINANCE
MINISTERS MEET, AP, March 7, 2003
4)
EU, US SIGN HYDROGEN, NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH PACT, Reuters,
March 6, 2003
5)
FORESTERS PUSH CARBON CREDIT CASE, RNZ, March 6, 2003
6)
MUNICH RE DRAWS WORLD'S ATTENTION TO CLIMATE CHANGE RISKS,
Vanguard, March 05, 2003
7)
NZ GOVT TO BACK WIND FARMS WITH CARBON CREDITS, Planet Ark,
March 5, 2003
8)
EU MINISTERS URGE RUSSIA TO RATIFY CLIMATE PROTOCOL, ENS,
March 5, 2003
9)
KYOTO GIVES HOPE TO WIND POWER, ONE News, March 5, 2003
10)
RESEARCHERS HOPE TO ANTICIPATE EFFECTS OF GLOBAL WARMING,
Dallas Morning News, March 5, 2003
11)
WIND-POWER BODIES SAY 2002 GLOBAL USE GREW 28 PCT, Planet Ark,
March 5, 2003
12)
NUCLEAR PROMISE SOURS BUT JAPAN'S CHOICES LIMITED, Planet Ark,
March 4, 2003
13)
ONTARIO POWER AND SIEMENS WESTINGHOUSE TO INSTALL WORLD'S
LARGEST SOLID OXIDE FUEL CELL, Fuel Cell Today, March 4, 2003
14)
JAPAN, RUSSIA EYE PACT OVER CO2 EMISSIONS REDUCTION, Kyodo
News, March 3, 2003
15)
EUROPE AT THE FOREFRONT OF ARTIC POLAR RESEARCH, CORDIS, March 3, 2003
16)
ANTARCTIC TIME CAPSULES REVEAL CLIMATE SECRETS FROM 800,000BC,
Independent, March 3, 2003
17)
UK MAY HAVE TROUBLE REACHING KYOTO TARGET, CNSNews.com, March 3, 2003
18)
INTERVIEW: AUSTRALIAN BUSINESSES GRAPPLE WITH KYOTO, Dow Jones Newswires,
March 3, 2003
19)
ARCTIC DATA CAST DOUBT ON CLIMATE CHANGE THEORY, Canadian Press, March 2,
2003
20)
REPUBLICANS AIM FOR SOFTER, GREENER ENVIRONMENTAL TALK, The New York
Times, March 2, 2003
21)
GOVT TO SET UP CO2 CREDIT FINANCE FUND, Daily Yomiuri, March
2, 2003
22)
BUSINESS SHIFTS TACK ON KYOTO, The Age, March 1, 2003
23)
POTENTIAL SAVINGS IN ENERGY USE, The Star, March 1, 2003
24)
RUSSIAN STALLING COULD KILL KYOTO CONSENSUS, Globe and Mail, March 1,
2003
25)
RESEARCH PANEL CRITICIZES US GOVERNMENT'S CLIMATE PLAN, Voice of America,
March 1, 2003
26)
BUSH CLIMATE CHANGE PLAN A SHAMBLES, SAY SCIENTISTS, SRI Media, March 1st
2003
27)
DJERBA TO HOST WTO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE, Tunisia Online (Tunis), March
1, 2003
28)
LIGNITE MINE PLAN SLAMMED BY GREEN BODY, Belfast Telegraph,
February 28, 2003
29)
EMISSION CREDITS TO CURB DENMARK'S CO2 POLLUTION, Planet Ark, February 28,
2003
30)
BILL TAKES AIM AT GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, Puget Sound Business Journal,
February 28, 2003
31)
REPUBLICAN CLEAR SKIES ARE TOXIC CLOUDS TO DEMOCRATS, ENS,
February 28, 2003
32)
U.S. ANNOUNCES INTERNATIONAL FORUM TO ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE,
Washington File, February 28, 2003
33)
THE COST OF CLEAN AIR, Chicago Sun-times, February 28, 2003
34)
UK ENERGY POLICY COULD HURT BRITISH INDUSTRY-EIUG, Planet Ark,
February 28, 2003
35)
SUSTAINABLE ENERGY PROVIDES ECONOMIC BENEFITS, Edie weekly
summaries, February 28, 2003
36)
OFFSETTING GLOBAL WARMING, The New York Times, February 28,
2003
37)
ENERGY WHITE PAPER GOOD IN THEORY, BUT WHERE ARE THE
TARGETS? Edie weekly summaries, February 28, 2003
38)
POLLUTERS MAY BE SUED FOR FUTURE CLIMATE CHANGE, Daily
Telegraph, February 27, 2003
39)
WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCES MULTITRACK CLIMATE CHANGE INITIATIVES,
US Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific,
Affairs, February 27, 2003
40)
REPORT: EXTREME WEATHER ON THE RISE, LIKELY TO GET WORSE,
Associated Press, February 27, 2003
41)
RUSSIA URGED TO RESCUE KYOTO PACT, The Guardian, February 26,
2003
42)
DENMARK TO INVEST ABROAD TO MEET KYOTO CLIMATE OBLIGATIONS,
Space Daily, February 26, 2003
43)
METHANE ERUPTIONS COULD FUEL GLOBAL WARMING, ENS, February 26,
2003
44)
UK AND SWEDEN CALL ON EU TO FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE, EU Observer, February
25, 2003
45)
SHOW ME THE CARBON, Tidepool, February 25, 2003
46)
METI TO AUTHORIZE BIOMASS FUEL, The Japan Times, February 25,
2003
47)
CURBING CARBON DIOXIDE, New York Times, February 25, 2003
48)
CLIMATE CHANGE THREATENS BIODIVERSITY, Daily Times Monitor, February 24,
2003
49)
DROUGHT A SIGN WATER USE MUST CHANGE: LABOR, Liberal Daily, February 24,
2003
50)
FRANCE UPS GREENHOUSE GAS RESTRICTIONS, AFP, February 25, 2003
51)
SWISS URGED TO SHUN HIGH-EMISSION CARS, Swissinfo, February
24, 2003
52)
BLAIR URGES 60 PERCENT GLOBAL GREENHOUSE GAS CUTS, ENS,
February 24, 2003
53)
DOWNING STREET TO CHALLENGE BUSH ON GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS,
The Guardian, February 24, 2003
54)
PM: 'CONCERTED INTERNATIONAL EFFORT' NECESSARY TO FIGHT
CLIMATE CHANGE, Number 10, February 24, 2003
55)
CHARTS OPEN THE BOOK ON ARCTIC CLIMATE RIDDLE, Independent Online (South
Africa), February 23 2003
56)
COMPANIES IGNORE WEATHER WARNINGS AT THEIR PERIL, The Courier-Mail,
February 22, 2003
57)
WIND TURBINES A GOOD CASH CROP, Journal Pioneer, February 22,
2003
58)
EMISSIONS TRADING COULD BE COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE TO KYOTO, Edie
weekly summaries, February 21, 2003
59)
MOOSA WELCOMES THE LAUNCH OF ESKOM'S WIND ENERGY FARM, SA
Ministry of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, February 21, 2003
60)
GERMANY UNLIKELY TO MEET CO2 REDUCTION TARGETS DIW, Planet
Ark, February 21, 2003
61)
INVESTORS INSIST COMPANIES PREPARE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE, Edie weekly
summaries, February 21, 2003
62)
CLIMATE CHANGE SET TO IMPACT GLOBAL MARKETS REPORT, Planet
Ark, February 19, 2003
63)
EUROPE AHEAD OF U.S. IN RENEWABLE POWER, ENS, February 19,
2003
64)
CONSERVATION GROUP CALLS ON GOVT TO SIGN KYOTO PROTOCOL, Abc.net, February
17, 2003
65)
SIGNING THE KYOTO PROTOCOL IS NOT A SIMPLE TASK: BEATTIE, Abc.net,
February 17, 2003
66)
WE'RE BETTER OFF IN KYOTO: CARR, News.au.com, February 17, 2003
67)
SELLING SMOKE, Time, March 10, 2003
68)
THE GROWING RELIGIOUS MISSION TO PROTECT GOD'S CREATION by Jim
Motavalli, ENN, March 7, 2003
69)
RESTRUCTURING THE ENERGY ECONOMY by Lester Brown, The
Globalist, March 6, 2003
70)
TILTING AT 8000 WINDMILLS TO CUT EMISSIONS BY 10PC By Keith
Orchison, Canberra Sunday Times, March 6, 2003
71)
CLIMATE CHANGE FOR EUROPE'S UTILITIES, The McKinsey Quarterly,
March 5, 2003
72)
GLOBAL WARMING: THE
PERVERSION OF SCIENCE by Alan Caruba, Sierra Club,March 3, 2003
73)
EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON MARINE BIODIVERSITY, CO2 Science,
March 2003
74)
IS THE EUPHORIA OVER CDM UNWARRANTED? by Preety Bhandari,
Financial Express, February 24, 2003
75)
'CONCERTED
INTERNATIONAL EFFORT' NECESSARY TO FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE by Tony Blair,
Number 10, February 24, 2003
GENERAL NEWS
1) UGANDA TO NEGOTIATE FOR ENVIRONMENT
New Vision
(Kampala)
March 7, 2003
Internet:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200303070016.html
UGANDA will lead Africa in
international negotiations for the protection of the environment, the state
minister for environment, Kezimbira Miyingo, has said. He was launching the
Greater Horn of Africa Climate Forum in Entebbe on Tuesday. Miyingo said
there was an urgent need for Africa to address the threat of global warming
through the Kyoto Protocol. "When we meet as Africa we should lobby so that
we have the Kyoto Protocol to reduce green house gases," he said.
back to contents
2) CHINA TO HOLD INT'L SYMPOSIUM ON CLIMATE CHANGE
Peoples Daily
March 7, 2003
Internet:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200303/07/eng20030307_112858.shtml
The effects of a warming climate
on the world's ecology and sustainable development will be discussed in the
coming International Symposium on Climate Change (ISCC) scheduled in Beijing
from March 31 to April 4. With a theme of "Climate Change: Science and
Sustainable Development", the symposium will not only cover scientific
problems about climate change, but also involve related political, economic,
environmental and diplomatic topics.
According to sources with the
China Meteorological Administration, the symposium aims to meet the pressing
demands for scientific research on global climate change. In addition, it
will serve as an impetus to drive China's exchanges and cooperation with
other countries in climate change. Global warming of the past century has
increasingly influenced economic construction, social development and
people's lives. It is also closely connected with the security of water,
food and energy resources as well as human health. As the largest
developing country, China has taken workable measures to alleviate the
harmful impact of climate change and worked out general strategies to solve
related problems. Preparations for the international symposium are going on
well, already attracting over 400 participants both at home and abroad.
The ISCC will be jointly held by
the State Development Planning Commission, Ministry of Science and
Technology, Ministry of Education, State Natural Science Fund Committee,
China Association for Science and Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
China Meteorological Administration and World Meteorological Organization.
back to contents
3) ITALY, GERMANY FACE OFF OVER ENERGY TAXES AS EU FINANCE
MINISTERS MEET
AP
March 7, 2003
Internet:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030307/ap_wo_en_ge/eu_fin_eu_finance_1
BRUSSELS, Belgium - Italy and
Germany faced off again over energy taxes intended to help Europe meet its
targets under the Kyoto protocol on climate change, as European Union
finance ministers took up the long-debated package again Friday. Ahead of
the meeting, the EU's head office said it would launch disciplinary
procedures against France for breaching the limit on budget deficits for
countries using the euro. But with the economy deteriorating around Europe,
ministers seemed to be more tolerant of French insistence on tax cuts to
stimulate growth, even if it meant a little more red ink in the short run.
"We're living in difficult times
so we should show some understanding for each other," said Henri Grethen,
Luxembourg's economy minister. French Finance Minister Francis Mer pledged
to get his budget in line next year, and said the prospects for economic
growth would become clearer once the Iraqi crisis had been resolved. "After
the Iraqi events, the sky will be clearer," he told RTL radio Friday. The
6-year-old energy tax package is intended to raise minimum levels of tax on
energy across the 15-nation EU to encourage conservation and reduce
pollution.
EU finance ministers tried last
month to pass it, but failed when Italy insisted on an "extended derogation"
to apply a lower tax rate on diesel fuel to aid its truckers. It claims its
truckers are cut off by the periodic closing of Alpine tunnels and must
drive longer distances to deliver goods. France also is seeking an extension
of the lower rates first adopted in response to protests over soaring fuel
prices in late 2000, but only for two more years. Germany, where the Greens
are in government, has refused to accept the Italian demand, blocking
passage of the entire package since tax measures require unanimity. EU
officials said little had changed.Chances for an agreement were
"unfortunately rather slim," said Jonathan Todd, a spokesman for EU Internal
Market Commissioner Frits Bolkestein.
Complicating the picture, EU
diplomats said, was Italy's suggestion that it would not sign off on final
approval for a separate savings tax deal, which won preliminary agreement
last month, unless it gets concessions on diesel. The French budget deficit
was discussed at a meeting of the 12 euro-zone finance ministers Thursday
night. Mer said that France's 2003 budget deficit will be 3.4 percent of
gross domestic product, breaking the E.U.'s 3 percent limit. This comes
after the French deficit already came slightly above the threshold last
year. EU Monetary Affairs Commissioner Pedro Solbes said France will have
one year to bring its deficit below the limit or face the possibility of
hefty fines, which could theoretically reach 0.5 percent of GDP. Germany,
which also broke the 3 percent limit last year and could do so again this
year, will also have until 2004 to get its fiscal house in order. But unlike
Berlin, which is working hard to respect the limit this year through
austerity measures, Paris has been pushing ahead with promised tax cuts to
stimulate growth. "The planned tax cuts in the 2003 budget will be carried
out," Mer told RTL radio. But he also said the government would impose
stricter controls on public spending and make savings to cut the deficit to
below 3 percent next year.
back to contents
4) EU, US SIGN HYDROGEN, NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH PACT
Reuters
March 6, 2003
Internet:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L06593959
BRUSSELS, March 6 (Reuters) -
The United States and the European Union sought to find common ground over
global warming on Thursday by signing a pact to cooperate on research on new
and potentially cleaner forms of power generation. The agreement aims to
link research projects on both sides of the Atlantic on hydrogen, nuclear
fission and fusion and the removal of carbon dioxide -- the main gas blamed
for climate change -- from the atmosphere. U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer
Abraham, who signed the pact at the offices of EU Research Commissioner
Philippe Busquin, said technology was the only way to tackle global warming.
"You can't accomplish any of these (climate change) goals...unless you
improve your technology or dramatically reduce your technology. I think
everybody across the board thinks that technology is the key," he told
reporters.
The United States infuriated the
EU in 2001 when it pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol, the global treaty which
requires developed countries to cut the greenhouse gas emissions blamed for
trapping heat in the atmosphere and causing climate change. President
George W. Bush said it would harm the economy of his country, which alone
produces one quarter of global man-made greenhouse emissions. The EU
believes it can reduce its emissions at acceptable cost and plans to stick
with Kyoto. The research pact does not specify how much money each side
would spend, but opens the way for joint projects on thorny issues like
nuclear safety and waste disposal. Nuclear power, although loathed by the
main environmental groups, is seen by some politicians as an attractive
alternative to fossil fuels as it does not emit carbon dioxide and does not
require supply from unstable regions like the Middle East. Both the EU and
the United States have expressed ambitions to move to a "hydrogen economy"
where the gas is used in fuel cells to create electricity that one day could
replace oil as the main propellant for cars.
back to contents
5) FORESTERS PUSH CARBON CREDIT CASE
RNZ
March 6,2003
Internet:
http://onebusiness.nzoom.com/onebusiness_detail/0,1245,172909-3-397,00.html
Farm foresters are hoping a
government wind farming initiative will reinforce their case for special
consideration over green-house gas emissions. The government has agreed to
allocate carbon credits, issued under the Kyoto Protocol, to help offset the
cost of two new wind farming ventures. It is proposing to issue promissory
notes to TrustPower, for extending its Tararua wind farm and to Meridian,
which is also planning a wind farm. Energy Minister Pete Hodgson says
electricity from the wind farms would reduce the need for gas or coal-fired
generation, which produces carbon dioxide, a green-house gas. Farm
foresters want to be able to claim carbon credits from their woodlots, to
offset the cost of methane emissions from lifestock. The Forest Industry
Associations climate change spokesman Mike Halliday thinks the Governments
move on wind-farming backs up its case. Halliday says farm foresters put
their case to the Government for carbon credit recognition early last month,
but have not heard back yet.
back to contents
6) MUNICH RE DRAWS WORLDS ATTENTION TO CLIMATE CHANGE RISKS
Vanguard
March 05, 2003
Internet:
http://www.vanguardngr.com/articles/2002/business/b105032003.html
WORLD's leading reinsurer,
Munich Re of Germany will be partnering with Deutsche Museum in an
exhibition tagged 'Climate: The experiment with planet Earth," to draw
mankind's attention to the dangers faced by humans as well as property in
the unfolding climatic changes. The exhibition which will be staged in
Munich until June 15 would thereafter go on tour. "Its aim is to draw
attention to the subject of climate change and to underline the significance
of this phenomena, which habours considerable risk for human life and
property," the reinsurer stated in a release. After nearly three decades of
research into global changes in the earth's environment and climate, Munich
Re's head of Geo Risks Research Department, Dr. Gerhard Berz said
"Catastrophe loses are mostly caused by extreme weather events," adding that
the case applied to 2002 as well.
The research which focuses on
the effects of weather changes on the insurance industry and loss prevention
had also revealed that "buildings and infrastructure are usually not
sufficiently designed to cope with the high strains of extreme weather
events," Berz said. According to him, "evidence points to critical extreme
wind speeds and precipitation being exceeded with increasing frequency; so
that for this reason alone there will inevitably be a stark increase in the
loss burdens as well." Compared with 1998 regarded as the warmest year
since the temperature reading began, 2002 has also maintained the unbroken
record of global warming, the risk expert stated.
The concentration of events and
its intensity throughout the earth also confirms the reinsurer's fears that
there may not be an end in sight to the catastrophes describing as
"disastrous and alarming" the severe earthquakes that occurred in
Afghanistan killing more than 2000 people in the Hindu Kush mountains.
The report also cited the
earthquake in central Italy that left 26 school children dead. The
strongest earthquake of the past year happened in Alaska, United States late
last year and is said to have aroused deep concern among experts. "It
magnitude reached the unusual reading of 7.9 on the Richter Scale" the
Munich Re report stated, adding that extensive loses were averted because
the epicentral area was in scarcely populated region.
Altogether, there were "about 70
loss producing earthquakes, generating economic losses of about US$1bn , out
of which only US$11 million was insured. Nevertheless, the year started
with increased natural catastrophes, particularly earthquakes. There has
been reported cases of flood and technological disaster, foremost among them
is plane crashes. Predictably, insurance industry say they are excluding
some items in some covers while re-wording others to remove liabilities in
areas that expertise in terms of loss forecast is difficult.
back to contents
7) NZ GOVT TO BACK WIND FARMS WITH CARBON CREDITS
Planet Ark
March 5, 2003
Internet:
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/20032/story.htm
WELLINGTON - The New Zealand
government said yesterday it will support the development of two proposed
wind farms by giving them Kyoto Protocol climate change credits for the
clean energy they will produce. The two wind farm projects - a 36 megawatt
(MW) extension of TrustPower's (TPW.NZ) Tararua wind farm and a 40-80 MW
project proposed by state-owned Meridian Energy - will be allocated Kyoto
Protocol "carbon credits". "Electricity from these wind farms would avoid
some gas or coal-fired generation, with its associated greenhouse gas
emissions," Energy Minister Pete Hodgson said. "That is clearly in New
Zealand's interests but the initial costs mean that the wind farms would
probably not proceed without the credits the government is offering." New
Zealand ratified the Kyoto accord on global warming last December.
TrustPower said it had received
consents to enlarge its wind farm more than two years ago but it had not
been economically viable to begin the expansion. "This will, I think, tip
the balance between viability and the project stagnating," a spokesman said,
adding that the project was expected to be completed within two years. A
Meridian spokesman said several North Island sites were being investigated
for its proposed wind farm, expected to be commissioned in 2005. He
declined to comment on the value of the carbon credits, saying it was
commercially sensitive. New Zealand generates around 63 percent of its
electricity needs from hydro power stations, with gas providing around 22
percent, geothermal around seven percent and coal about four percent.
Under the deal, promissory notes
for Kyoto Protocol emission units will be allocated to the power companies
depending on the final amount of generation from the wind farms. Hodgson
said the wind farms could deliver emission reductions of up to one million
tonnes of carbon dioxide over the Protocol's first commitment period
2008-2012. It has been previously estimated that the global price of carbon
is between NZ$10 and NZ$20 per tonne. The Kyoto pact aims to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions from the developed world, which account for the
overwhelming bulk of the gases, by 2012 to around five percent below 1990
levels. Around 100 countries have ratified the controversial protocol but
New Zealand's major trading partners Australia and the United States have
remained outside the agreement. The New Zealand government has announced
plans for a carbon tax some time after 2007 which will raise energy prices
between six and 19 percent. New Zealand produces between 70 and 90 million
tonnes of carbon dioxide a year but expects to earn as much as NZ$1.4
billion ($784 million) from carbon sink credits generated by its big
commercial forests.
back to contents
8) EU MINISTERS URGE RUSSIA TO RATIFY CLIMATE PROTOCOL
ENS
March 5, 2003
Internet:
http://ens-news.com/ens/mar2003/2003-03-05-01.asp
MOSCOW, Russia, March 5, 2003 (ENS)
Three top level European environment officials arrived in Moscow today for
a three day attempt to persuade Russia to complete ratification of the Kyoto
Protocol, and to discuss a strengthening of cooperation in the fight against
climate change. The European Union member states have all ratified the
climate treaty, and now Russias ratification is necessary to enable the
protocol to enter into force. EU Environment Commissioner Margot Wallstrom,
together with environment ministers Altero Matteoli of Italy and Vasso
Papandreou of Greece, which currently occupies the six month EU Presidency,
are in Moscow through Friday.
Their schedule includes meetings
with the Ministry for Economic Development and Trade, Energy Minister Igor
Yusufov, representatives of the Duma, and nongovernmental organizations.
This visit to Russia is the latest initiative in the European Unions
ongoing efforts to secure the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol and
effective multilateral action to combat climate change. In February 2002,
Yusufov announced Russias intention to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. He
stressed that Russia is making maximum efforts to reduce the level of
greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. Under the protocol, an
addition to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 37
industrialized nations have agreed to cut their emissions of six greenhouse
gases linked to global warming. Thirty-nine countries were to have been
governed by the original agreement signed in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997,
but the Bush administration in March 2001 said that the United States would
not ratify the protocol, and Australia has followed suit. The protocol will
not take effect until it is ratified by 55 percent of the nations
responsible for at least 55 percent of the total carbon dioxide emissions in
1990.
Commissioner Wallstrom said,
The world is waiting for Russia to demonstrate that it is ready and willing
to become a major player in the multilateral efforts to combat climate
change. I trust that Russia will live up to its responsibilities and
political commitments. The EU is looking forward to cooperating even closer
with Russia to fight this global challenge. As of February 6, the latest
date for which figures are available, 105 countries responsible for 43.9
percent of the carbon dioxide emissions in 1990 have ratified or acceded to
the Kyoto Protocol. Ratification by Russia is essential, as Russia is
responsible for 17.4 percent of the 1990 emissions. Russian ratification
would push the total percentage of the greenhouse gas over the 55 percent
that triggers the protocols entry into force.
The countries that ratify the
agreement must reduce emissions of carbon dioxide to an average of 5.2
percent below 1990 levels during the five year period 2008 to 2012. But the
Russian Federation would not have to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions
below 1990 levels. The terms of the protocol allow Russian emissions to
remain at 100 percent of 1990 levels. Environment Minister Papandreou said,
Russia has the honor of running the anchor leg of this relay race for
ratification. We hope that Russia will cross the finish line so that the
applause from around the world starts. All of us, said Papandreou, 15
Member States in the EU as well as all the acceding countries who have
already ratified it view the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol as an
important step in addressing climate change and starting to reduce its
impacts. We believe that the Kyoto Protocol is good for Russia, and most
importantly it is good for the world. Minister Matteoli observed, The
ratification of the protocol will allow Russia to create an important
channel for technological cooperation with Europe in the energy sector and
in forest management.
The European environment
officials will attempt to persuade Russia to ratify by emphasizing the
economic advantages the country would gain by ratification such as
participation in the so-called flexible mechanisms that the protocol
permits. The international emissions trading regime established by the
Kyoto Protocol allows industrialized countries to buy and sell emissions
credits amongst themselves. They will also be able to acquire emission
reduction units by financing projects reducing greenhouse gas emissions in
other developed countries through a mechanism under the protocol known as
Joint Implementation. By creating a framework for emissions trading, Russia
will be able to monetize the surplus of emission rights that it is likely to
have given that its emissions in the first commitment period under the
protocol 2008 through 2012 will probably be lower than its emissions
stabilization target under the protocol, the European officials say.
Russian companies will have
access to Joint Implementation projects that could be developed with
partners from other developed countries. Through these projects, Russian
companies will have access to new technologies and management systems.
Russia will benefit from measures implemented worldwide to fight climate
change, the European officials say, measures that will diminish the adverse
effects that climate change already has had, and will have, on Russia. The
thawing of permafrost in particular, which is foreseen to be one of the
effects of climate change in Russia, carries with it considerable economic
costs in terms of damage to infrastructure such as buildings and railways.
If climate change is reduced, through strict control of emissions, costs for
Russia will be lessened. The European environment officials say that
Russias concerns such as taking into account the carbon absorption of its
forests and conditions for access to the Kyoto flexible mechanisms have
been taken into consideration throughout the international climate change
negotiations, and Russian ratification will be an important recognition of
the spirit of compromise in which the negotiations took place.
See Also:
E.U. officials head for Moscow
to urge action on ratifying Kyoto accord, ENN, March 6, 2003
http://www.enn.com/news/2003-03-06/s_3212.asp
back to contents
9) KYOTO GIVES HOPE TO WIND POWER
ONE News
March 5, 2003
Internet:
http://onenews.nzoom.com/onenews_detail/0,1227,172903-1-7,00.html
The first significant impact of
New Zealand signing the Kyoto protocol is being felt with two new wind farms
coming a step closer to producing electricity. The government has made its
first use of the tradeable carbon credits under the Kyoto Protocol, giving
them to Meridian Energy and TrustPower in recognition of the benefits of
their proposed wind farms. Carbon trading allows a heavily-polluting
country to offset some of its carbon dioxide emissions so it can still meet
the obligations it signed up to under the Kyoto Protocol.
The power companies say the
projects would not be economically viable if it was not for the credits
which will eventually be sold on the international market.
The wind farms will add up to
115 megawatts of electricity to New Zealand's generating capacity - enough
to supply roughly 50,000 homes. They will treble the current amount of
electricity generated by wind turbines and could start producing power by
late next year. The Energy Minister Pete Hodgson says the allocation of
carbon credits to TrustPower and Meridian is a significant milestone,
because it is the first time it has happened since the government ratified
the Kyoto Protocol on climate change. It is difficult to put a dollar value
on the tradeable credits being given to the power companies because an
international market is yet to be established, as other Kyoto nations wait
for Russia to ratify the agreement. But best estimates involve an
international price of around $US5 per tonne of CO2 emissions with the wind
farms in line for credits of up to one million tonnes.
A potential buyer of the credits
could be a company that needs to mitigate large amounts of carbon dioxide
pollution such as an oil or coal fired power station in Japan. TrustPower
spokesperson Graeme Purches says the credits help the company clear a
financial hurdle in the way of the projects. Graeme Purches says the 55 new
turbines will be added to the 48 turbines at TrustPower's existing Tararua
Windfarm near Palmerston North for which it already has resource consent.
However, Meridian is still to gain consent for its windfarm and will not yet
reveal its location, believed to also be in the North Island. Green Party
co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons says the two power companies are boosting
their reputation for being clean power producers by using renewable energy.
But Fitzsimons believes the government could be doing more to encourage such
activities.
But the Energy Minister Pete
Hodgson says the government has already announced disincentives for dirty
energy because under the Kyoto protocol there will be emission charges on
coal, gas and petrol from 2008.
Hodgson says further tradeable
carbon credits will be allocated by the government later this year when it
invites all sectors of the economy to put in bids. But in the short term,
the new windfarms will not be enough to resolve Hodgson's concerns about
power shortages expected this winter due to low hydro-lake levels. He says
there will be increased use of coal and oil fired power stations - and
consequently more CO2 emissions.
back to contents
10) RESEARCHERS HOPE TO ANTICIPATE EFFECTS OF GLOBAL
WARMING
Dallas
Morning News
March 5, 2003
Internet:
http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/5320540.htm
(KRT) - Global warming may sound
like a good idea after recent winter storms across the nation. But as
temperatures rise over the next century, such freakish weather events could
actually become more common, scientists say. The main question is how
common. What climate will be like over the next 100 years depends on how
people act now to stop the buildup of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere,
researchers reported last month. At a meeting in Denver of the American
Association for the Advancement of Science, two top climate specialists
sketched a future that ranged from grim to disastrous. One scientist argued
that humans may have already disrupted climate enough to qualify as
"dangerous interference."
The other, who is chairman of
the National Science Board that advises President Bush, said the United
States lags behind other countries - notably Japan - in its efforts to study
future climate and its effects on society. Last week, the National Academy
of Sciences released a report criticizing the Bush administration's draft
plan for studying climate change. Climate researchers don't yet know how
global warming will affect the United States - and the rest of the planet -
over the next century. But now is the time, they say, to figure out how
wacky the weather might get. "The further we move into unknown territory,
the more likely it is that things we haven't anticipated are going to
happen," said Tom Wigley, a climate expert at the National Center for
Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo.
Scientists know this much:
Temperatures worldwide have risen an average of nearly 1.3 degrees
Fahrenheit since the 1870s. Two-thirds of that increase has occurred during
the past 25 years. Most experts now agree that people are having a
discernible effect on climate. Through the burning of fossil fuels and other
industrial activities, humans are pumping out more heat-trapping gases than
nature does. Since 1959, for instance, scientists have monitored how the
concentration of one of those gases - carbon dioxide - has crept from 316
parts per million in the air to 371 parts per million. In preindustrial
times, that number is thought to have stood at about 280 parts per million.
Over the next century, carbon dioxide concentrations could rise to 500 parts
per million or even above 1,000 parts per million, Wigley said. "We're
talking four times what it was," he said at the Denver meeting.
And all that carbon dioxide will
conspire to raise global temperatures, he said. Sea level might rise,
threatening coastal cities; animals may shift their habitats north; and
spring may come earlier in the higher latitudes. Computer models differ on
exactly how hot temperatures will get, but most predict an increase between
about 4 and 7 degrees Fahrenheit, said Warren Washington, chairman of the
National Science Board. Society needs to decide what level of warming it can
live with, he said. The 1997 Kyoto Protocol set initial limits on how much
carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases industrial nations should put out.
President Bush has rejected the international treaty, saying compliance
would cost too much.
The United Nations has also
drawn up a convention on climate change, which calls for stabilizing levels
of such gases before they reach a point of dangerous interference with the
climate. "There is some possibility that we may already have reached
dangerous interference," Wigley said at the Denver meeting. Climate change
will become more dramatic in the future, he said, as greenhouse gases
continue to build up in the atmosphere. Changes might include more frequent
storms in the mid-latitudes, melting polar ice caps, and a rapidly rising
sea level. Scientists anticipate all these changes, but cannot say when they
might happen, how severe they may be, or how society might react. Even if
carbon-dioxide emissions were stabilized immediately, Wigley said, the gas
would continue to build up in the atmosphere for centuries.
"We may have a really daunting
task," he said. The best way to tackle it, said Washington, is to improve
U.S. science. Researchers need more-powerful computers to get better models
of how climate might behave in the future, he said.
One such computer already
exists, in Japan - the $360 million Earth Simulator, built specifically to
study climate change. On the Earth Simulator, Japanese scientists crunch
some serious numbers on the climate change problem. The more variables a
computer model can include, the more realistic its conclusions should be. A
good model, for instance, must take into account the effects of clouds,
evaporation and rainfall; input including greenhouse gases, the sun and
volcanoes; feedbacks from ice and plants covering large swaths of the globe;
plus much more. "Climate models are a manifestation of basic physics," said
Washington, also of the National Center for Atmospheric Research. "The real
test is, can we reproduce what's really happening?" he asked. In recent
years, computer models have gotten much better at explaining current
climate. That gives scientists confidence, Washington said, that their
predictions will be more on target in the future.
Still, major questions remain,
including how sensitive the climate is when it responds to these many
factors. Only a long-term investment in research can help, said Washington.
President Bush's draft plan for studying climate change calls for some
answers within two to four years - information that decision-makers can use
in their planning. But Washington said that might not be possible. "We will
not have at the end of three years answers to these questions," he said.
Still, he added, "there's a lot of incentive to start taking some steps at
this point."
back to contents
11) WIND-POWER BODIES SAY 2002 GLOBAL USE GREW 28 PCT
Planet Ark
March 5, 2003
Internet:
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/20030/story.htm
COPENHAGEN Global installed
wind-power capacity grew in 2002 by 28 percent, the American Wind Energy
Association (AWEA) and European Wind Energy Association (EWEA) said this
week in a joint statement. In total a record 6,868 megawatts (MW) was
installed worldwide in 2002, taking total wind power to over 31,000 MW,
enough to power 7.5 million average American homes or 16 million European
homes, they said. Wind energy is a fast-growing power sector worldwide as
countries try to bring down greenhouse gas emissions, which scientists say
cause global warming.
Installed generating capacity
has increased by an average 32 percent annually for the last five years,
giving a tailwind to wind turbine manufacturers. Denmark is home to two of
the worlds leaders, Vestas Wind Systems (VEST.CO) and NEG Micon (NEG.CO).
Germany is by far the largest wind-power market in the world, with a total
of 12,001 MW installed. With around 4,830 MW installed, Spain is now the
second-biggest market ahead of the U.S. The U.S. market has slowed due to
the uncertain status of the wind energy production tax credit (PTC), a key
federal tax incentive to promote windpower. Today wind power supplies
approximately 0.4 percent of the worlds electricity demand. According to
EWEA analysis, there is no reason, either technical or economic, why wind
power should not supply 12 percent of global electricity consumption in
2020.
back to contents
12) NUCLEAR PROMISE SOURS BUT JAPANS CHOICES LIMITED
Planet Ark
March 4, 2003
Internet:
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/20022/story.htm
TOKYO - Scandals, cover-ups and
accidents - it sounds like the plot of a soap opera. Instead, it is the
recent history of Japan's nuclear power industry, a pillar of the
government's energy policy and source of some 30 percent of the power
consumed by the world's second-largest economy. Opponents speak of lax
management and argue that a nation as prone to earthquakes as Japan should
seek other energy sources.
Others say that with virtually
no energy resources of its own, Japan simply has few choices. "For a
country like ours, nuclear power is one option for energy, along with oil
and natural gas," said Masahiro Onodera, senior researcher at Japan's
Institute of Energy Economics, an industry-backed think tank. "But to throw
out one of these and replace it with another? Japan doesn't have that
luxury."
Dependence on nuclear power has
been starkly illustrated by warnings of an electricity crunch in Tokyo this
summer if the reactors it relies on are not back on line by then. Thirteen
of 17 reactors operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co Inc (TEPCO) have been
shut down temporarily due to lapses in inspections, including falsified
safety reports. A 14th is due to shut down on March 1, and the rest could
follow by April. No dates have been set for any of them to resume. "From
the point of view of a stable power supply, nuclear energy is essential,"
said Yoichi Sekizawa at the Trade Ministry's Agency for Natural Resources
and Energy.
HIGH ANXIETY
Essential as it may be, a string of accidents and scandals over the past
decade has eroded public trust in the nuclear industry and its 52 commercial
reactors. The worst accident was in September 1999, when an uncontrolled
nuclear chain reaction was triggered at a uranium processing plant in
Tokaimura, 140 km (90 miles) northeast of Tokyo. Two workers died. Fears
were fanned last year by a scandal over TEPCO's falsification of nuclear
safety records in the 1980s and 1990s, revelations that led to the current
shutdown of its reactors. Given these problems, Japan's insistence on
nuclear power may appear hard to understand.
However, the fact Japan is
forced to rely mainly on imported energy - 52 percent of it oil, of which
more than 80 percent comes from the volatile Middle East - makes policy
framers edgy. "It's true that Japanese have become anxious about nuclear
energy," Trade Minister Takeo Hiranuma said recently. "But securing steady
energy resources is an issue we must take up extremely seriously." One
aspect of this is reducing use of Middle East oil, a desire behind Prime
Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visit in January to the Russian Far East - a
region of vast energy resources. Even more important, planners say, is
reducing Japan's reliance on imported energy at all.
ENVIRONMENTAL BANDWAGON
"One of the big problems is
keeping a steady oil supply, and depending only on fossil fuels is dangerous
too," said Sekizawa. "There's no worry about imports stopping with nuclear
power." And despite numerous news stories about mishaps, statistics
compiled by the Trade Ministry from International Atomic Energy Agency data
show there were 15 unplanned stoppages of 50 Japanese reactors in operation
in 2000, compared with 166 unplanned stoppages of 55 French reactors. This
may be partly because Japanese reactors operate on a shorter cycle - 13
months on, then three months off-line for inspection - than in other
nations, reducing unplanned stoppages. "There's always trouble with
reactors," said Haruki Madarame, professor of nuclear energy at a Tokyo
University research centre. "The media plays it up here. It only seems
there's more."
Ordinary Japanese, however, are
increasingly sceptical. To woo them, the government is emphasising
environmental benefits of nuclear power, which it says cuts greenhouse gases
and is needed for Japan to meet Kyoto Protocol deadlines. Environmentalists
counter that this is meaningless. "Japan needs to meet its Kyoto deadlines
quite soon, but it takes decades to build a reactor," said Kazue Suzuki, at
Greenpeace Japan. "Besides, you can't call it 'clean' energy when you
consider the chance of radiation leaks." Although Japan is working on
alternate sources of energy, geography often makes this difficult and
inefficient. The few places in this mountainous nation where the wind is
steady enough for wind power, for example, tend to be so remote that
transporting power where needed is prohibitively expensive. Crucial for the
industry now is regaining trust, an essential step since approval from
residents near any reactor is needed before it can be restarted, as TEPCO
hopes to do soon. Industry experts say that, dire as the company's
falsified reports may seem, the problem may have been provoked by vague and
unrealistic government inspection rules requiring reactors to be in pristine
condition even after years of use.
REGAINING TRUST
Theres inevitably degradation,
but in Japan the plants have been managed as if this didnt take place,
Madarame at Tokyo University said. Thats clearly nonsense. What weve
been seeing is nothing more than this, and if its repaired, thatd be fine.
But to report anything created a huge problem so of course, they didnt
want to. Japan has taken steps to correct this by adopting inspection
standards similar to those in the United States, which take wear and tear
into account, late last year. Still more steps, such as adopting a system
of inspection by a third-party group, are needed, industry experts say. But
some in the field say a change of attitude by those in charge may be what
matters most. Years ago, I was told nuclear power is something that
basically always comes with danger, but if this is properly understood, it
can be used, said Manabu Hattori, formerly with the Atomic Energy Research
Centre at Tokyos Rikkyo University.
But people who believe that
its completely safe totally believe this are the ones you really cant
trust. And Japan seems to have left the industry to people like this. Of
course, I dont think this is only true of Japan.
back to contents
13) ONTARIO POWER AND SIEMENS WESTINGHOUSE TO INSTALL
WORLDS LARGEST SOLID OXIDE FUEL CELL
Fuel Cell
Today
March 4, 2003
Internet:
http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/FuelCellToday/IndustryInformation/IndustryInformationExternal/NewsDisplayArticle/0,1471,2597,00.html
TORONTO, Mar 04, 2003 (Canada
NewsWire via COMTEX) -- Ontario Power Generation and Siemens Westinghouse
today announced that the University of Toronto at Mississauga (UTM) will be
the location for the first pre-commercial demonstration of the world's
largest solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) power plant. The unit will be
incorporated into the existing physical plant at (UTM) in the fall of 2003,
following extensive testing at Kinectrics Inc., the key engineering and
system integrator on the project. According to Tapan Bose, Director of the
Hydrogen Research Institute at the University of Quebec at Trois Rivieres
and President of the Canadian Hydrogen Association, this will mark the first
time anywhere that this leading-edge R&D technology will be tested on a
commercial platform. Advantages of this technology include high rates of
energy efficiency and virtually no emissions.
"Moving from the laboratory to
real life conditions is an exciting milestone on the road to more
sustainable, Kyoto-compatible, energy solutions for electricity customers,"
said Ron Osborne, Ontario Power Generation's President and Chief Executive
Officer. "We are pleased to play a role in testing the commercial viability
of this fuel cell system as fuel cells represent an important alternative
energy technology for the future." The unit is capable of producing about 8
per cent of the campus' current electricity needs as well as hot water--the
equivalent of meeting the electricity and hot water needs on an annual basis
for more than 200 households. "Ontario is clearly a leader in the
development of alternative energy and this is another great example of the
progress being made in this area," said Energy Minister John Baird. "This
groundbreaking demonstration project will help us ensure there's a reliable
supply of clean and affordable electricity for future generations."
"UTM is uniquely positioned to
provide a high-profile platform upon which we can showcase this exciting
technology," said UTM vice-president and principal Ian Orchard. "The
development of alternative energy technologies is a theme that resonates
with many of our programs." "In Mississauga we are committed to making our
city an environmentally healthy community," said Mississauga Mayor Hazel
McCallion. "I am delighted that Ontario Power Generation and Siemens
Westinghouse have chosen the University of Toronto at Mississauga as their
testing ground for a project that will not only benefit us locally, but in
time, the global community." The successful operation of the power plant on
a commercial platform at UTM would represent an important step toward
commercial readiness of this fuel cell technology. When commercially proven,
such a fuel cell system could be located directly where the energy is
consumed, such as small industrial sites, universities, hospitals, or even
small neighbourhoods. Siemens Westinghouse is developing manufacturing
processes and is building a plant near Pittsburgh to house its fuel cells
business. The company plans to come to market as early as 2006 with the unit
that will be tested at UTM.
In 2000 OPG, a commercial
company wholly owned by the Province of Ontario, partnered with the
Government of Canada, the U.S. Department of Energy, Siemens Westinghouse
Power Corporation, and Kinectrics Inc. to develop the world's largest
atmospheric solid oxide combined heat and power fuel cell system. Government
of Canada funding for the prototype was provided through the Climate Change
Action Fund/Technology Early Action Measures, Natural Resources Canada, and
the National Research Council.
back to contents
14) JAPAN, RUSSIA EYE PACT OVER CO2 EMISSIONS REDUCTION
Kyodo News
March 3, 2003
Internet:
http://quotes.freerealtime.com/dl/frt/N?art=C2003030300062x5637&SA=Latest%20News
MOSCOW, Mar 03, 2003 (Kyodo via
COMTEX) -- Japan and Russia have reached an accord over the need to conclude
an intergovernmental agreement to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions as
part of efforts to curb global warming, Russian government sources said
Monday. The sources said the two sides concurred on the need for such an
agreement, in line with the 1997 Kyoto Protocol on global warming, during
talks held in Moscow in late January between Japan's Economy, Trade and
Industry Ministry and Russia's Ministry of Energy.
Should the agreement be formally
concluded, it will mark the first full-fledged transaction on emissions
reduction on a national level, the sources said. To work toward this goal,
the two nations will set up a task force of experts and conduct feasibility
studies, according to the sources. Japan and Russia have been engaged in
preliminary consultations since the Russian authorities initiated the move
in June last year, they said. The initiative will be under the framework of
"joint implementation," which is one of three flexible mechanisms built into
the protocol as a way for nations to meet their reduction pledges by means
of transactions abroad.
Joint implementation is a scheme
applied to cooperative projects conducted between developed countries. The
two other mechanisms are the clean development mechanism and emissions
trading. Under the joint initiative between Japan and Russia, Japan is
envisioned to take responsibility for construction projects at coal-fired
power plants in Russia's Sakhalin and Khabarovsk for converting fuel into
natural gas, the sources said. As a trade-off, Japan would get all the
credits for CO2 emissions reductions produced from these projects, they
said, adding the project in Khabarovsk alone is expected to reduce CO2
emissions by 1 million tons annually. Under the protocol, Japan is required
to cut greenhouse-gas emissions by 6% from
1990 levels between 2008 and
2012. Russia, for its part, will help Japan operate the projects smoothly
through such steps as tax reduction and exemption clauses, the sources said.
The Japanese government, however, maintains that Russia's ratification of
the protocol is a prerequisite for the conclusion of such an
intergovernmental agreement.
back to contents
15) EUROPE AT THE FOREFRONT OF ARTIC POLAR RESEARCH
CORDIS
March 3, 2003
Internet:
http://dbs.cordis.lu/cgi-bin/srchidadb?CALLER=NHP_EN_NEWS&ACTION=D&SESSION=&RCN=EN_RCN_ID:19808
Europe is providing insights into climate history
and is at the cutting edge of polar research. This was the consensus as the
European Commission showcased EU polar projects on 28 February in
Bremerhaven, Germany. The presentation of the EU polar research projects
coincided with the departing of scientists from these projects for another
research expedition, aboard Polarstern, a double-hulled icebreaker research
vessel. Europe is at the forefront of international efforts in polar
research. The North and South Poles are unique indicators of climate change
processes and therefore polar research is a key element in our overall
research effort on global climate change, said EU Research Commissioner,
Philippe Busquin. An example of European prominence in this area is the
project for ice coring in Antarctica (EPICA), which has recovered ice near
bedrock from a depth of over 3,000 metres. This ice is approximately 800,000
years old. It is believed that information about how our climate worked in
the past is locked in the ice.
EPICA involves 13 partners from eight EU countries
as well as Norway and Switzerland, and has a total budget of 7.06 million
euro. It is coordinated by the European science foundation (ESF) and funded
by the EU under the Fifth Framework programmes Energy, environment and
sustainable development programme (EESD). While other ice coring research
initiatives have taken place around the world EPICA provides the oldest ice
ever retrieved in Antarctica. Such a retrieval is a milestone for
scientific research in this area and is expected to enhance scientists
understanding of current global climate change and predict future changes,
Heinz Miller, coordinator of EPICA, told CORDIS News. Mr Miller said that
the final outcome of the discovery is expected to help shape environmental
policy in Europe.
The EPICA team also works closely with other polar
research projects, such as the EU Arctic ice cover simulation experiment (AICSEX)
project, which uses a century scale perspective to assess the changes in the
arctic climate system. Also funded under FP5s EESD programme, AICSEX
involves seven partners from the EU and Norway and has a total budget of
2.42 million euro. AICSEX scientists have recently analysed the ice cover
in the Arctic Ocean and suggested that significant changes have occurred in
the latter part of the last century. These changes have resulted in the
average thickness of ice decreasing by 8 per cent, which is a comparable to
the surface area of France. However, while previous cooling periods in the
Arctic were caused by natural fluctuations in the climate system, we
believe there are strong indications that the warming trend and decrease in
the ice extent in the last 20 years cannot be explained by natural processes
alone, said Mr Ola Johannessen, coordinator of AICSEX.
Speaking to CORDIS News, Mr Johannessen added that
it was essential to assess all available ice thickness observations from the
Arctic Ocean during the last century as extrapolating the ice thickness
decrease [
] indicates that the Arctic Ocean could be ice-free 50 years from
now, causing a dramatic change in the albedo, with significant effects on
the global climate system. The project findings suggest that such
developments could have both a positive and negative impact on the climate.
For instance, replacing ice cover with cold water, which has high capacity
for carbon dioxide (CO2) absorption, could create a new sink for atmospheric
CO2. This could help decrease global warming. Similarly, decreasing ice
cover would benefit marine transportation and provide easier and safer
logistics for offshore oil activities in the Arctic region. Increased
fisheries in new previously ice-covered regions would contribute positively
to the global food supplies. However, melting ice would also result in less
plankton and thus have a negative effect on the marine biodiversity in the
area. Furthermore, drastically decreasing ice would affect the transport of
heat by the Gulf Stream and North Atlantic current, which, it is believed,
would have significant consequences on the climate in Europe.
For further information, please visit:
http://www.awi-bremerhaven.de/GPH/EPICA/index.html#top
http://www.nersc.no/AICSEX/
back to contents
16) ANTARCTIC TIME CAPSULES REVEAL CLIMATE SECRETS
FROM 800,000BC
Independent
March 3, 2003
Internet:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/environment/story.jsp?story=383314
Scientists are preparing to study tiny bubbles of
air trapped inside the Antarctic ice sheet for more than 800,000 years as
part of an ambitious research programme to investigate the history of the
Earth's climate using the frozen time capsules of the north and south poles.
The air bubbles will provide critical information on temperature and
atmospheric composition at the time when the ice formed. The findings could
shed light on the sudden changes in the global climate that have in the past
threatened the vital ecosystems of the planet. Polar scientists from 10
European nations announced over the weekend that they had now drilled the
deepest hole into the oldest ice of the Antarctic. At 3,201 metres, more
than two miles, the ice core is twice as deep and old as the previous
record.
Professor Heinz Miller, a researcher at the Alfred
Wegener Institute in Bremmerhaven, Germany, and spokesman for the European
Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica (Epica), said that the drill still had
another 100 metres to go before it hits the bedrock. When completed, the
project should be bringing ice more than a million years old to the surface,
he said. "We need to learn from the past. We need to learn from our climate
history. Ice cores tell us about temperature, precipitation and atmospheric
composition at a time long ago," he said. The ice had shown, for instance,
that the world was 20C cooler 11,000 years ago. Epica, which has cost the
European Union about 10m (£6.8m), has been running since 1995 and involves
drilling at two sites in Antarctica so that the analysis of one core can be
cross-checked with a second core to calibrate the dating procedure.
The deepest hole is at a site called Dome C, where
the ice sheet is at one of its thickest points on the continent. Five years
were spent drilling into ice that was 70,000 years old, but in only two more
yearsice that is more than 800,000 years old was reached at that depth the
ice is far more compacted and each metre of drilling penetrates many more
seasons of snow fall. When the ice is brought to the surface, it has to be
stored for several months at sub-zero temperatures so that it can "relax"
enough to allow the trapped air to move out from the ice crystals to the
spaces in between, where it forms minute bubbles. Similar ice cores taken
from the Greenland ice sheet have shown that the Earth has experienced rapid
periods of warming and cooling, where average global temperatures have
changed by as much as 10C in less than 30 years.
"That's very fast even by human standards," said
Professor Nicholas Shackleton of Cambridge University, who is comparing the
ice core data with another set of findings from cores drilled into the muddy
sediments on the seabed of the North Atlantic.
Although these cores do not go back as far as those
from the Antarctic, they can tell scientists, with greater accuracy, about
global temperatures and atmospheric composition, such as the amount of
methane given off by the decomposition of organic matter in the tropical
wetlands. High levels of methane in the sediment indicated a warm, wet
climate and low levels a dry, cold period. Sediment cores drilled off
Florida and Greenland both indicated rapid periods of cooling and warming in
support of the ice core data indicating that such periods were a global
rather than a regional phenomenon, Professor Shackleton said. "Greenland and
Florida both experienced periods of warming and cooling in parallel.
Occasionally we see material melted out from icebergs, which gives an
indication of how significant these events were," he said.
A consensus is emerging that these periods of
dramatic change in the global climate were brought about by sudden shifts in
ocean currents. The fear is that such changes could also be triggered by
man-made global warming. One theory was that the heat "conveyor belt" of the
North Atlantic, which brings warm water from the Mexican Gulf to north-west
Europe, had in the past slowed down or even stopped, Professor Shackleton
said. "Computer models suggest that it can spontaneously shut down. It may
not be the result of an external cause at all. This may be relevant for the
future because many events could trigger such a shut down," he said.
"Clearly a significant reduction in northward movement of the Gulf Stream
would have a significant impact on our climate."
back to contents
17) UK MAY HAVE TROUBLE REACHING KYOTO TARGET
CNSNews.com
March 3, 2003
Internet:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=%5CForeignBureaus%5Carchive%5C200303%5CFOR20030303e.html
London (CNSNews.com) - Britain will have difficulty
meeting its long-term domestic targets for reduction of "greenhouse gases"
and might even have trouble complying with the Kyoto Protocol, according to
a report by an independent research group. In a report released last week,
researchers with Cambridge Econometrics (CE) said the U.K. government will
be able to abide by the Kyoto treaty only if it takes Britain into a
Europe-wide emissions trading plan. The Kyoto Protocol will come into effect
if developing nations responsible for the output of 55 percent of the
world's greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, sign up to the treaty.
Although the United States and Australia have
declined to be bound by the treaty's terms, ratification by Russia would
cause the treaty to go into effect and require nations to reduce their gas
outputs from 1990 levels. But Britain's domestic reduction targets are more
ambitious than those set out in the treaty. Earlier this week, Prime
Minister Tony Blair unveiled a new energy policy that will aim to reduce
carbon emissions by 20 percent by 2010. Paul Ekins, co-editor of the CE
report, said there were "formidable obstacles" facing the British
government's energy plan. "Our forecasts of energy demand and carbon
emissions are a timely warning signal to policy makers of the challenges of
reducing carbon emissions," he said.
The report stated that the 20 percent reduction
goal "appears to be out of reach without significant policy measures."
Sudhir Junankar, manager of the UK Energy-Environment Service for Cambridge
Econometrics, said that such policy measures include higher taxes. "To
reach these goals, the government might have to consider higher energy
taxes, perhaps compensated by a decrease in other forms of taxation such as
payroll taxes." Increased payroll taxes will hit British businesses next
month as part of government spending plans on health and education. Junankar
said that without plans to keep the country's nuclear power industry running
at current output levels, more carbon-emitting fossil fuel energy would need
to be generated.
"The decommissioning of nuclear power stations
means that more coal-fired plants will be needed," he said.
Missing the 2010 goal would jeopardize other,
longer-term goals in the government's strategy. By 2050, the government aims
to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 60 percent, a push that Prime Minister
Tony Blair said would "break the relationship between economic growth and
ever-rising pollution." "Essentially, they would be off track for the future
if they fail to hit their targets for 2010," Junankar said. The report,
which is the result of combined energy, environmental and economic research
published by Cambridge Economics every six months, also contained a warning
about Britain's Kyoto obligations. The treaty, of which Britain has been
one of the key supporters, gives the U.K. a 12.5 percent greenhouse gas
reduction target. The CE report said that emissions will only decline by 9.5
percent by 2010, however, unless Britain joins the E.U. mandatory emissions
trading program.
The Department of Trade and Industry stood by its
energy projections Monday. A spokesman said although officials had not had a
chance to look at the CE report, the energy plan or "white paper" unveiled
by the government was "the most comprehensive study of the energy industry
in the U.K. in 20 years." "It's not apparent that the Cambridge Econometrics
report takes into account the new programs" outlined in the government's
plan, the spokesman said. Those measures, including incentives totaling
more than $1.5 billion, will result in an overall 23 percent drop in
greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 to 2010, according to government
statistics. The spokesman also said the government already plans to sign up
to the EU's emissions trading scheme. "It's also possible that the way the
report calibrated its figures, that may have put a relatively high emphasis
on recent statistics," the spokesman said. "That would tend to shift the
focus towards the short term -- and the use of coal went up in the past two
years -- and away from the long term.
back to contents
18) INTERVIEW: AUSTRALIAN BUSINESSES GRAPPLE WITH
KYOTO
Dow Jones Newswires
March 3, 2003
Internet:
http://sg.biz.yahoo.com/030228/15/38dgo.html
CANBERRA (Dow Jones)Meredith Hellicar is
philosophical about the reasons behind the Business Council of Australias
failure to reach consensus on Kyoto ratification. Having chaired many
meetings of the councils greenhouse taskforce over recent months, Hellicar
is only too aware of the confusion and complexities inherent in what remains
a politically sensitive topic in Australia. Encouraging for Hellicar, who
instigated debate on the environmental accord in November, is that many of
the organizations 102 members remain perched on the fence, choosing
neutrality until research and evidence can convince them one way or the
other. There are a large number of members who are very consciously not
taking a position because the arguments are pretty difficult, Hellicar told
Dow Jones Newswires in an interview Friday. Im pleased weve had an
extremely healthy debate and weve got more people engaged in the issue,
she said.
Also the views do not fall along sectorial lines.
This isnt a winners versus losers debate based along sectorial lines,
Hellicar adds.
Earlier Friday, the business council declared it
couldnt reach a common position on Kyoto, citing differences of opinion and
a lack of definitive research about the business impacts and benefits of the
protocol. The result avoids embarrassment for Prime Minister John Howards
conservative government, which has resisted ratifying the treaty, putting it
at odds with much of the developed world. Energy heavyweight BP PLC (BP)
and billionaire Richard Pratts Visy Industries took a prominent role in
pushing for Kyoto endorsement, warning Australia risked discrimination from
trading partners in future years if it failed to become a signatory. More
specifically, Australia could find itself excluded from new energy trading
arrangements and miss out on opportunities in greenhouse technology
development. Resistance though came from some heavy-hitters in the
resources industry, namely Rio Tinto PLC (RTP), BHP Billiton Ltd. (BHP) Esso
Australia (XOM), Alcoa Inc. (AA), and Woodside Petroleum Ltd. (A.WPL).
Hellicar said the councils near-term priority will
be ensuring Australia meets its 2012 target in greenhouse gas emissions,
while further educating members on the competing scenarios of ratification
and nonratification. The focus will be on developing the agenda to ensure
Australias economic performance is optimized in a greenhouse-constrained
world, she said. But the question of ratification isnt likely to
disappear, with Hellicar expecting it to linger in the background. Prime
Minister Howard has repeatedly said Australia wont sign the protocol unless
the U.S. and developing nations also agree to join. Howard regards the
treaty as flawed because it doesnt require developing countries to
contribute to a cut in the emission of greenhouse gases, leaving Australian
industry at a disadvantage.
The 1997 protocol commits industrialized nations to
rolling back emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, nitrous
oxide and methane gases to 1990 levels. Industrialized countries were
directed to reduce their emissions by an average of 5.2% below 1990 levels.
Australia extracted a special deal that allows it to limit emissions to 108%
of 1990 levels by 2012. An audit last year found Australia would miss that
target, with emissions projected to be 111% above the 1990 levels by 2010.
back to contents
19) ARCTIC DATA CAST DOUBT ON CLIMATE CHANGE THEORY
Canadian Press
March 2, 2003
Internet:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1046647333160_76/?hub=SciTech
OTTAWA Data compiled from the journals of early
Arctic explorers casts doubt on the assumption that recent thinning of
Arctic ice is the result of human-induced climate change. A Norwegian study
using the explorers' ancient logbooks suggests that dramatic shrinkage of
sea ice, widely cited as evidence for global warming in recent years, has
occurred before. That doesn't necessarily prove that recent disappearance
of sea ice is natural, but raises the possibility that it could be,
researchers say.
Adventurers of the 1700s, who took meticulous notes
on their voyages, encountered ice conditions similar to those seen today,
researcher Chad Dick said in an interview from Norway. "If you go back to
the early 1700s you find that sea ice extent was about the same then as it
is now," said Dick of the Arctic Climate Systems Study, an international
research program. In Canada there has been alarm at reduced ice cover in
Hudson's Bay which is causing problems for polar bears. There's also been
debate about disappearing ice in the Northwest Passage, which could result
in challenges to Canadian sovereignty over the passage. Those phenomena
have been cited as evidence that humans are causing the global climate to
warm.
But similar shrinkage has occurred before,
according to the Norwegian researchers who have drawn up Arctic ice charts
covering 500 years. The charts show sea ice has declined by about 33 per
cent over the past 135 years, but much of that thinning occurred in the
early part of that period, before the industrial revolution unleashed
greenhouse pollution on a large scale. In the more distant past, ice
conditions were similar to those seen today. That raises the possibility -
but does not prove - that recent ice shrinkage could be part of a natural
cycle, rather than the result of human-caused greenhouse emissions, Dick
said. "The evidence at the moment is fairly inconclusive." "The fact is
there are natural cycles in sea ice extent and we're not outside the range
of those natural cycles at the moment."
He said natural climate cycles like ice ages are
driven by the way the earth orbits and wobbles in its orbit and resulting
changes in the amount of solar radiation reaching Earth. If the current
reduction in ice cover is part of a natural cycle, ice cover should soon
start to grow again, said Dick. "We've definitely lost a lot of sea ice
over the past 20 years or so. "If this is a natural cycle, then things
should start returning to a more average condition, so we should see sea ice
thickening up and extending further south. "If we don't see that, if we see
it continuing to thin and disappear, then in 10 years time we're pretty well
going to be beyond the range of natural cycles we've seen up to now." He
emphasized that the study doesn't refute the theory of global warming, but
points to the inadequacy of current climate models. "Just to say, it was
the same in the 1700s and therefore it's natural, doesn't follow. It's not
necessarily wrong but it doesn't follow. "What we need to understand is
what these natural cycles are about and why they occur and if we could do
that we could tell where in the natural cycle we were meant to be." The
World Wildlife Fund is publishing the sea-ice charts on CD-ROM for
researchers around the world to use. "I would say that in about 10 years
time we'll know whether this is a human effect or not," said Dick.
back to contents
20) REPUBLICANS AIM FOR SOFTER, GREENER
ENVIRONMENTAL TALK
The New York Times
March 2, 2003
Internet:
http://www2.ocregister.com/ocrweb/ocr/article.do?id=27925§ion=NEWS&subsection=FOCUS_GOVERNMENT&year=2003&month=3&day=2
WASHINGTON Over the last six months, the
Republican Party has subtly refocused its message on the environment, an
issue that a party strategist called "the single biggest vulnerability for
the Republicans and especially for George Bush" in a memorandum encouraging
the new approach. The Republicans, as the memorandum advised them, have
softened their language to appeal to suburban voters, speaking out for
protecting national parks and forests, advocating investment in
environmental technologies, and shifting emphasis to the future rather than
the present. In interviews, Republican politicians and their aides said
they agreed with the strategist, Frank Luntz, that it was important to pay
attention to what his memorandum, written before the November elections,
called "the environmental communications battle." In his memorandum, Luntz
urges that the term "climate change" be used instead of "global warming,"
because "while 'global warming' has catastrophic communications attached to
it, 'climate change' sounds a more controllable and less emotional
challenge." Also, he wrote, "conservationist" conveys a "moderate, reasoned,
common-sense position" while "environmentalist" has the "connotation of
extremism."
President George W. Bush's speeches on the
environment show that the terms "global warming" and "environmentalist" had
largely disappeared by late last summer. The terms appeared in a number of
Bush's speeches in 2001, but now the White House fairly consistently uses
"climate change" and "conservationist."
National environmental groups say the shift has
blunted the edge of Republican attacks. "They are not playing defense
anymore," said Kim Haddow, a consultant for the Sierra Club who has helped
counter some Republican advertisements. "It's like a tennis game. The ball
is back in our court, and we need to spend time and energy educating
voters." Many new Republican communication strategies match the
recommendations of the 16-page environmental memorandum put together by the
Luntz Research Cos., the consulting firm run by Luntz, who was also one of
the drafters of Contract with America, the manifesto of House Republicans
under Newt Gingrich, the former speaker.
The memorandum was given to The New York Times by
the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy group critical of Bush
administration policies. "They are showing the message discipline they need
to get these anti-environmental policies past suburban voters," said Ken
Cook, president of the organization.
One section of the memorandum, "Winning the Global
Warming Debate," asserts that many voters believe there is a lack of
consensus about global warming among scientists. "Should the public come to
believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global
warming will change accordingly," it says. "Therefore you need to continue
to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue." Among the ways
to "challenge the science," the memorandum says, is to "be even more active
in recruiting experts who are sympathetic to your view and much more active
in making them part of your message" because "people are more willing to
trust scientists than politicians."
Each party says Luntz's advice played a role in
elections last fall, including the Senate race in Colorado, where the
Republican incumbent, Wayne Allard, ran advertisements promoting his work
with the Great Sand Dunes National Park and cleaning up nuclear weapons
plants. "The thrust of the memorandum is consistent with what we tried to
do with our campaign, to take issues that have real impact on people in
Colorado and work on those problems," said Dick Wadhams, a spokesman for
Allard. "The Sierra Club and League of Conservation Voters spent millions of
dollars attacking Senator Allard and it didn't work."
That kind of success will encourage more
Republicans to embrace these strategies, party officials say.
"We have not engaged in the discussion as
enthusiastically as we should on occasion - there are so many governors
around the country that have sterling environmental records," said Marc
Racicot, chairman of the Republican National Committee. "We are going to
talk about these issues a lot over the next election cycle."
back to contents
21) GOVT
TO SET UP CO2 CREDIT FINANCE FUND
Daily
Yomiuri
March 2,
2003
Internet:
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20030302wo41.htm
The
Economic, Trade and Industry Ministry plans to establish within this year a
fund with the Development Bank of Japan and other financial institutions to
finance Japanese companies that carry out projects abroad to cut carbon
dioxide (CO2) emissions to prevent global warming, sources close to the
ministry said Saturday. The fund for the Kyoto mechanism, which will be set
up in line with the Kyoto Protocol rules, will provide financial assistance
to projects designed by electric power plants to renovate thermal power
plants in underdeveloped countries to reduce CO2 emissions, the sources
said. It will not offer funds in the form of loans or investments, but will
finance such projects through a partial purchase of CO2 credits companies
will acquire via reduction projects, the sources said.
The fund
will be capitalized in the billions of yen. In addition to the Development
Bank of Japan, the ministry will also invite private companies and financial
institutions to contribute to the fund, the sources said. Fund providers
will be given CO2 credits proportionate to the amount of their
contributions. They can use the credits to meet requirements of CO2
reductions imposed on them or sell them on the market, the sources said.
The Kyoto Protocol requires Japan to reduce greenhouse-effect gases,
including CO2 emissions, by an average of 6 percent of 1990 levels between
2008 and 2012. However, as Japan will have difficulty reducing global
warming gases by such a high percentage, it will need to acquire 1.6 percent
of its CO2 credits through overseas reduction projects, the sources said.
back to contents
22)
BUSINESS SHIFTS TACK ON KYOTO
The Age
March 1,
2003
Internet:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/28/1046407750553.htmlhttp://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/28/1046407750553.html
Business
support for the Federal Government's hardline position on climate change is
crumbling, with the Business Council yesterday scrapping its outright
opposition to the Kyoto Protocol. Despite the move, the Government is
adamant it will not officially endorse the protocol and its raft of measures
to combat global warming. After "passionate" debate that cut across industry
sectors, yesterday's Business Council of Australia meeting endorsed a
"neutral" stance on Kyoto. The council's early opposition to Kyoto is said
to have influenced the Government's stance.
But in an
earlier speech to a conference on climate change, Environment Minister David
Kemp confirmed the Government would stand with the US on climate change
against Europe, Canada, Japan and other developed countries. "The truth is
that Kyoto itself will achieve little . . . the Government has decided it is
not in Australia's interests to ratify the Kyoto treaty at the present
time," he said. It is not clear if Dr Kemp was told of the imminent change
in the Business Council's position.
The
council's neutral position sent an important signal to the Government,
Australian Conservation Foundation executive director Don Henry said. "The
only opposition to ratification of the Kyoto Protocol in Australia has been
business opposition," he said. "If the Business Council is neutral, and
given that we all know the huge impact of climate change, this is a very
clear signal to the Federal Government that they should move ahead and
ratify the Kyoto Protocol." Greenpeace's climate campaigner, Frances
MacGuire, said: "The business community is now clearly at an impasse on the
issue of Kyoto ratification. All members of the BCA know that ratification .
. . is inevitable." Dr MacGuire said a small number of businesses were
holding the council and the Government back from a position that would be in
the nation's interest - ratifying the Kyoto Protocol.
The Kyoto
Protocol requires signatories to limit greenhouse gas emissions to a target
5 per cent below 1990 levels by 2010. Australia has been granted leniency to
account for its high concentration of energy-dependent industry and as a
reward for improvements in land clearing. While Dr Kemp claims to be on
target to meet Australia's special target of 108 per cent of 1990 emissions,
other assessments show emissions are already 31 per cent above 1990 levels.
Business Council chief executive Katie Lahey said the organisation had
previously opposed ratifying Kyoto because China, Japan and other major
polluters had declined to commit. But after an acrimonious four-month debate
between members, more businesses now supported signing Kyoto than opposed
it. "Until October, the BCA position was, we shouldn't ratify it because
the countries that were pumping out the biggest amount of greenhouse gases
weren't part of the protocol," Ms Lahey said.
The
international dynamics changed at the Earth Summit last year. "Members went
to Johannesburg and said, this is real and it's going to happen next year .
. . The view of some people is that you can be more influential in the camp
than outside." She expects Kyoto to become international law when, or if,
Russia signs later this year. While businesses remained divided by Kyoto,
she said, the challenge had shifted to grappling with its practical
challenges such as lifting greenhouse efficiency and starting carbon trading
systems. The Government agrees with supporters of Kyoto that global warming
is harmful and caused by rising carbon and methane emissions. But it
disagrees on whether the Kyoto Protocol is the best solution.
See Also:
Business moves to middle ground on Kyoto, Sydney Morning Herlad, March 1
2003,
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/02/28/1046407749965.html
Kyoto
Stance 'Costing Nation', Herald Sun, February 17, 2003
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,5998046%255E421,00.html
back to contents
23) POTENTIAL SAVINGS IN ENERGY USE
The Star
March 1, 2003
Internet:
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2003/3/1/nation/jqenergy&sec=nation
PETALING JAYA: A Malaysia Energy Centre audit
conducted last year in 24 Malaysian-based factories has revealed the
potential for reductions in energy costs and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.
The audits showed that the factories - from the
energy-intensive sectors of cement, wood, pulp and paper, rubber, food,
glass, iron and steel, and ceramic - alone consumed 5.5 million Megawatt
hour per year (MWh/yr) of energy last year. This amounted to 4.75% of the
final energy demand by the industrial sector in 2001 and cost almost
RM1.1bil, the Malaysia Energy Centre or Pusat Tenaga Malaysia (PTM) said in
a press release yesterday.
The audit found that if cement factories - which
consume the most energy among the eight sectors - implemented no-cost
measures such as fixing leakages, optimising compressed air pressure, and
improving fuel to air ratio for burners, their combined energy consumption
could be reduced by 17%. PTM said an additional 12.7% could be slashed if
high cost measures such as the installation of energy efficient equipment
and ancillary works to recover waste heat for productive use. It said the
rubber sector, consumed a total of 30,200 MWh/yr, could cut down its energy
consumption by 20% merely by improving housekeeping and maintenance.
The audits reflect the minimum cost required to
make a significant change in the savings enjoyed by the factories, PTM
chief executive officer Dr Hassan Ibrahim said, adding that a number of
audited factories had successfully implemented the proposed cost-saving
measures. Hassan said the audit was also aimed at identifying ways to
encourage industries to cut down on CO2 emissions, which largely originate
from fuel combustion for energy production. The audit found that 24
factories alone emit 1.8 million tonnes of CO2 a year but this could be
slashed by 28% if the factories adopted energy management. Hassan said the
reduction in emission of a green house gas like CO2 coincided with
Malaysias commitment to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The
audit is part of RM80mil Malaysian Industrial Energy Efficiency Improvement
Project co-funded by the UN Development Fund, the Global Environment
Facility, the Government and the private sector.
back to contents
24) RUSSIAN STALLING COULD KILL KYOTO CONSENSUS
Globe and Mail
March 1, 2003
Internet:
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030301.wxkyot0301/BNStory/International
Moscow Russia has delayed ratification of the
international Kyoto Protocol on climate change, and two of its top
scientists have begun to question the science underpinning it, developments
that environmentalists say could kill the painstakingly crafted deal.
Although Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov said last year that the
Russian parliament would ratify the accord, a bill to begin that process has
not yet been put to the Duma. The original schedule was to have the accord
ratified by the end of last year. ne cabinet minister said recently that
Russia no longer has a set timetable for ratification, a stall that could
put the entire deal in jeopardy. Under a series of complex mechanisms, the
accord will come into force only when countries representing 55 per cent of
global emissions sign the pact.
The 100-plus countries that have ratified account
for just 44 per cent. Russia, with 17.4 per cent of the global total, is the
only remaining country that could make the pact binding on its own, since
the United States has dropped out of negotiations. he wait may be long. At a
recent climate-change conference in India, two members of the Russian
parliament told their international colleagues that only about half the Duma
backs ratification of the Kyoto accord, and that its passage is by no means
certain. More troubling to some environmentalists, the two leading Russian
scientists on the file, Alexander Bedritsky and Yuri Israel, have been
questioning whether the deal is scientifically sound, even suggesting Russia
might benefit if global warming makes its colder regions more productive.
Mr. Israel, vice-chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
the body that oversees the entire Kyoto process said recently that the
treaty did nothing to mitigate the long-term effects of climate change,
words that were likely music to the ears of U.S. President George W. Bush,
who noisily pulled his country out of the treaty in 2001.
Some are worried that the United States may be
putting pressure on Russia to follow its lead on Kyoto, perhaps in exchange
for U.S. support of Russia's application to join the World Trade
Organization. "There's some funny business, as always, going on within the
politics of Russia right now," said Gerry Scott, climate-change campaigner
for the David Suzuki Foundation. "There's always the concern that there
would be linkage between Kyoto and other issues that are of concern to
Russia and the U.S." After a recent meeting in Moscow with his American
counterparts, deputy foreign minister Georgy Mamedov refused to say whether
Russia will ratify the treaty and said only that the United States and
Russia will work together to fight climate change. Russian President
Vladimir Putin, who will have the final say on the matter, has not backed
away from his public commitment to push the accord through to
ratification.Most scientists worldwide believe that signing the accord could
prove greatly beneficial to the Russian economy, since the collapse of
industry at the end of the Soviet era means Russia has already met its
target of reducing emissions to 1990 levels by 2010. Russia will likely be
well below those levels, meaning it could make billions of dollars selling
emission "credits" to countries that exceed their allotted amounts.
back to contents
25) RESEARCH PANEL CRITICIZES US GOVERNMENT'S
CLIMATE PLAN
Voice of America
March 1, 2003
Internet:
http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=82888F88-A383-4E31-89A54875DCCEA0FB
An independent federal research panel has strongly
criticized the U.S. Government's strategic plan to combat global warming.
The new report by the National Research Council prepared at the request of
the Bush administration - calls the White House plan "a good first step" but
says it falls short of the needed response to global climate change. Eight
months after the Bush Administration rejected the United Nations-sponsored
Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change, back in June 2001, the White House
established its own Climate Change Science Program. Its purpose was to
coordinate climate change research across more than a dozen federal
agencies. The White House then submitted its draft plan for review by a
National Research Council committee, made up of experts from the academic,
business and the environmental communities. And that group has now offered
its analysis of the Bush Administration's plan to combat global warming.
Thomas Graedel Committee Chairman and Yale
University professor Thomas Graedel says the plan provides a solid
foundation for future research. He commends the plan in particular for its
emphasis on the use of science to guide policymaking in this complex field.
"So while we have the underlying Global Change Research Program moving
forward to take the in-depth looks at the science that one needs to
understand increasingly well the complex interactions dealing with climate,
we also have a shorter term initiative to take those results and make them
available to a wide variety of stakeholders, rather more quickly," he said.
The committee also supports the plan's call for cutting edge research to
better understand the science of climate change and to develop computer
models that would offer more reliable forecasts of climate change.
While the study says the plan could build on these
initiatives, Committee Chairman Thomas Graedel says it lacks most of the
elements of a strategic plan. Notably absent the report says, are
"executable goals, clear timetables, criteria for measuring progress, an
assessment of whether existing programs are capable meeting these goals, and
a management plan." "Even though the goals are scattered here and there
throughout the plan, or things that could be goals, we don't find a clear
vision and strategic plan structure that would support a measured progress
toward meeting what is outlined as the things that the plan would like to
achieve," said Mr. Graedel. Chairman Thomas Graedel says it is also not
clear how the lead agencies working on climate change issues will coordinate
their efforts, nor how other agencies like the Federal Emergency Management
Agency or agricultural extension services would fit into the program. "This
is particularly important to think about because this program is a new
start, and it has the opportunity to redefine how the interagency activities
are better integrated, certainly important for areas like decision support
science that have not essentially been a part of the old program and it is
not clear how you make them go forward vigorously unless you have some way
to assign responsibility for getting that job done," he said. The National
Research Council report says the plan has serious gaps when it comes to
studying the effects of climate change on human societies and ecosystems.
Also missing, it says, are key global climate observation systems, which the
report notes are currently a "patchwork of observational networks, not
particularly well-integrated."
Thomas Graedel says another critical weakness in
the Bush Administration proposal is the absence of a system for delivering
information to decision makers. "In particular it is not clear from the
draft plan who will use climate research results and what it is they need to
know," he said. "And, we are thinking fairly broadly here, yes, watershed
managers, yes urban planners, also people like corporations who in one way
or another might be influenced by changes in climate or evolving changes in
one or more of the perimeters driven by climate." The committee did not
include details of the proposed U.S. budget for the next fiscal year, but
noted that the goals of the Climate Change Science Program could not be
realized without more money than the White House is seeking for climate
research. In response to the Council's strong criticisms, James Mahoney,
director of the Bush Administration's Climate Change Science Program, told
the New York Times newspaper that he welcomed the comments, "even though
they may sound like they're fairly harsh. It is like getting a ship into
motion," he noted. "Let's make a solid start, and then we've got something
to critique and build on." Committee Chairman Thomas Graedel applauds the
White House openness to suggestions from a wide group of critics. And he
says he is "cautiously optimistic" that the final version of the plan, due
in April, will incorporate at least some of the committee's recommendations.
back to contents
26) BUSH CLIMATE CHANGE PLAN A SHAMBLES, SAY
SCIENTISTS
SRI Media
March 1, 2003
Internet:
http://www.srimedia.com/artman/publish/article_416.shtml
The seventeen strong National Academy of Sciences
panel, who were responding to a query from the White House, also said that
after a decade of climate change we already have a good picture of the
phenomenon & what to expect in the future. The panel has also attacked the
plan for having questionable funding. The Climate Change Strategic Program
for research into the effects of what the Bush Administration call,
So-Called greenhouse gasses was thought up by the Bush Administration
after it withdrew the United States from the Kyoto Protocol this summer. The
Bush Administration has made clear that it wants to call upon US industry to
make voluntary reductions in CO2 emissions. The Climate Change Strategic
Program, will facilitate research by 13 federal agencies.
"The draft plan lacks most of the basic elements of
a strategic plan," the National Academy of Sciences panel wrote. It said
there was no "guiding vision," set of executable goals, clear timetables,
criteria for measuring progress, or priorities for work. The panels
recommendations continued, "The revised strategic plan should articulate a
clear, concise vision statement for the program in the context of national
needs. The vision should be specific, ambitious, and apply to the entire
CCSP." However there were some positive statements made by the report. The
panel said the draft plan identified "some exciting new directions" for
research such as reliable methods for forecasting climate change and
"cutting-edge" research into aerosols and the carbon cycle. The panel also
recognised the attempts of the Bush Administration to make "genuine
overtures" to researchers and interested parties on how to improve the
draft.
Thomas Graedel, professor of industrial ecology at
Yale University and chairman of the panel, said while research in the past
tried to gauge how the climate was changing and its effects on nature,
"future science must also focus on more applied research that can directly
support decision-making." The panel brought together to critique the plan
was drawn from the academic world, businesses including Honeywell and BP,
utilities and environmental organizations. The experts credited the
administration for undertaking the effort in the first place. A broad
government plan for climate research is required under a 1990 law, the
Global Change Research Act, but was never completed during the
administration of Mr. Bush's father or in the Clinton administration. As a
result, many experts say, climate research has suffered.
The names of the panel members, and the text of the
report, are online at
www.nas.edu
See Also:
Advisers
Tell Bush Climate Plan is Useless, the Guardian , February 27, 2003
Internet:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,903609,00.html
back to contents
27) DJERBA TO HOST WTO INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
Tunisia Online (Tunis)
March 1, 2003
Internet:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200303020019.html
The World Travel Organization (WTO) has chosen
Djerba to host an international conference on April 10 and 11 on climate
change and tourism, a choice of venue that reconfirms the respect for
Tunisia's approach to sustainable tourism and its active role within the WTO.
Tourism has witnessed a progressive development over the last few decades, a
trend that the WTO forecasts will continue, with major changes already
observed both in offer and demand. In order to maintain this dynamic, the
world's tourist industry needs to meet several challenges, amongst them
climate change. The causes and effects of climate are many and complex and
its repercussions already visible in a number of tourist resorts,
particularly in coastal areas and islands and areas effected by drought and
floods.
The problems facing tourist resorts and their
perspectives for the future will be examined in greater detail in the WTO
conference, the principal aim of which is to increase awareness amongst
governments, tourism professionals and operators to the problems of climatic
change. The conference seeks to make an assessment, define an approach for
overcoming the problems and finding appropriate solutions.The conference
will be bringing together 120 international experts and a large number of
WTO members and representatives and international bodies such as the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, World Meteorological
Organization United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification and the
Intergovernmental Oceanographic CommitteeAmongst the themes to be dealt with
in greater detail are Tourism and Hydraulic resources, Tourism and small
islands and coastal zones, Tourism and mountains regions and the scope for
action and the effects of climate change.
back to contents
28)
LIGNITE MINE PLAN SLAMMED BY GREEN BODY
Belfast
Telegraph
February
28, 2003
Internet:
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=382502
CONTROVERSIAL plans to mine lignite in North Antrim go against
recommendations in the Kyoto Protocol on carbon dioxide emissions, an
environmentalist warned today. Ballymoney Power, a subsidiary of Australian
company, AuIron Energy, have submitted a controversial planning application
to build a £500m lignite mine and power station north of Ballymoney. But the
plan has encountered massive local opposition from residents,
environmentalists and politicians who are demanding a full public inquiry.
The WWF
warned that the increased carbon dioxide emissions from the proposed plant
could put the UK in violation
of its commitments under the Kyoto Treaty, if the treaty becomes legally
binding.
The
Managing Director of AuIron Energy, Jon Parker, admitted to shareholders at
a speech in Sydney late last year that Kyoto may have to be taken into
account. He said: "The Ballymoney project has the potential to add to
shareholder wealth and deserves continued financial support. "However, the
potential is not guaranteed and key determinants of the project's success
will include future gas and electricity prices in Ireland and Kyoto
environmental considerations." Malachy Campbell from the WWF said: "The UK
signed up to Kyoto which called for a reduction in greenhouse emissions. The
treaty is not yet in operation but as more countries ratify it, it will
hopefully become binding. "Moreover, the government has set a national
target of reducing carbon dioxide emissions in the UK by 20% by 2010 and the
suspended Stormont executive had a commitment to work towards wind power and
reduce carbon dioxide."
Mr Campbell
added: "This is an international agreement, a UK domestic target and a local
government target and it is impossible to see how any of them are compatible
with a lignite mine. "Lignite has higher emissions than any other fossil
fuel and we should be looking to move away from dependence on fossil fuels."
A spokesman for Ballymoney Power said: "This plan will go to a planning
inquiry which will take into consideration the environmental aspect. "Any
plans will have to conform with the latest EU regulations."
back to contents
29) EMISSION CREDITS TO CURB DENMARK'S CO2
POLLUTION
Planet Ark
February 28, 2003
Internet:
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/19988/story.htm
COPENHAGEN - Denmark said this week it would reach
its target for cutting greenhouse gas emissions by buying emission credits
from central and eastern Europe. Denmark expects to spend 5-25 billion
crowns ($0.7-3.6 billion) to reach its commitments to the Koyoto protocol to
cut carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) by 21 percent by 2012. "We want the most
improvement for the environment we can get for as little money as possible,"
Danish Finance Minister Thor Pedersen said at a news conference. "Buying
credits is the cheapest way of improving our environment while only taking
national measures would be the most expensive."
Denmark ratified the Kyoto protocol in May last
year, and set the ambitious target of reducing its emissions of carbon
dioxide, thought to contribute to global warming, by 21 percent by 2012
compared to 1990's level.
But since 1990 Denmark's emissions have barely
decreased at all, and if no measures are taken, the carbon dioxide emission
would be 20-25 million tonnes above the target by 2012, corresponding to
25-30 percent of Denmark's total greenhouse gas emissions. "We have to
reduce our emissions much more than we initially thought. Therefore it will
also cost more than expected," Pedersen said. Under its commitment to the
Kyoto protocol, Denmark has to cut its CO2 emissions by 25 million metric
tonnes to 55 million tonnes per year by 2012.
By buying emission credits from other countries
which are below their target, Denmark hopes to reduce the cost of its
commitment. Emmissions trading schemes are planned worldwide as countries
look for ways to meet their Kyoto protocol commitments to curb emissions of
greenhouse gases. Under the terms of the European protocol, if countries
find it too difficult to cut their pollution to reach the targets, they can
buy the right to pollute from others whose emissions are below their
target. Such mechanisms can also be used within states by companies,
meaning firms which produce renewable energy such as wind energy can sell
credits to those unable to meet the required reductions. Britain said on
Monday it could reach its target to cut greehouse emissions through more
renewable power and greater energy efficiency.
back to contents
30) BILL
TAKES AIM AT GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Puget Sound
Business Journal
February
28, 2003
Internet:
http://seattle.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2003/03/03/story4.html
A bill
proposed this week in the state Legislature could inch Washington closer to
creating a commodities-style market for greenhouse gas emissions. If House
Bill 2119 and Senate Bill 5945 pass, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas
emissions could someday be bought and sold like hog futures or wheat. The
bill would create the Washington Climate Action Registry, a voluntary
program that would catalog the amount of greenhouse gas emissions and the
mitigation programs used by power plants and heavy industry. It would be the
first step in potentially setting up a market that would allow companies to
trade emission credits like commodities. A company with heavy carbon
emissions could buy emission credits by investing in a renewable energy
project or buying a large swath of forest - called sequestering - thus
reducing its countable emissions level. Like most attempts to regulate or
mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in the state, it's likely to be vigorously
opposed.
But
pressure is mounting on the federal government to create a national market
for emission trading, and advocates of the registry say getting ahead of any
national climate exchange program could give Washington state businesses an
advantage. "The point of the registry is that we believe everybody is going
to be faced with mandatory registry by the end of the decade," said Mike
Ruby, a consultant with Envriometrics Inc., a Seattle-based environmental
engineering firm. Ruby helped draft the legislation, which is being
sponsored by a host of Democrats in the House and several Republicans in the
Senate. "The federal government is moving in this direction, and if we move
now, Washington companies will be mature-market participants while the rest
of the country will be green novices," he said.
Attempts to
regulate emissions of carbon dioxide - or other so-called greenhouse gases
such as methane, nitrous oxide, and engineered chemicals, including
hydrofluorocarbons, which are believed to cause global warming - have been
opposed by the Association of Washington Business, the largest business
lobby in the state. "We think any regulation on greenhouse gas emissions
should come at the federal level," said Kristen Sawin, government affairs
director for environmental policy at the Olympia-based Association of
Washington Business. "It's important to have the same rules in place in each
state, not a piecemeal approach." While the Legislature debates the merits
of the registry, the state Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council is
wrestling with setting mitigation standards for greenhouse gas emissions on
new power plants.
Earlier
this month, state Attorney General Christine Gregoire announced that
Washington would join six other states in suing the Bush administration over
its failure to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from the nation's power
plants.
Power
plants in the United States account for 10 percent of the world's total of
man-made carbon dioxide emissions, according to a study done last year by a
host of public interest groups and released by Congress.
In
Washington, 100 million tons of carbon dioxide are released each year into
the atmosphere. Roughly 54 percent of those emissions come from tailpipes of
cars and trucks. Power plants and heavy industry, like refineries, account
for 32 percent of the state's emissions, according to a study done in 2000
by Energy Division of the state Department of Community, Trade and Economic
Development. In 2001, the Environmental Protection Agency estimates that
the United States emitted roughly 6.13 billion tons of carbon dioxide.
The state
Energy Facilities Site Evaluation Council is expected to release its new set
of mitigation rules this summer for power plants that generate more than 350
megawatts of electricity. Mitigation rules for power plants that generate
fewer than 350 megawatts are done by local air quality control boards. Over
the years, attempts to codify mitigation rules for smaller power generators
have failed. If the facilities council sets limits on greenhouse gas
emissions on new power plants, a fleet of older power plants in the state
would still be unregulated. Many business groups think that would be unfair.
"We all know something in respect to CO2 mitigation is coming. The question
is what form will it take?" said Robert Kahn, director of Northwest
Independent Power Producers Coalition. "Is it sensible to penalize the
newest, cleanest and most efficient technologies? I think that is kind of
goofy." Carbon dioxide is widely believed to be one of the chief culprits
behind global warming. The Bush administration, however, does not believe
carbon dioxide is a pollutant as defined by the Clean Air Act
The White
House has also renounced the United Nations' Kyoto Protocol - a worldwide
agreement signed by 100 countries to lower greenhouse gas emissions - on the
grounds it would be too costly for American business. Because of the
federal government's lack of a cohesive policy on greenhouse gases, several
voluntary emission trading markets, as called for in the Kyoto Protocol,
have started. The proposed Washington Climate Action Registry bill calls
for power plants and heavy industries to calculate how many tons of carbon
dioxide they emit. The companies would then need to pay for an outside audit
of their numbers and have the total published once a year .To create an
exchange or market for emission credits would probably require additional
legislation. A cap on total emissions would probably be needed, but the
creation of the registry could foster bilateral trades between companies.
Carbon
markets are operating in Great Britain and Denmark, and have been suggested
as a way of curtailing greenhouse gas emissions in the Kyoto Protocol.
Several Canadian companies are said to be searching for mitigation projects
in the United States. Canada has ratified the Kyoto Protocol and is expected
to begin a formal climate exchange program. The United States has not
ratified the protocol. In the absence of a national policy, a voluntary
market started this year in Chicago. Prior to the opening of the Chicago
Climate Exchange, which includes 30 companies, voluntary bilateral trades of
carbon credits between companies have passed $100 million, according to the
exchange.
back to contents
31)
REPUBLICAN CLEAR SKIES ARE TOXIC CLOUDS TO DEMOCRATS
ENS
February
28, 2003
Internet:
http://ens-news.com/ens/feb2003/2003-02-28-11.asp
WASHINGTON,
DC, February 28, 2003 (ENS) - The Clear Skies initiative, an air quality
plan architected by President George W. Bush, was reintroduced in Congress
Thursday. It drew immediate criticism from Democrats who vowed to fight the
administration's market centered approach to reducing air pollution from
power plants. Environmentalists and public health advocates say an analysis
with data from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) indicates Clear
Skies could mean more than 100,000 unnecessary premature deaths between now
and 2020, deaths that would be avoided if the current Clean Air Act was
enforced. "I will do everything in my power to stop a bill that puts
polluters ahead of people," said North Carolina Senator John Edwards, a
Democrat and a declared 2004 candidate for President.
A cap and
trade program for pollutants, Clear Skies is modeled on the 1990 Clean Air
Act's acid rain program, the nation's first such effort. It is intended to
reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and mercury
more quickly and efficiently than the current law, the administration says.
"Clear
Skies represents cost effective pollution reductions that make sense for the
environment and the economy," said President Bush in a prepared statement.
Passage of the Clear Skies bill is "a top environmental priority of this
administration," said EPA Administrator Christie Whitman. "It is also an
essential component of our goal to dramatically improve the environment
while promoting energy security and independence," she said. "Almost
immediately following its passage into law, Clear Skies would generate
health and environmental benefits from reduced air pollution."
But key
Congressional Democrats counter nearly every claim the administration makes
about its plan. Clear Skies, say Democrats, environmentalists and public
health advocates, will do far less to reduce pollution than the enforcement
of the current Clean Air Act, and it does not address the emissions of
carbon dioxide (CO2), the most abundant heat trapping greenhouse gas. The
bill is a "legislative nonstarter" said Senator Joe Lieberman, a Democrat
from Connecticut who has thrown his hat in the 2004 presidential ring.
The
legislation was introduced Thursday in the Senate by Senators James Inhofe
of Oklahoma and George Voinovich of Ohio, both Republicans. Representatives
Joe Barton of Texas and Billy Tauzin of Louisiana, also Republicans,
introduced the legislation in the House. Clear Skies is the "most
aggressive presidential initiative in history to reduce power plant
emissions," said Inhofe, who chairs the Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works.
The
President's plan implements a cap and trade system for reducing emissions of
the three pollutants. Companies that meet emissions caps early, or exceed
required reductions, earn credits they can sell to others that have not meet
emissions requirements. The initiative's supporters say that imposing caps
for emissions of the three pollutants will give companies incentives to
begin reducing emissions immediately to generate credits. Implementation of
Clear Skies, Whitman said, will "dramatically reduce harmful emissions from
power plants by 70 percent from current levels." Still, analysis of
mandates in the current Clean Air Act for reductions to SO2, NOx and
mercury, indicate that enforcing those requirements would reduce pollution
emissions more quickly than the cap and trade plan in the Clear Skies
legislation. For example, current annual emissions of SO2, a major cause of
acid rain, are some 11 million tons. Clear Skies caps emissions of S02 at
4.5 million tons by 2010, and three million tons by 2018. Enforcing the
Clean Air Act, according to the EPA, would result in SO2 emissions of two
million tons annually by 2010.
Some five
million tons of NOx, a component of smog, are emitted annually from power
plants. Clear Skies caps these emissions at 2.1 million tons in 2008 and 1.7
million tons in 2018. EPA estimates that the Clean Air Act would reduce NOx
emissions to two million tons by 2012. Power plants emit roughly 48 tons of
mercury each year, emissions that Clear Skies caps at 26 tons in 2010 and 15
tons in 2018. But provisions of the Clean Air Act could mandate a 90 percent
reduction in mercury emissions by 2007. "Mercury is the poster child for
what is wrong with the President's plan," said Frank O'Donnell, executive
director of Clean Air Trust, a nonprofit environmental group. Eight percent
of U.S. women of childbearing age have unsafe levels of mercury in their
bodies, according to government data. Coal fired power plants are the
largest industrial source of mercury, emitting some 33 percent of the
nation's total. Critics further complain that Clear Skies repeals deadlines
for state compliance with federal air standards, adds loopholes for power
plants to ignore mandated technology upgrades, and prohibits downwind states
from pursuing any pollution reductions from power plants in upwind states
before 2012.
It will gut
the Clean Air Act, said John Kirkwood, president and CEO of the American
Lung Association, a public health advocacy group. "The administration is
currently focused on attempts to avoid implementation of existing clean air
regulations," Kirkwood said. "The administration bill threatens public
health by delaying pollution cleanup required by simply enforcing the
current law." "The Clear Skies Act is wrongly named, because this
legislation is full of dark clouds." Lieberman said. "Every time we see the
administration's plan to clean our air, it gets weaker." Lieberman said he
will seek to compromise with supporters of the legislation, but said he
would not budge on the need to include reductions of CO2 emissions or the
principle that the final plan should move beyond the Clean Air Act
requirements. Power plants are responsible for 40 percent of U.S. C02
emissions. Lieberman and others have introduced legislation that would set
limits on power plant emissions of this greenhouse gas, as well as tighter
limits for the three pollutants addressed by Clear Skies.
The
administration has rejected moves to mandate emissions reductions for C02,
preferring to call for industries to voluntary reduce emissions. Industry
groups hailed the reintroduction of the plan, which they believe is a more
sensible and efficient approach to emissions reductions than the system
presently in place.
The current
regulatory approach is plagued with problems that threaten the reliability
and affordability of the nation's electric supply, said Thomas Kuhn,
president of the Edison Electric Institute, which represents companies that
collectively produce some 70 percent of electricity generated in the United
States.
"This is
our chance to break the litigation logjam by adopting a more rational
approach to regulation," Kuhn said, but he warned that Clear Skies is still
a "very aggressive proposal." "While our industry supports the overall
scope and framework of the initiative," said Kuhn, "it must be pointed out
that these requirements would be extremely difficult for some companies to
meet."
back to contents
32) U.S.
ANNOUNCES INTERNATIONAL FORUM TO ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE (PLANS FOR WORLD'S
FIRST POLLUTION-FREE POWER PLANT ALSO UNVEILED)
Washington
File
February
28, 2003
Internet:
http://usinfo.state.gov/cgi-bin/washfile/display.pl?p=/products/washfile/latest&f=03022802.glt&t=/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml
Washington
- U.S. officials have announced a public-private effort to construct a
prototype electric and hydrogen production plant and the formation of a new
international forum to advance carbon capture and storage
technologies as ways to reduce the world's heat-trapping greenhouse gas
emissions. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and Under Secretary of State for
Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky, joined at the Department of Energy (DOE)
February 27 by representatives from several countries, said a
government-industry partnership is being set up to design, build and operate
the world's first pollution-free, coal-fired power plant. The facility will
cost an estimated $1,000 million over the next 10 years.
The
275-megawatt plant, to be known as FutureGen, will serve as a large-scale
engineering laboratory for testing new clean power, carbon capture and
coal-to-hydrogen technologies. According to DOE press material,
the goal is to build the cleanest fossil fuel-fired power plant in the
world. "FutureGen will be one of the boldest steps our nation has taken
toward a pollution-free energy future," Abraham said. He added that virtually
every aspect of the prototype plant will be based on cutting-edge technology
and "will serve as the test bed for demonstrating the best technologies the
world has to offer." "This creative initiative offers the hope not only of
clean coal, but of even cleaner hydrogen made from clean coal," Dobriansky
said.
The plant
will be based on coal gasification, in which the coal's carbon is converted
into a hydrogen-rich gas, rather than burning it directly. The hydrogen
would then be extracted for use as a clean fuel in powering turbines or fuel
cells to generate electricity. It could also be used in a refinery to help
upgrade petroleum products. The plant could also serve as the model for
future hydrogen-production facilities to provide fuel for a new fleet of
hydrogen-powered cars and trucks. President Bush's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative,
announced on January 28, envisions the transformation of the nation's
transportation fleet from reliance on petroleum to the use of clean-burning
hydrogen by 2020. Common air pollutants such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen
oxides created in FutureGen's coal gasification process would be cleaned
from the coal gases and converted to useable byproducts such as fertilizers
and soil enhancers. Carbon dioxide, one of the most potent of greenhouse
gases, would be captured and permanently sequestered in deep geologic
formations such as depleted oil and gas reservoirs and unmineable coal
seams. The plant is expected to be capable of producing
commercially competitive electricity by 2020.
In addition
to the FutureGen announcement, Dobriansky outlined plans for creating the
Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum an international body that will
bring together ministerial-level
representatives to discuss the latest research and emerging technologies for
capturing and storing carbon dioxide. Dobriansky said the forum, which will
hold its first meeting near Washington, D.C. in June, would also provide an
international venue for planning future,multilateral carbon sequestration
projects, such as FutureGen. Dobriansky said the United States has so far
invited Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, India, Italy, Japan,
Mexico, Norway, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom and the European
Union to
join the
forum, adding that foreign partners are essential to achieving the ultimate
goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. "If we
are to succeed in addressing the challenge of global climate change, we need
the sustained effort of many nations," she said. "We need a collective
effort. Science holds the key to much needed breakthroughs to develop and
deploy new clean energy technologies."
Dobriansky
said the forum provides a way for the United States and its international
partners to collaborate on carbon capture and storage activities, and to
mobilize international resources. "Through such collaboration, we can
develop technologies that are universally applicable and not previously
thought possible." Global cooperation is already underway in some areas of
carbon sequestration. One of the most notable projects is the Weyburn oil
recovery project in Saskatchewan, Canada, where carbon dioxide from the Great
Plains Coal Gasification Plant in the U.S. state of North Dakota is being
injected into an active oil field. Scientists from 18 nations are monitoring
the project to determine if the carbon dioxide remains
entrapped in the field. Dobriansky said such carbon sequestration projects,
as well as other approaches
to address the problem of climate change, are needed because fossil fuels
account for about 85 percent of energy use today and will remain a dominant
source of global energy for at least the next three
decades.
"The world
holds abundant coal resources, and this coal is in many cases the cheapest
and most available source of energy for developing countries," she said. "As
a result, we expect world use of coal to increase by half over the next 30
years, and by two-thirds for power generation uses. That's why we must
invest in new technologies for clean fossil fuels, including coal."
See Also:
U.S.
Seeking Cleaner Model of Coal Plant, The New York Times, February 28, 2003
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/28/science/28COAL.html?ex=1047013200&en=60af0306f98a1ac3&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
back to contents
33) THE
COST OF CLEAN AIR
Chicago
Sun-times
February
28, 2003
Internet:
http://www.suntimes.com/output/business/cst-fin-global28.html
A study
from the Heartland Institute warns that new efforts to curb greenhouse gas
emissions that contribute to global warming could cost the Illinois
government as much as $1.1 billion annually to implement, and sock
businesses and consumers with as much as $46.1 billion in lost wages and
higher energy costs.
The study
comes as environmental activists mount a state-by-state campaign to
implement provisions of the Kyoto Protocol, a 1997 treaty that called for
scaling back business activity to reduce emissions to pre-1990 levels. The
Bush administration repudiated the treaty at the national level, but the
state-by-state strategy is gaining traction in Illinois' new
Democrat-controlled General Assembly, which has shifted to a more liberal
attitude on environmental regulation.
A
state-by-state approach is estimated to cost consumers and business 10 times
as much as a federal program because it is less efficient, said the study.
"Our intention is to warn state legislators not to squander large parts of
state budgets on programs like this," said Joe Bast, president of the
libertarian-oriented Heartland Institute. "A lot of legislators are being
told such programs are costless, and that's not true." The estimate of a
future state program's impact on businesses and Illinois consumers assumes
that it is likely that factories would be forced to install new
pollution-control technology, some businesses would have to close certain
plants to meet emission standards, and that consumer energy prices would
soar as producers passed along the expense of converting to higher-priced
cleaner fuels such as solar or wind power. Implementing a state program
also would be a costly state budget item as it would require the
establishment of a new regulatory agency to oversee compliance as well as
financial incentives to encourage emission reduction by businesses and
residents, Bast said. It would also trim state tax revenue.
The study,
authored by Bast and James M. Taylor and Jay Lehr, suggests that the science
of global warming is too uncertain to justify such expenditures. It also
says that global warming, if indeed it is occurring, could actually have a
small positive effect on the U.S. economy by extending the growing season
for farmers, expanding areas that can be used for agriculture, and reducing
snow removal costs. Illinois is not the only state facing higher costs
should new legislation mandating emission reductions be approved, the study
said. The cost of a national state-by-state program to consumers and
businesses would range from a low of $149 million in Vermont up to $8.2
billion for California, the study said. A typical state program would
likely cost consumers and businesses in Vermont $1.5 billion while
California would pay $82.4 billion.
Howard
Learner, executive director of the activist Environmental Law & Policy
Center in Chicago, said Heartland doesn't address the many economic benefits
that are expected to come from state regulation that supports renewable
energy. The center supports a bill introduced by Sen. Patrick Welch (D-Peru)
that would set state standards to require that at least 5 percent of the
state's total energy supply come from renewable energy by 2010 and at least
15 percent by 2020. The state set these levels as goals in 2001. Besides
Welch, an assistant majority leader in the Senate, the Senate Bill 25 is
co-sponsored by heavyweights Barack Obama (D-Chicago) and majority caucus
chair Debbie Halvorson (D-Chicago Heights), and was assigned to the Senate
Rules Committee, under the direct control of Majority Leader Emil Jones
(D-Chicago).
"It's
widely viewed as a win-win situation," Learner said. An economic study by an
arm of the University of Illinois estimated that the renewable requirements
could create 8,580 net new jobs and $950 million of net economic growth by
2010. Farmers would be among those who benefit economically as they gain new
income sources such as leasing land for wind turbines.
The study
also comes at a time of increased pressure on the Bush administration
regarding its energy policies. Last week seven Northeastern states announced
they planned to sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for its failure
to regulate power plant emissions of carbon dioxide, a major global warming
gas. State Sen. Steve Rauschenberger (R-Elgin), a member of the Energy and
Environment Committee, said legislation calling for stricter regulation of
greenhouse gases has been submitted routinely in recent years with no
success but has a better chance of passing this year, despite the financial
constraints the state faces, given that Democrats now control Springfield.
However, he fears that such legislation could put the state in a difficult
economic position without reducing overall pollution levels because it could
drive businesses to locate in other neighboring states. Uniform federal
standards would be more effective, he said.
"The goal
is laudable, but for states to inje ct themselves is a clumsy way to do it,"
Rauschenberger said. "It ought to be national policy set by scientists at
the EPA." Welch, who introduced the legislation supporting a state standard
on renewable energy, said the Heartland study's economic analysis is
self-serving. He said it did not look at the many hidden costs related to
the country and state's current dependence on scarce fossil fuels from other
countries, such as the expense of going to war periodically to protect our
oil supply.
"It sticks
in my craw," Welch said of the study. "Let us plant some trees and see if
they grow."
back to contents
34) UK
ENERGY POLICY COULD HURT BRITISH INDUSTRY-EIUG
Planet Ark
February
28, 2003
Internet:
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/19995/story.htm
LONDON -
Britain's big industrial energy users said this week higher gas and power
prices, resulting from government measures to curb greenhouse gas emissions,
could hit their ability to compete in world markets.
Lobby group
Energy Intensive Users Group (EIUG) said that unless other countries
followed similar policies to those outlined by the UK government in a white
paper earlier this week, the impact on British industry could be
devastating. "We must not neglect the potential impact on industrial
competitiveness," said Jeremy Nicholson, director of the EIUG, which lobbies
on behalf of industries including steel, chemicals and paper. "The big
dilemma for energy policy remains how to achieve a low carbon economy
without damaging competitiveness," he said. The government, which aims to
cut carbon emissions by 60 percent over the next 50 years, said its policies
might add 10-25 percent to industrial power prices and 15-30 percent to
industrial gas prices over the next 17 years. But it said the price
increases would not push up energy costs to consumers because increased
efficiency should lead to them using less energy.
back to contents
35)
SUSTAINABLE ENERGY PROVIDES ECONOMIC BENEFITS
Edie weekly
summaries
February
28, 2003
Internet:
http://www.edie.net/gf.cfm?L=left_frame.html&R=http://www.edie.net/news/Archive/6710.cfm
Promotion
of renewable energy and energy efficiency could provide economic benefits as
well as the expected environmental bonuses, according to researchers in
Australia. Economic activity in New South Wales, Australia could increase by
more than AU$500 million (over US$300 million) per year, with the creation
of up to 4,000 new jobs, only a quarter of which would be in the sustainable
energy industry, the remainder in the wider economy, according to a study
commissioned by the Sustainable Energy Development Authority, a state
government body based in Sydney. However, the benefits depend on the
adoption of multi-pronged approaches, rather than individual measures taken
in isolation, according to the study, so that the savings from improved
energy efficiency can offset the added cost of increasing the share of
renewable energy. For New South Wales in particular, an ongoing effort will
be required so that the state keeps pace with global trends and maintains a
healthy slice of the global market in greenhouse friendly technologies and
services. The state currently has sufficient green power for 55,000
households, offsetting 400,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions, says SEDA.
back to contents
36)
OFFSETTING GLOBAL WARMING
The New
York Times
February
28, 2003
Internet:
http://www.iht.com/articles/88101.html
Do you feel
guilty about global warming every time you get behind the wheel of your car?
If you are a frequent flier, start feeling more guilty. On a round trip from
New York to London, according to the calculations of the Edinburgh Center
for Carbon Management in Scotland, a Boeing 747 spews out about 440 tons of
carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas. That is about the same amount that
80 SUVs emit in a full year of hard driving. But short of swimming to London
or jogging to Los Angeles, what is the concerned business traveler to do?
The airline industry, busy trying to avoid bankruptcy, is not offering tips
on how to limit the environmental damage. And chances are your travel agent
has not given the matter much thought.
But a few
organizations, among them the Better World Club and American Forests in the
United States and Future Forests in Britain, have stepped into the breach.
They have devised ways for the environmentally concerned to mitigate their
role in the collective output of carbon dioxide. For a contribution, they
will plant trees in Siberia or Texas; replace inefficient oil-burning
boilers in Portland, Oregon; supply energy-saving light bulbs in Jamaica, or
take some other conservation measure aimed at offsetting the harm of an
individual's commercial flight. Take that Boeing 747's round trip to London.
It will discharge a total of 880,000 pounds (400,000 kilograms) of carbon
dioxide, or 126 pounds for each mile flown. At an occupancy rate of 78
percent, each of the 317 passengers will be responsible for 2,776 pounds of
the pollutant.
Future
Forests, which is based in London, allows a traveler to help offset those
emissions by planting two trees or installing two energy-saving light bulbs
in a developing country for each round trip to London. At Future Forests you
cannot save the world on the cheap: Each tree or light bulb will set you
back about $12. Its Web site, www.futureforests.com, offers a wealth of
information about the environmental impact of lifestyles and travels and
about the steps that can be taken to soften that impact. It also features an
impressive database with thousands of airports worldwide. That
once-in-a-lifetime round trip from Akiachak Seaplane Base in Alaska to the
always exciting city of Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria, England? Chalk up 3,430
pounds of carbon dioxide on the debit side of your environmental account,
but still just two trees or bulbs on the credit side.
Future
Forests offers a no-frills menu of one tree or bulb for each short-haul
flight, two trees or bulbs for each medium-distance trip and five of either
for each long-range odyssey. Each transaction will net you a free luggage
tag made of recycled leather. Future Forests is not the only game in town.
The Better World Club (www.betterworldclub.com), the self-declared
environmentally friendly alternative to the AAA, offers a simple
alternative. Suggested donations of $11 for every domestic flight and $22
for every international flight will be invested in new energy-efficient
heating systems in schools in its hometown, Portland, Oregon. On trips
booked through its travel agency, Better World Travel, the club will pay
part or all of the fees itself.
The group
has rejected tree planting as a solution, however, exposing a rift in the
nascent movement. "It is very difficult to calculate the carbon dioxide
absorption by trees," said Mitchell Rofsky, president of the Better World
Club. "It is easy to cheat, and besides, as young trees absorb more CO² than
old ones, carbon dioxide offsets may inspire the clear-cutting of forests to
plant new trees."
American
Forests, a century-old nonprofit organization in Washington, offers the
cheapest option: It will plant a tree for every dollar donated, and the
donor can choose from programs like Memorial Trees, which honors those
killed in the Sept. 11 attacks, and Trees for Tigers, which is aimed at
restoring the habitat of the threatened Siberian Tiger. The minimum donation
is $15. At its Web site, www.americanforests.org, you can calculate the
carbon dioxide you produce in such activities as driving your car or mowing
your lawn.
So far, the
number of Americans who pay to undo the damage their flights inflict is
negligible. The Better World Club says it handles 1,500 to 2,000 requests a
year. American Forests says it receives more than 25,000 donations, though
not all are related to air travel. Future Forests says the majority of the
40,000 individuals who have paid for environmentally friendly measures since
it was founded in 1997 are Europeans.
Should the
public become more uneasy about global warming, though, these figures could
explode. In European countries like the Netherlands, Britain and Germany,
the practice has become much more common. And it is not limited to flying.
Avis Europe, for example, offers clients who book a car online the
opportunity to pay a small extra fee to have trees planted. In the United
States, Avis said it had no immediate plans to follow suit. There may be
cause for more concern in the years ahead. Despite today's lull in air
travel, according to figures provided by the Edinburgh Center, an
independent consulting group, worldwide carbon dioxide emissions from civil
aviation will double from 1999 to 2015, to 900 million tons a year. This is
despite a 20 percent increase in fuel efficiency by the airline industry
over the period. By 2015, airplanes' share of human-generated carbon dioxide
emissions will rise to 3 percent, from 2 percent in 1999.
While few
in number, the American business travelers who have signed onto the
environmental campaign have strong views. "The fact that the U.S. government
hasn't ratified the Kyoto treaty against global warming was a big reason for
me," said Martha Delaney, a lawyer in Minneapolis and a regular flier to San
Diego, who joined the Better World Club last summer. Shannon St. John,
president of a nonprofit concern in Durham, North Carolina, who makes around
20 business trips a year, says the airlines should pitch in. "It would be
marvelous if they gave you the option to pay a bit extra to offset the
negative environmental impact of flying," said St. John, who in December
began paying Future Forests to plant trees. It might take a while for the
airlines to come on board. "We are extremely focused on financial survival,"
said Tim Doke, a spokesman for American Airlines. "CO² emissions are not
something we have time for to think about."
Jonathan
Shopley, Future Forests' chief executive, says his appeals to the airline
industry have fallen on deaf ears. "They act toward this environmental
problem like the chemical industry 20 years ago: 'If we ignore it, maybe it
will go away,'" he said. "But it won't." Big business is not thinking a lot
about the issue, either, but here and there the movement has won a corporate
convert. Companies that offset the business air miles traveled by their
employees include Nike; Interface, a carpet maker in Atlanta, and the
American subsidiary of Tetra Pack, the Swedish packaging concern. Interface
pays American Forests to plant a tree for every 1,500 passenger miles its
employees fly. "It's part of our program to minimize our impact on the
environment," said Ray Anderson, Interface's chairman. "The cost is minimal,
and we create enormous good will."
back to contents
37)
ENERGY WHITE PAPER GOOD IN THEORY, BUT WHERE ARE THE TARGETS?
Edie weekly
summaries
February
28, 2003
Internet:
http://www.edie.net/gf.cfm?L=left_frame.html&R=http://www.edie.net/news/Archive/6699.cfm
The
Governments new energy white paper, published on 24 February calls for a
60% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, and for increased use of
renewables and energy efficiency, but it has been criticised for being high
on spin and much lower on firm targets. According to the white paper, the
goals for the Governments energy policy are to put the UK on a path to cut
CO2 emissions by 60%, in line with the opinion of the Royal Commission on
Environmental Pollution. The Government has also published its response to
the Royal Commissions opinion, but although this agrees with the
Commission, it talks about goals rather than the firm targets called
for.
The white
paper also outlines the importance of maintaining the reliability of energy
supplies, promoting competitive markets and ensuring that every home is
adequately and affordably heated. This includes promoting renewable energy
and energy efficiency, such as through pushing for higher energy efficiency
standards in tradable goods in Europe, and lowering carbon fuels in
transport. The renewable energy industry is dismayed by the white paper.
Renewables firm Green Energy UK has described the paper as a missed
opportunity. Ramsay Dunning, the companys Finance Director, is disappointed
at the lack of targets. Consumers will only go so far without the carrot
and stick, he warns. The Government provides no stick, and the carrots are
woefully small.
Dale Vince,
Managing Director of energy provider Ecotricity, agrees. The move from
targets to aspirations is not a positive step and weakens the Governments
commitment, he says. One of the biggest problems for renewables is the
planning system, with eight out of 10 wind development applications failing.
This week, Ecotricity has joined with carbon offset firm Future Forests to
launch a campaign of renewable energy to potential customers. The
partnership will create a one-stop-shop where customers will be able to
directly reduce their individual carbon emissions by both using green
energy, and offsetting their remaining emissions by either planting
indigenous trees, or paying for new renewable energy projects. The left-wing
think tank, the Institute of Public Policy Research, sides with the
renewables industry, stating that the white paper could put investment in
renewable energy at risk. Whilst it welcomes the ambitious target to cut
CO2, it notes that the strategy for delivery was chronically short on
detail.
It is
frustrating that the government doesnt have the nerve to commit to formal
2020 targets for renewable energy and energy efficiency, said Alex Evans,
research fellow at the IPPR. This will send a negative message to financial
institutions considering whether to invest in renewable energy, he added.
In a speech
on sustainable development timed to coincide with the launch of the white
paper, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair made what could be interpreted as a
veiled attack on US President George W Bush for his stance on the Kyoto
Protocol. He stated the importance of the Protocol, saying that it is a myth
that reducing emissions will make us poorer. Over the last six years the UK
economy has grown 17%, whilst emissions have dropped 5%, he said, but added:
Of course, there is little point in the UK acting alone.
Calling for
international co-operation on sustainable development issues, Blair noted
the sadness of seeing African leaders decrying attempts to isolate Robert
Mugabe as neo-colonialism when his rule is impoverishing millions of black
Zimbabweans. This occurs because the West wants it, so African believes that
it should be resisted. The only answer is to construct a common agenda that
recognises both sets of issues have to be confronted for the worlds
security and prosperity to be guaranteed, he said. There will be no
lasting peace whilst there is appalling injustice and poverty.
However,
Liberal Democrat Shadow Environment Secretary Norman Baker is unimpressed.
Every few years the Prime Minister feels the need to give a speech on the
environment which is followed by inaction, he said. Although the Prime
Minister admitted that even with the current threat of war, climate change
is the greatest threat long term, the Government is spending £3 billion on
the war and £200 million a year on old nuclear power stations just to
maintain the status quo, says Vince. By comparison the renewables industry
is being given £100 million, he points out.
Green group
Airportwatch has noted the Governments apparent double standards. Just two
days after Blair pledged to cut the UKs greenhouse gas emissions, the
Government launched a consultation on the expansion of British airports,
when air travel is the fastest rising cause of man-induced climate change.
Last year, the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution warned that air
traffic will become a major contributor to climate change. Ministers must
stop conning the public into believing that more airports are inevitable,
said John Stewart of pressure group Hacan ClearSkies. Take away aviations
privileged tax free status and the demand to fly drops to a reasonable level
which could be coped with using existing airport space.
back to contents
38)
POLLUTERS MAY BE SUED FOR FUTURE CLIMATE CHANGE
Daily
Telegraph
February
27, 2003
Internet:
http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/02/27/ngreen27.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/02/27/ixhome.html
One day it
may be possible to sue a greenhouse-gas polluter for causing floods or
reducing a farmer's yield of crops, according to a study by a climate
expert. Scientists say the greenhouse effect will trigger more extreme
weather, and have predicted that Britain will experience drier summers
punctuated by torrential downpours. Although the Meteorological Office says
it is impossible at present to link specific floods with past emissions of
greenhouse gases, the widely held assumption that this will always be the
case is challenged today by Dr Myles Allen of Oxford University, a leading
climate expert. In the journal Nature, Dr Allen suggests a possible method
by which the amount of extra risk of adverse weather conditions can be
attributed to a particular cause - car emissions contributing to the risk of
local flooding, for example. This could lead to the culprits being penalised
by compensating homeowners.
He decided
to tackle the issue last month when the swollen Thames was rising and
flooding his neighbourhood in Oxford. Dr Allen said: "The issue is important
as it touches on a question that is far closer to many of our hearts than
global sustainability or planetary survival: who to sue when the house price
falls?
"We will
never be able to say, at any confidence level, that human influence has
contributed X per cent to an actual weather event. What we can say is that
past greenhouse gas emissions are likely to have increased the risk of that
event over its pre-industrial value. "This does not preclude compensation
settlements - juries have not been perturbed by the possibility that an
individual smoker might in any event have contracted cancer," he said. One
day, people driving up the local hill in their big four-wheel drives might
be contributing to the cost of replacing flood-damaged homes nearby. "By the
time we finish paying off our home loans in the early 2020s," he added,
"almost two-thirds of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will have been
emitted post-1990." He believes that a market may emerge in insurance cover
against climate-related lawsuits. This would reflect concern over climate
change, without involving politicians and international accords. "Even the
most impassioned eco-warrior has nothing on a homeowner faced with negative
equity," he added.
back to contents
39)
WHITE HOUSE ANNOUNCES MULTITRACK CLIMATE CHANGE INITIATIVES
US Bureau
of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs
February
27, 2003
Internet:
http://usinfo.state.gov/cgi-bin/washfile/display.pl?p=/products/washfile/latest&f=03022803.glt&t=/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml
On February
14, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to an ambitious climate
change strategy that will reduce domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
relative to the size of the American economy. The United States will achieve
this goal by cutting its GHG intensity -- how much it emits per unit of
economic activity -- by 18% over the next 10 years. This strategy will set
America on a path to slow the
growth of
greenhouse gas emissions, and -- as the science justifies -- to stop, and
then reverse that growth. The President's policy also continues the United
States leadership role in supporting vital climate change research, laying
the groundwork for future action by investing in science, technology, and
institutions. In addition, the United States strategy emphasizes
international cooperation and promotes working with other nations to develop
an efficient and coordinated response to global climate change. In taking
prudent
environmental action at home and abroad, the United States is advancing a
pro-growth, pro-development approach to addressing this important global
challenge.
WORKING
WITH OTHER NATIONS TO DEVELOP AN EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE GLOBAL RESPONSE
Enhanced
support in the developing world. The President's FY2004 budget supports
significant funding for climate change-related science and technology
research, development, and transfer in the developing world,
including:
-
$155
million for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID),
which continues to be a major source of climate technology assistance to
developing countries.
-
$70
million for the Global Environment Facility (GEF), to help developing
countries better measure and reduce emissions, and invest in clean and
renewable energy technologies. The United States has requested a total of
$185 million for GEF in FY 2004, $107.5 million to cover the second of
four payments under the third replenishment of the GEF (GEF-3) and $77.5
million to clear a portion of U.S. arrears.As part of the GEF-3
replenishment agreement, the United States has pledged $500 million to the
GEF over the next 4 years to help developing countries address
environmental problems with potential global impact. This commitment
represents a 16% increase over the U.S. contribution to the previous
replenishment.
-
A
significant share of the overall funding required to meet the President's
commitment of $25 million for climate observation systems in developing
countries.
-
$50
million for tropical forest conservation, including $20 million under the
Tropical Forest Conservation Act to help countries redirect debt payments
toward protecting tropical forests, which store millions of tons of
carbon.
Multilateral partnerships. The President's FY 2004 budget also supports
significant funding for Department of Energy (DOE) multilateral climate
change-related technology research and development (R&D), including:
-
$9.7
million for the Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Initiative, which is
developing the next-generation nuclear systems to produce electricity to
drive our 21st century economy and to generate vast
quantities of economical hydrogen for transportation use without emitting
greenhouse gases. In this effort, the U.S. leads multi-national R&D projects
through the Generation IV International Forum, comprised of Argentina,
Brazil, Canada, France, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of South
Africa, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the U.S. This international
approach seeks to develop technologies that are widely acceptable, enables
DOE to access the best expertise in the world to develop complex new
technologies, and helps leverage scarce nuclear R&D resources.
-
$62
million for carbon sequestration research and development, which is
developing a portfolio of technologies that hold great promise to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel plants through carbon
separation, capture, transport and storage. The U.S. is also inviting
international partners to participate in a Carbon Sequestration Leadership
Forum that provides a way for the U.S. and other governments to take
effective action in a number of ways by partnering with the private
sector on carbon capture and storage activities already underway; by
strengthening international multilateral efforts in research and
development of carbon sequestration technologies; and by mobilizing
international resources.
-
$12
million to support U.S. preparations for negotiations with the United
Kingdom, other European Union nations, Russia, China, Japan and Canada on
the creation of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER),
an ambitious international research project to harness the promise of
fusion energy. In the longer term, the results of ITER will advance the
effort to produce clean, safe, renewable, and commercially-available
fusion energy by the middle of this century. Commercialization of fusion
has the potential to dramatically improve America s energy security while
significantly reducing air pollution and emissions of greenhouse gases.
Bilateral
partnerships. The United States is committed to working with other nations,
especially developing countries, to build future prosperity along a cleaner
and better path. The President's strategy promotes cooperative relationships
with other countries, so that our objectives and activities complement each
other in addressing climate change effectively. Since June 2001, the United
States has engaged in bilateral partnerships with Australia, Canada, China,
seven Central American countries (Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador,
Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama), the European Union, India,
Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, and the Russian Federation on
issues ranging from climate change science to energy and sequestration
technologies to policy approaches.
back to contents
40)
REPORT: EXTREME WEATHER ON THE RISE, LIKELY TO GET WORSE
Associated
Press
February
27, 2003
Internet:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/02/27/international1427EST0686.DTL
The world
has experienced unusually extreme weather in recent decades and economic
losses from storms and other catastrophes have increased tenfold, an
independent research group reported. The World Water Council said Thursday
that more intense rainy seasons, longer dry seasons, stronger storms, and
rising sea levels had helped cause an increasing number of disastrous floods
and droughts. Global warming is causing the changes in weather patterns,
while growing populations and migration to vulnerable areas is increasing
the cost of each disaster, said William Cosgrove, vice president of the
World Water Council. "The forecast is that it's going to continue to get
worse unless we start to take actions to mitigate global warming," he said.
Between
1971 and 1995, the group reported, floods affected more than 1.5 billion
people around the world. About 318,000 people died because of floods and
more than 81 million were made homeless, the council said. The figures were
culled from research done by scientists at the Dialogue on Water and
Climate, as well as papers by researchers from other groups. The findings
will be presented in greater detail at the World Water Forum, scheduled to
be held next month in Kyoto, Japan, site of negotiations for the global
warming protocol that was rejected by President Bush. The council quoted
climate experts as predicting changes in the next century would lead to
shorter and more intense rainy seasons in some areas and longer droughts in
others, endangering some crops and species and causing a drop in global food
production. Rising sea levels pose a serious threat to small island
nations, low-lying countries like Bangladesh and the Netherlands and major
cities like New York, Tokyo, Buenos Aires, Argentina, and Lagos, Nigeria,
the group warned.
Sea levels
are expected to rise by 19 inches between 1990 and 2100, the scientists
estimated. "Even if we were to stop all carbon dioxide emissions today,
global warming is going to continue," Cosgrove said. "As a consequence, the
sea is going to continue expanding and rising." Carbon dioxide is among the
"greenhouse gases" blamed for warming the earth. While most climate experts
agree pollution is responsible, a few remain skeptical. The White House
says humans clearly are agents of environmental change but says it is
unclear to what degree. Bush has called for more research on warming, a
stance criticized this week by a National Academy of Sciences panel. While
scientists could not say exactly how much the incidence of extreme weather
had increased, Cosgrove said records for storms, floods and droughts were
being broken every year, killing thousands and causing serious economic
disruption. "Most countries aren't ready to deal adequately with the severe
natural disasters that we get now, a situation that will become much worse,"
he said.
The council
said there were 26 "major flood disasters" worldwide in the 1990s, compared
to 18 in the 1980s, eight in the 1970s, seven in the 1960s and six in the
1950s. The largest number of severe floods occurred in Asia, the council
said. Overall, precipitation worldwide has increased by about 2 percent
since 1900, the group said. Poor nations tend to suffer far more than
wealthier ones when hit by weather disasters, both in terms of human
casualties and economic loss, the council said. While 2000 flooding in
Mozambique cut the southern African country's gross domestic product by 45
percent, severe floods last year in Germany were blamed for just a one
percent decline in GDP, the group said, citing World Bank figures.
Hurricane Mitch had a devastating impact when it walloped Central America
in 1998, killing thousands and causing billions of dollars in damage.
Cosgrove
blamed the difference in impacts partly on growing populations in poor
countries and migration to risky or environmentally damaged areas such as
flood plains or bare mountainsides at risk of mudslides.
In
drought-prone regions, growing populations put more pressure on food and
water supplies and mean shortages happen faster when rains stop, he said.
The group also said droughts were growing more severe and widespread,
accounting for up to 45 percent of reported deaths from natural disasters
between 1992 and 2001.
On the Net:
Dialogue on
Water and Climate report,
www.waterandclimate.org
World Water
Council,
www.worldwatercouncil.org
World Water
Forum,
www.worldwaterforum.org
back to contents
41)
RUSSIA URGED TO RESCUE KYOTO PACT
The
Guardian
February
26, 2003
Internet:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,903094,00.html
Pressure on
Russia to ratify the Kyoto protocol is intensifying amid fears in the
European Union that Moscow may scupper the agreement to combat climate
change by refusing to sanction it. Vladimir Putin, Russia's president,
promised last year that the ratification process would be under way by now
in the duma, the lower house of the country's parliament, but no progress
has been made. The United States and Australia have already withdrawn their
support, putting Russia in a crucial position. Its support will make or
break the pact. Gerhard Schröder, the German chancellor, and Tony Blair
have separately written to Mr Putin in the past two months asking him to
act, so far without success. So concerned is the EU about the lack of
progress that a delegation of the leaders of three countries will be sent to
see Mr Putin in March.
Russian
doubters about the value of ratifying the Kyoto protocol have organised a
world climate conference for September 29 in Moscow. This conference is to
"re-examine" the science on the issue, seen as casting doubt upon it, a
position that will delight President George Bush, who wants to destroy the
protocol.
Behind the
conference are the two scientists who lead for Russia in the climate talks,
Alexander Bedritski and Yuri Israel. Both are respected members of the
Russian Academy of Sciences, but they apparently believe that climate change
might be good for their country. They believe global warming might pep up
cold regions and allow more grain and potatoes to be grown, making the
country wealthier. They argue that from the Russian perspective nothing
needs to be done to stop climate change.
The EU
hopes that Mr Putin, having promised that the protocol would be ratified
this spring, will bring his reluctant scientists into line. The energy and
economic ministries are said to still be in favour of the treaty because
they expect to make money out of it. Under the complex rules Russia's
support is essential if the protocol is to succeed. This is because
developed countries that are responsible for 55% of the world's greenhouse
gas emissions must ratify it for it to come into force. With the US and
Australia refusing to sign, Russia's cooperation is needed to reach the
required figure. All the other necessary countries have already ratified the
pact or are doing so. Currently there are 104 parties, representing over
44% of eligible emissions - Russian's emissions would automatically bring
the protocol into legal force.
All the
developed countries have a target to reduce emissions on 1990 levels by 2010
based on the protocol becoming law this year. If a country fails to reach
its target by domestic measures, it is entitled to buy surplus carbon from
any country that has already exceeded its target. This provision could make
Russia a lot of money because it already has more than reached its reduction
target because of the collapse of the economy in the 1990s. Several
countries not expected to reach their targets would be offering hard cash
for Russian surpluses. A second scheme under the protocol allows clean
energy projects and carbon saving schemes inside Russian borders to be
financed by other countries which can gain carbon credits as a result.
To try to
counter establishment scientists who believe climate change could be good
for Russia, a report on how the country will suffer will be circulated in
the coming weeks. The report, produced jointly by scientists from Kassel
University in Germany, Moscow State University and the centre for ecology
and forest production of the Russian Academy of Sciences, contradicts the
establishment view.
It says
that previous calculations that more warmth and rain will be bring more
crops for Russia fail to take into account regional variations. It says that
only 15 out of the 89 administrative regions of Russia provide the rest of
the country with much of its food. Under the most likely climate change
calculations these 15 areas in the south and west will suffer summer heat
and droughts. The number of people affected by these droughts is 58 million.
It will rise to 77 million by the 2020s and 141 million by 2070. "The
possibility of more frequent bad harvests is a threat to Russia's food
security that should be taken seriously," the report says. Although
rainfall is set to increase in much of Russia, increasing river flows and
groundwater levels, and incidentally the risk of flooding, the southwest
will suffer the opposite. There is already pressure on water supplies
because of large withdrawals for cities and irrigation. Lack of rain will
reduce river flows even further.
The report
concludes: "Our findings challenge the belief that climate change will
generally benefit Russian agriculture and water resources. Instead they
point out how extreme events such as droughts may become more frequent in
key areas of Russia and may pose a threat to the food and water security of
its people."
Dr Paul
Jefferiss, head of environment policy at Britain's Royal Society for the
Protection of Birds, said: "Russia's ratification is vitally important. If
she doesn't go ahead, years of hard-won agreements will be placed in
jeopardy, and meanwhile the climate continues to change."
back to contents
42)
DENMARK TO INVEST ABROAD TO MEET KYOTO CLIMATE OBLIGATIONS
Space Daily
February
26, 2003
Internet:
http://www.spacedaily.com/2003/030226160702.rrjafir6.html
The Danish
government Wednesday announced plans to invest in environmental protection
abroad, in particular in eastern Europe, in order to meet its international
climate obligations. According to forecasts published in December by the
European Environment Agency, Denmark is among the European Union member
states that will have a hard time meeting its obligations if it only takes
national measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The
Liberal-Conservative coalition government acknowledged on Wednesday that it
would take Denmark longer than expected to reach its Kyoto Protocol
obligation to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 21 percent from 1990 levels in
the period 2008-2012. It also said it would be more expensive than
initially expected.
The
government said it therefore intended to take advantage of Kyoto regulations
allowing a country some flexibility in reducing its own carbon-dioxide
emissions if it helps another country to pollute less.
Copenhagen
stressed that it would not abandon its own national plans to reduce
emissions. "It is much cheaper to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions abroad
than in Denmark, and the effect on the climate is the same since pollution
knows no borders," the Danish ministers of finance, trade and industry and
environment wrote in a joint statement. Environmental investments outside
Denmark will allow Copenhagen to save two to three billion kroner (269 to
403 million euros, 290 to 434 million dollars) per year.
Last month,
the government signed a framework agreement concerning cooperation with
Romania, following a similar agreement signed with Slovakia last year.
Copenhagen is also currently in negotiations with Russia, Ukraine, Poland,
Estonia and Bulgaria
back to contents
43)
METHANE ERUPTIONS COULD FUEL GLOBAL WARMING
ENS
February
26, 2003
Internet:
http://ens-news.com/ens/feb2003/2003-02-26-09.asp
WOODS HOLE,
Massachusetts, February 26, 2003 (ENS) - New research suggests that warming
oceans could cause "intense eruptions" of methane from the sea floor,
leading to "catastrophic" global warming.
Scientists
have found new evidence indicating that during periods of rapid climate
warming, methane gas has been released from the seafloor in intense
eruptions. In a study published in the current issue of the journal
"Science," Kai-Uwe Hinrichs and colleagues Laura Hmelo and Sean Sylva of the
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) provide a direct link between
methane reservoirs in coastal marine sediments and the global carbon cycle,
an indicator of global warming and cooling.
Molecular
fossils from methane consuming bacteria found in sediments in the Santa
Barbara Basin off California deposited during the last glacial period -
70,000 to 12,000 years ago - indicate that large quantities of methane were
emitted from the seafloor during warmer phases of the last ice age. Methane,
one of the major greenhouse gases, is stored on the seafloor as an ice like
solid known as methane hydrate.
Previous
evidence for such massive eruptions was based on isotopic properties of
calcite shells of foraminifera, microscopic marine animals called forams.
Because a variety of factors could lead to very similar signals in their
shells, that evidence has remained controversial. The preserved molecular
remnants found by the WHOI team result from bacteria that fed exclusively on
methane and indicate that large quantities of this powerful greenhouse gas
were present in coastal waters off California. The team studied samples that
were deposited between 44,000 and 37,000 years ago. "For the first time, we
are able to clearly establish a connection between distinct isotopic
depletions in forams and high concentrations of methane in the fossil
record," said Hinrichs, an assistant scientist in the Institution's Geology
and Geophysics Department.
"The large
amounts of methane presumably released during one event about 44,000 years
ago suggest a mechanism different from those underlying the emissions at
warmer periods, i.e. slow decomposition of methane hydrate triggered by
warming of bottom waters," Hinrichs continued. "The sudden release of these
enormous quantities of methane was probably caused by landslides and melting
of the methane hydrate."
Since there
was already indirect evidence of methane eruptions in the Santa Barbara
Basin area, Hinrichs and colleagues looked for fossil remnants of bacteria
that would have flourished only under high concentrations of methane. In a
44,000 year old sediment sample, a distinct type of biomarker representing
bacterial communities that oxidize methane in the absence of oxygen provided
evidence for an abrupt, catastrophic release of methane, presumably trapped
as hydrate below the sea floor.
The WHOI
team's data, from sediment cores taken by the Ocean Drilling Program off
southern California, show that substantial quantities of methane were
released at least several times during the past 60,000 years, leading to
periodic fluctuations in the levels of methane in deep waters in the Santa
Barbara Basin.
The
researchers say increased bottom water temperatures could mobilize or
release large amounts of methane hydrate in shallow waters. According to
some current estimates, there are about 10,000 billion tons of methane
stored beneath the ocean and on continents. In comparison, the contribution
of humans to the atmosphere's inventory of greenhouse gases by fossil fuel
burning amounts to about 200 billion tons of carbon in the form of carbon
dioxide. If even a small portion of the stored methane were to escape into
the atmosphere, the resulting greenhouse warming would be catastrophic.
"It was a
surprise to find this sort of evidence," said Hinrichs, who was looking for
evidence indicating mechanisms other than methane. "Although this research
tells us something about the amount of methane consumed by bacteria in the
ocean, it doesn't tell us anything about methane emissions into the
atmosphere because neither forams nor methane biomarkers record the portion
of methane that escaped out of the ocean." "But one thing is for sure," he
said, "our results clearly show that relatively minor environmental changes
can have a major impact on sensitive coastal regions with yet unknown
consequences for climate and biota." Hinrichs plans to look for similar
evidence elsewhere to determine whether this process, as a driver of climate
variation, happened simultaneously at other locations around the world. This
work, he said, is just the beginning of better understanding of the role of
methane in the carbon cycle and ultimately on climate on geologic time
scales. "We have a very poor understanding of the biogeochemical mechanisms
that control production, destruction and accumulation of methane in
sediments underlying the ocean," Hinrichs said. "We need to understand the
big picture of what drives methane and the carbon cycle and the actual
impact of methane emissions from hydrates on climate.
back to contents
44) UK AND SWEDEN CALL ON EU TO FIGHT CLIMATE
CHANGE
EU Observer
February 25, 2003
Internet:
http://www.euobserver.com/index.phtml?aid=9488
TONY BLAIR the British prime minister said that
Kyoto is not radical enough and urged his EU partners to join in a
commitment to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 60 per cent by 2050. (Photo:
EU Commission)
British prime minister Tony Blair and Swedish prime
minister Göran Persson urged yesterday their European partners to join them
in a commitment to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 60 per cent by 2050. Mr
Blair insisted that the targets set by the Kyoto treaty were not radical
enough and also challenged US to do its part in the crucial fight. Mr Blair
and Mr Persson sent a joint letter to the Greek Prime Minister, Costas
Simitis, presently head of the EU presidency. In it they confirmed their
ambitions to reduce emissions in the EU by 60 per cent by 2050, and their
commitment to policies that can achieve this goal. "It is clear that Kyoto
is not radical enough," Mr Blair said in his speech on sustainable
development. We will continue to make the case, to the US and to others,
that climate change is a serious threat that we must address together as an
international community, the British prime minister added. The
international community achieved a lot at the World Summit on Sustainable
Development in South Africa last year, Mr Blair said. "But today, I want to
argue that we have not yet been nearly bold enough." I am committed to
putting us on a path towards that target, he added.
back to contents
45) SHOW ME THE CARBON
Tidepool
February 25, 2003
Internet:
http://www.tidepool.org/original_content.cfm?articleid=67186
Slick sayings from TV and movies repeatedly slip
into society, uttered from coast to coast before fading into pop culture
obscurity. But a few have surprising staying power, sticking around long
after they've worn out their welcome. There's "where's the beef?" from
1980s-era Wendy's hamburgers commercial fame. Who could forget Arnold
Schwarzenegger's "I'll be back" from the first Terminator movie. And of
course, Tom Cruise yelling "show me the money!" in the sappy flick "Jerry
Maguire." One can just imagine the multitude of investors and other
financial-market types annoyingly demanding companies "show them the money"
in the wake of that film. The saying still gets plenty of use today. But
soon there could be a twist on this particular meme, as more investors tell
business to "show me the carbon."
The Carbon Disclosure Project, a collaboration of
more than 30 major institutional investors who collectively represent more
than $4 trillion in assets (as of May 2002), has released a report that says
investors who fail to take account of climate change in their asset
allocations and equity valuations face serious investment repercussions over
time. The report is based on the largest survey yet to analyze a company's
exposure to climate change, through the impacts of extreme weather events
and the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. Presenting those factors in
terms of the value of shareholdings in corporations worldwide, the survey of
the 500 largest global companies by market capitalization found that 80
percent of those who responded acknowledged the importance of climate change
as a financial risk, yet only 40 percent at best were taking any action to
address the risks and opportunities. Investors won't be pleased to hear
that the financial impact of climate change extends well beyond the obvious,
emissions-intensive sectors such as oil, gas and electrical utilities.
Companies in a wide range of other sectors, including financial services,
transportation, semiconductor, telecommunications and electronic equipment,
will all be deeply affected as well.
"We face a monumental educational challenge because
most institutional investors have a 'knowledge deficit' when it comes to
obtaining systematic, portfolio-wide information about the risks companies
face when it comes to climate change," said Tessa Tennant, CDP chairperson,
in greenbiz.com. "The financial consequences of climate change are almost
certain to grow, and the information deficit for investors will prove
costly." That "knowledge deficit" spurred the motivation behind the CDP
survey, brought about at the request of 35 institutional investors. Not
surprisingly, the roster includes reinsurance giants Munich Re and Swiss Re,
two firms that insure insurance companies and take big hits whenever extreme
weather causes major damage. The reinsurance industry has led the way in
recent years in pushing for more disclosure on how companies are preparing
to deal with climate change. Now other institutional investors, such as
Credit Suisse Group, Merrill Lynch, and Domini Social Investments, have
joined in.
The project is just one of recent efforts to get
business to disclose environmental and social performance. The Global
Reporting Initiative, as we saw last week, is gaining momentum as the de
facto standard for corporations to report on a range of environmental,
economic, and social factors. In that effort, the GRI was able to enlist the
support of dozens of top global companies, similar to the high response rate
the Carbon Disclosure Project received in its survey. Both cases illustrate
what could be a growing willingness among companies to recognize the
importance environmental factors play in financial performance.
On a sector level, the Disclosure Project's survey
revealed that different industries vary widely in their degree of risk
exposure and how sophisticated they've developed their risk management
response. For example, in the banking industry, climate change-induced loan
impairment of 10 percent could result in a 29 percent drop in share prices
for banks without adequate carbon risk management. And the rail industry
illustrates how supply chains will also feel the impacts of climate change.
The report concluded that a drought-induced reduction in U.S. agricultural
commodity shipments of 5 percent would depress revenues between 7.5 percent
and 10.5 percent of net income.
Perhaps the report's most important finding shows
that companies who are getting ahead of the curve in managing the financial
risks associated with climate change are sure to perform better in the
future. They'll be better positioned to enact cost-effective risk
management, able to adapt to changing future developments, and can exploit
any unforeseen profit opportunities. And they'll stand to gain competitive
advantage, both in cutting costs and risks. The report cited British
Petroleum for cutting its annual carbon dioxide emissions at t their plants
by 10 million tons, which resulted in $650 million of savings. "This survey
confirms the importance of taking early action to reduce greenhouse gases,
one of the most pressing environmental issues of our time," said Doug Bauer,
Vice President of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, in greenbiz.com. "We
are pleased that we could play a role in helping institutional investors
understand the direct connection between climate change, fiduciary
responsibility and shareholder value."
While the CDP survey helps investors understand how
companies will react to global warming, Clean Edge's new 'Clean Energy
Trends in 2003' report gives investors a sweeping look at the future of the
burgeoning clean energy industry. Reporting on this "exciting and
confounding time for clean energy," Clean Edge, a San Francisco research and
consulting firm, says that many small, start-up companies in the booming
alternative energy field are suffering during the down economy. Despite a
lot of interest in the sector, financial investors in publicly traded,
clean-energy companies have fared poorly during the past year. Most
clean-energy stocks are significantly off their previous highs, with many
trading below their initial public offering prices. And "many early-stage
companies will likely wither on the vine for want of consistent policies and
sufficient capital" during the recent economic downturn. Still, despite the
gloom and doom, Clean Edge reports that "market indicators demonstrate that
many clean-energy technologies are on the rise, and a confluence of forces
is making clean energy one of the few bright spots in an otherwise bleak
economy."
While other industry sectors are experiencing
either slow or negative growth, clean energy, including wind energy, solar
power and fuel cells, are reporting double-digit annual growth rates. The
firm predicts that solar photovoltaics will grow from a $3.5 billion global
industry in 2002 to more than $27.5 billion by 2012. Wind power will expand
from $5.5 billion in 2002 to approximately $49 billion in 2012. And fuel
cells will grow from $500 million to $12.5 billion over the next decade.
"Combined, these high-growth technologies will grow by nearly an order of
magnitude -- from just under $10 billion today to $89 billion by 2012 --
offering significant economic opportunities for companies, investors, and
governments pursuing clean-energy goals," concludes the report. The Clean
Edge also rightly points out that the United States won't be reaping as much
as it could from the upcoming growth in clean energy. With government
leadership in fostering new growth for the alternative energy industry
lacking from both the White House and Congress, other nations have stepped
into the void. Japan is now the leading producer of solar photovoltaics,
while Denmark and Germany hold the number one and two spots in the global
wind turbine market.
Here, the state and local level now leads the way,
with much of that leadership coming from the Pacific Northwest.
A recent commentary in the Oregonian hyped that we
"can turn the Northwest into the Saudi Arabia of hydrogen" by producing the
revolutionary fuel cheaply and easily with our region's abundant hydropower,
which makes up 40 percent of the nation's total. By using the low-cost
electricity generated by the Columbia River's massive dam system, water
could be electrolyzed into its two components -- hydrogen and oxygen. That
hydrogen could then be stored in fuel tanks all around the region, fueling a
"hydrogen highway" up and down the West Coast. "With the enormous power of
the Columbia River, the Northwest enjoys a huge natural advantage in a
hydrogen future," gushes the op-ed's author, Jack Robertson. "We can help
lead the nation -- and the world -- away from the carbon-based economy of
the past century and toward an energy revolution fueled by water. We need to
unlock the river's powerful secret -- now."
While the region's wind energy growth has been
well-documented, other sources are bubbling up too.
The Northwest could soon see the first large-scale
project to create electricity from a geothermal source, as the Raft River
geothermal venture in Southern Idaho moves forward. The plant is slated to
begin power generation in the range of 10 megawatts to 15 MW capacity,
although it eventually could generate as much as 90 MW, reports the latest
issue of ConWeb. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2004. Idaho is home
to other geothermal operations, although none produce electricity. Oregon
has been home to numerous geothermal power plans in the past, but none have
reached fruition. In Washington, a Moses Lake facility that just opened late
last year has recognized the growing need for a dedicated source of
crystalline silicon for manufacturing solar photovoltaic cells. Formerly,
hand-me-down silicon from the region's semiconductor industry supplied
regional solar PV need, but not anymore.
The plant, run by Solar Grade Silicon LLC, plans to
turn out 2,000 metric tons of solar-grade crystalline silicon every year,
enough to support the manufacturing of about 130 peak megawatts of PV cells,
equivalent to about one-third of global production in 2001, reported ConWeb.
And industry observers note that demand will continue to rise. "At a 25
percent annual growth, the PV industry's demand for silicon will double
every three years or so. In three years, you double and three years later
you double again. Then it gets to the point where PV is a significant part
of the silicon commodity market," said Tom Surek, PV researcher at the
National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
back to contents
46) METI
TO AUTHORIZE BIOMASS FUEL
The Japan
Times
February
25, 2003
Internet:
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?nn20030225b5.htm
The
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry plans to revise a law so vehicles
can use an environmentally friendly biomass fuel that would help Japan meet
its obligations in cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
METI wants
to classify the mixture of gasoline and alcohol as a fuel to be controlled
under the law governing the quality of gasoline, sources said Sunday. The
fuel is made from biomass, or organic matter, including wood waste. The
inclusion would mark the first time Japan has authorized a biomass fuel as
an energy resource. The ministry will submit the proposed revision to the
Diet during the current ordinary session, hoping it will be put into force
three months after its enactment, they said. The 150-day Diet session ends
in June.
Biomass
fuel is considered an indispensable tool for industrialized nations to
fulfill their obligations under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Carbon dioxide
released during the combustion of alcohol from biomass fuel is not counted
among greenhouse gas emissions each nation must cut. Gasoline containing 10
percent ethanol is already being sold in the United States. If the revision
is enacted, METI will formulate an ordinance stipulating quality standards
for biomass fuel. Only products meeting METI's standards of safety,
effectiveness and environmental friendliness would be authorized for sale.
Vehicles using gasoline mixed with an excessively high density of alcohol
can catch on fire. Under the Kyoto pact, industrialized nations must slash
their greenhouse-gas emissions from 1990 levels by an average of 5.2 percent
between 2008 and 2012. Japan must cut them by 6 percent in the same time
frame.
back to contents
47)
CURBING CARBON DIOXIDE
The New
York Times
February
25, 2003
Internet:
http://www.iht.com/articles/87771.html
The
pressure on President George W. Bush to abandon his irresponsibly passive
approach to global warming was ratcheted up last week. On Thursday the
attorneys general of seven northeastern states announced their intention to
sue the administration - in the person of Christie Whitman, administrator of
the Environmental Protection Agency - for its failure to regulate power
plant emissions of carbon dioxide, the main global warming gas, as required
by the Clean Air Act.
These same
states frequently pressured Whitman's Democratic predecessor, Carol Browner,
to invoke various provisions of the act to reduce long-regulated pollutants
like sulfur dioxide, which causes acid rain. The difference this time is
that they are trying to get the federal government to pay attention to
carbon dioxide, the one compound that remains completely unregulated despite
mounting scientific evidence that it is likely to be the most dangerous
pollutant of all. The Clean Air Act requires the environmental agency to
review and update standards governing power plant emissions every eight
years. The lawsuit says that for 20 years the agency has failed to do these
reviews. Had it done so, the suit contends, it would long ago have added
carbon dioxide to the list of power plant emissions deserving of regulation
- especially since power plants account for nearly 40 percent of all the
carbon dioxide emitted in America today.
The suit is
thus a direct challenge to one of several reasons Bush had advanced for not
moving more forcefully to control carbon dioxide. The reason he gave for
renouncing the Kyoto Protocol, the agreement on climate change signed by the
Clinton administration in 1997 and since ratified by about 100 countries, is
that aggressively reducing emissions would be too expensive. He also insists
that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant as defined by the Clean Air Act.
That's the reason he gives for not including carbon dioxide in the clean air
legislation he has sent to Congress.
The lawsuit
says this is poppycock. One section of the act explicitly recognizes carbon
dioxide as a pollutant, alongside more familiar culprits like sulfur
dioxide. In addition, carbon dioxide plainly falls within the act's
definition of what a pollutant is and, no less clearly, it meets criteria
necessary for the agency administrator, in this case Whitman, to regulate
it. The suit could fail. State challenges to federal policy are always
iffy. But it may at least inspire honest discussion about how to control the
largest single source of carbon dioxide in the world. And it may force the
administration to explain a global warming strategy that is becoming
increasingly indefensible.
back to contents
48) CLIMATE CHANGE THREATENS BIODIVERSITY
Daily Times Monitor
February 24, 2003
Internet:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_24-2-2003_pg6_8
DENVER: Climate change already is causing serious
detrimental effects on biological systems in Africa, the Andes and the
oceans worldwide, scientists studying these areas have warned. Thomas
Lovejoy, president of the H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics
and the Environment in Washington, D.C., said there will come a point at
which carbon dioxide accumulating in the atmosphere will cause serious
biological disruption, and the emerging picture...suggests these disruptions
will occur slightly this side of double pre-industrial CO2 (carbon dioxide)
levels. Speaking in Denver at the annual meeting of the American
Association for the Advancement of Science, Lovejoy said that while
deciphering the impacts of climate change was no simple matter, it appeared
that ecosystems were among the most sensitive to its effects. There needs
to be debate about the acceptable levels of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere, he suggested. Lovejoy later said that acceptable levels should
be set at the rate at which ecosystems can adapt naturally.
back to contents
49)
DROUGHT A SIGN WATER USE MUST CHANGE: LABOR
Liberal
Daily
February
24, 2003
Internet:
http://dubbo.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=news&subclass=local&category=general%20news&story_id=211278&y=2003&m=2
Australians
had to change their water use practices to avoid even worse droughts, Labor
has warned. Opposition environment spokesman Kelvin Thompson said last
week's rain was a relief for many farmers, rural communities and wildlife.
But he said the drought, and its extent, should be a warning of even worse
circumstances in years to come. "It would be folly for us to fail to learn
from the lessons of what has been a very difficult year for our land and
water," he said in a statement. "Australia cannot afford to be complacent
about climate change. "If we are, the next drought, and the next set of
bushfires, will be even more serious than this year's have been."
Mr Thomson
said water use in both rural and urban areas had to change, with better
farming practices and more re-use of stormwater and sewage. "In rural areas,
and particularly in the Murray-Darling basin, our agricultural practices are
based on a rate of water use which is unsustainable," he said. "We must take
less water from our river systems and use what we do take more wisely. "In
the urban areas we must greatly increase our rate of water re-use, making
more use of stormwater, treated sewage and rainwater tanks."
Mr Thomson
said the Government's failure to sign the Kyoto Protocol on climate change
would only lead to further greenhouse gas creation in Australia. He said
temperatures in Australia last year were 1.6 degrees Celcius above the
long-term average.
back to contents
50)
FRANCE UPS GREENHOUSE GAS RESTRICTIONS
AFP
February
25, 2003
Internet:
http://www.expatica.com/france.asp?pad=278,313,&item_id=29167
PARIS, Feb
25 (AFP) - The French government on Tuesday unveiled additional measures
aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming. The
goal of "Climate Plan 2003" is to ensure that France meets its commitments
under the UN's Kyoto Protocol on climate change, which seeks to stabilise
global emissions of greenhouse gases, as compared to their level in 1990, by
a timeframe of 2012.
The plan
"reinforces" action taken under in January 2000 under the country's former
Socialist-led government, a statement released by a coordinating body, the
Interministerial Mission for the Greenhouse Effect (MIES), said. It notably
focuses on the transport and construction sectors, where pollution emissions
have far outstripped projections.
Greenhouse
gas output from transport rose 22 percent from 1990, and there was an
increase of 14 percent from the building sector, MIES said. The statement
said the measures were expected to be adopted by the government in November
this year, and there would be an assessment "every 18 to 24 months" to
evaluate progress. MIES, which is part of Prime Minister Jean-Pierre
Raffarin's office, said the measures "would be drawn up in line with
consultation with socio-economic figures." The communique gave no details
about what kind of action was envisaged or who would take part in the
consultations. The announcement came only a day after British Prime
Minister Tony Blair announced ambitious new targets for reducing CO2
emissions. He pledged to slash Britain's output of greenhouse gases by 60
percent by 2050, going far beyond the country's Kyoto target of a 12.5
percent reduction.
France has
to keep its emissions stable compared with the 1990 levels. The Kyoto
Protocol has been agreed by all industrialised countries except the United
States, the world's biggest greenhouse gas polluter. The agreement cannot
take effect, however, until it has been ratified by a sufficient number of
industrialised signatories. Russia is the last major country still to
ratify. In one of his first acts after taking office, US President George
W. Bush announced in 2001 that he would ditch Kyoto. He questioned the
scientific evidence for global warming and said Kyoto was too costly for the
American economy and unfair because only industrialised countries were
required to make targeted emissions cuts.
back to contents
51)
SWISS URGED TO SHUN HIGH-EMISSION CARS
Swissinfo
February
24, 2003
Internet:
http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/Swissinfo.html?siteSect=111&sid=1653553
Swiss
consumers are being challenged to buy environmentally friendly cars, as part
of a new government push to stem the sale of gas-guzzlers. Car dealers are
now required to rank new cars according to their fuel efficiency, as part of
efforts to meet the country's commitments to the Kyoto Protocol. Moritz
Leuenberger, the Swiss transport minister, on Monday said the measure was
designed to help Switzerland reduce its annual carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions. Under the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, emissions must be cut
below 1990 levels by 2010. Private vehicles, along with other forms of
transport, account for more than 30 per cent of the country's yearly CO2
emissions.
By 2008,
the government wants to reduce the average fuel consumption of new cars by
24 per cent from 8.4 litres per 100 kilometres to 6.4 per 100km. Already
common on electrical goods, the new energy stickers provide data about fuel
consumption rates, CO2 emissions and energy efficiency. Urban and
environmentally friendly vehicles will be awarded an A ranking, while the
least efficient will be condemned with a G ranking. Government regulations
also require car dealers to display or mention the energy stickers whenever
putting up a price list of new models, in advertisements and during a sales
pitch. The authorities are also launching a series of TV and newspaper
advertisements to explain the new scheme.
Leuenberger
said the energy stickers were just the first step in tackling the
environmental impact of Switzerland's 3.6 million vehicles. The government
has not ruled out the possibility of imposing a CO2 tax on fuel sales should
Switzerland fall short of its reduction targets. Nevertheless, the Swiss
approach is considerably gentler than that of the German government's, which
has imposed a tax regime to reward consumers who opt for environmentally
friendly cars and punish those who jump into big four-wheel drives.
Leuenberger
said he preferred to give consumers a chance to voluntarily choose efficient
vehicles, and would not make a decision on the proposed tax before year's
end. The government also wants to increase the sale of diesel-powered cars,
which use less fuel than regular vehicles.Only 18 per cent of new cars sold
in Switzerland run on diesel, compared with rates of almost 50 per cent in
other European countries.
Worried by
the potential impact of a CO2 tax, which some analysts fear could be as high
as SFr0.20 per litre, the Swiss petroleum association recently launched its
own initiative to reduce CO2 emissions. The plan centres on a fund, financed
by an SFr0.01 fuel tax that would invest in emission-reduction schemes such
as car-pooling or alternative fuel research. Sonya Studer, from the
association, said the fund could also be spent on CO2 reduction programmes
abroad, enabling Switzerland to earn carbon credits if, and when, a global
trading system is introduced. "The climate problem is something that should
be tackled globally," Studer told swissinfo. Potential projects include wind
farms in India, bio-fuel research and funding for so-called carbon sinks
such as forests. "We have worked out a business plan and presented it to the
government," Studer said.
The
environmental group, WWF, has given "in principle" support to the new
sticker system, but added that it needed to be carefully monitored. Tony
Wohlgensinger, president of the Swiss importers association Auto Schweiz,
believes the energy stickers will have a positive impact on consumers. "We
are confident that there [will] be an influence on the buyer, and that he
will consider the efficiency of a car more than he did before,"
Wohlgensinger told swissinfo.
back to contents
52)
BLAIR URGES 60 PERCENT GLOBAL GREENHOUSE GAS CUTS
ENS
February
24, 2003
Internet:
http://ens-news.com/ens/feb2003/2003-02-24-01.asp
LONDON, UK,
February 24, 2003 (ENS) - To stop further damage to the global climate a 60
percent reduction in emissions by 2050 is required, UK Prime Minister Tony
Blair said today in a major speech on sustainable development in which he
committed Britain to the 60 percent cut. Speaking at an event organized by
the United Nations Sustainable Development Commission, he set out the case
for a new international consensus to tackle key issues of sustainable
development like climate change. Today, Blair and Swedish Prime Minister
Goran Persson wrote a joint letter to the Greek Prime Minister, Costas
Simitis, in his capacity as President of the European Council. In it the two
nations confirm their ambition to reduce emissions across the European Union
by 60 percent by 2050, and their commitment to policies that will
demonstrate how it can be achieved.
Climate
change is a crucial long term global security issue comparable to the
immediate security threat posed by weapons of mass destruction, Blair said.
"The world is in danger of polarizing around two different agendas," warned
Blair. "On the one hand there are the very clear and dangerous threats of
unstable states developing or proliferating weapons of mass destruction and
the evil of terrorism exemplified by September 11th. These are the issues,
if you like, of immediate security. They are a threat we can see confronting
us directly and now." "On the other hand, there are the issues that affect
us over time. They are just as devastating in their potential impact, some
more so, but they require reflection and strategy geared to the long term,
often straddling many years and many governments," said the British Prime
Minister, now in his second term.
Within the
long term category, said Blair, are "issues of global poverty, relations
between the Moslem world and the West, environmental degradation, most
particularly climate change." Calling climate change "unquestionably the
most urgent environmental challenge," Blair said the only answer is to
construct "a common agenda that recognizes both sets of issues have to be
confronted for the world's security and prosperity to be guaranteed." He
said his government will continue to make the case, "to the U.S. and to
others, that climate change is a serious threat that we must address
together as an international community."
Blair
stressed the potential of technological development to achieving transition
to "a truly low-carbon economy" without causing the sort of economic damage
feared by countries like the United States.
Blair said
Britain is "well on the way" to meeting its greenhouse gas reduction target
of 12.5 percent under the United Nations Kyoto climate protocol, which U.S.
President George W. Bush rejected.
"But while
the Kyoto Protocol was "an enormous achievement," Blair warned, "it is clear
Kyoto is not radical enough." He acknowledged that it represents the most
that is "politically achievable" at this time.
Global
emissions of greenhouse gases have risen 10 percent since 1990, with a 35
percent increase in developing countries, and Blair said even the Kyoto
Protocol limits and deadlines will not be enough to avert global warming.
"At best Kyoto will mean a reduction of two percent in emissions. That is
better than emissions just continuing to rise and rise. But we know now,
from further research and evidence, that to stop further damage to the
climate we need a reduction in 60 percent reduction worldwide," the Prime
Minister said, relying on the 2000 report of a Royal Commission on
Environmental Protection.
Many,
including the Bush administration, see the Kyoto Protocol as a threat to the
pursuit of economic growth, but said Blair, "I believe this needn't be the
case. If we harness new technology the evidence is mounting that we can
achieve a target of 60 percent - and at reasonable cost." The solutions to
climate change, such as hydrogen fueled vehicles, are not expensive "against
the scale of the problem," said Blair. It is "a myth" that reducing
emissions makes us poorer, he said. "The UK's economy has grown by nearly 17
percent since 1997," when the Blair government took office, he said. "In
that time, emissions have fallen by five percent." There are "clear
economic advantages" for Britain in taking the lead in combating climate
change, Blair said. "We have enormous potential in this field - in our
universities, our research institutes, our businesses." "Today I am pleased
to announce its first large portfolio of projects - including fuel cells,
wave power, photovoltaics and CHP [cogenerated heat and power] - which
together will amount to £70 million in combined public-private investment,"
Blair said.
Britain's
commitment on cutting carbon dioxide emissions was included in a long
anticipated energy white paper, which puts an end to months of speculation
over national policy on renewable energies and nuclear power. A new ambition
of a 20 percent share of electricity from renewables by 2020 is included.
The
question of possible new nuclear power capacity is left open. Ensuring
security of energy supply drives the white paper. Britain is set to become a
net importer of energy in 2010 for the first time in 30 years. Under a
business as usual scenario by 2020 around 75 percent of primary energy
supplies will be imported.
Better
energy efficiency, establishment of the forthcoming EU carbon trading scheme
and planning system changes to remove obstacles to new renewables
infrastructure build are included. While Blair's speech seemed to place
Britain in the vanguard of the battle against global warming, government
environment adviser Sir Jonathon Porritt has warned that the UK would fall
`"well short'' of its goal of cutting carbon dioxide emissions by 20 percent
by 2010 unless major policy changes are made, particularly on reducing car
use. Today Blair did not mention his government's previous commitment to
cut carbon dioxide emissions by 20 percent over 1990 levels by 2010.
Blair did
stress that his government is acting to clean up the environment, "not just
globally, but locally," in towns and cities, where "the environment is
overwhelmingly an issue of concern for the poorest citizens in our
communities." "It is the poorest that live in the worst housing, and are
the most affected by traffic pollution, live closest to landfill sites and
have the worst graffiti and litter problems," the Prime Minister said.
Friends of the Earth UK Director Tony Juniper commented, "Tony Blair's
speech today contained important passages about the relationship between
poverty, social exclusion and environmental damage. The need for
environmental justice has been the central theme of Friends of the Earth's
campaigning for a number of years. Mr Blair's clear understanding of this
crucial issue is very welcome." But, said Juniper, many of the UK's
environmental problems are getting worse, not better, under the Blair
government. "Greenhouse gas emissions are not falling. Road traffic is
rising. And so is the amount of household waste being sent to landfill."
Juniper called for "specific and radical targets and timetables," backed
with sufficient funding. "Otherwise we may simply return in a year or two to
hear the same pledges and depressing realities all over again."
See Also:
Blair
launches initiative to fight global warming, Faults Washington rejection of
Kyoto, Associated Press, February 25, 2003
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/056/nation/Blair_launches_initiative_to_fight_global_warming+.shtml
Blair
Outlines Plans to Slash Emissions Over 50 Years, The New York Times,
February 25, 2003
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/25/international/europe/25BRIT.html?ex=1046754000&en=fbba6048037f961b&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
Climate
Change is 'Urgent Challenge', CountryLife, February 24 2003
http://www.countrylife.co.uk/CountrysideConcerns/News/blair_climatechange.htm
Blair lays
out an ambitious emissions cut, The New York Times, February 26, 2003
http://www.iht.com/articles/87917.html
Blair
accused of energy 'greenwash', The Guardian, February 24, 2003
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/green/story/0,9061,901901,00.html
Blair pushes US on climate change, Daily Times,
March 3, 2003
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_3-3-2003_pg6_8
Blair urges Europe to turn green with hope, Times
on Line, February 25, 2003
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-590354,00.html
back to contents
53)
DOWNING STREET TO CHALLENGE BUSH ON GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The
Guardian
February
24, 2003
Internet:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/waste/story/0,12188,901719,00.html
Britain
will today implicitly challenge George Bush's anti-environment stance by
demanding that the world go further than the stalled Kyoto protocol and
commit itself to a 50% cut in carbon emissions by 2050.
Tony Blair,
often accused of acting as Washington's poodle, will also mark a decisive
shift towards a greener energy policy after months of Whitehall infighting
when he announces an ambition to ensure that 20% of British energy is
derived from renewable sources by 2020. In what is not quite the death
knell of the nuclear industry, the Department of Trade and Industry will
publish its energy white paper today suggesting that new nuclear stations
should only be considered as a last resort. The paper has been prompted by
the projection that Britain will be a net importer of energy by 2010, for
the first time since the industrial revolution.
But Mr
Blair will also challenge the US, the biggest energy consumer on earth, to
do more to cut consumption. He will challenge claims that cuts in emissions
threaten economic growth, pointing out that thanks to new technology Britain
has seen emissions fall 5% since 1997 while the economy has grown by 17%.
He will argue that the world's poor suffer most from environmental problems
and will urge the world to take up a new covenant to protect the
environment. In a clear challenge to Mr Bush, he will argue that the Kyoto
protocol - rejected by the US - helped to focus minds but does not go far
enough. Jonathan Porritt, an environmental campaigner and chairman of the
government's sustainable development commission, called the white paper a
major step forward. It was also backed by Friends of the Earth.
But the
Liberal Democrats attacked it in advance as a fudge, and the left of centre
thinktank the IPPR said the government's failure to back road congestion
charging threatens its commitment to cut carbon emissions.
A Cabinet
Office paper last year suggested that the government set a target of 20% of
electricity from renewable sources by 2020. The downgrading of the target to
an ambition in the white paper reflects Whitehall nervousness that the 20%
figure may not be achievable. The white paper will promise an annual report
setting out progress towards the ambition, including a staging post of 10%
of energy from renewable sources by 2010. In what is being billed as Green
Monday, the white paper will be backed by a speech from the prime minister
to the sustainable development commission and the first annual
sustainability report from Margaret Beckett's Department for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs.
The energy
minister, Brian Wilson, a backer of the nuclear industry, supports
renewables but is sceptical that the 20% goal can be reached on the basis of
the current slow progress. The Treasury has also been asking searching
questions. The 20% ambition will be backed by three main measures - an
extra £100m of investment in renewables, taking the total state commitment
to £300m; tax breaks and exemptions worth £2bn annually to the renewables
industry; and new planning rules designed to make it easier for onshore and
offshore wind farms to gain planning permission. Licences for windfarms
beyond territorial waters will also be introduced. The white paper, in line
with last year's Cabinet Office review on security of energy supplies, will
keep the option of building nuclear power stations, but no new stations will
be proposed. It will point out that the problem of handling nuclear waste
has not been resolved, making the true cost of nuclear energy difficult to
measure.
The trade
secretary, Patricia Hewitt, will suggest that such stations should only be
built as a last resort if alternative energy sources, including gas, are
proving inadequate. The nuclear industry denounced the white paper as
"incompetent, irrelevant and frankly dangerous". Sir Bernard Ingham,
secretary of the Supporters of Nuclear Energy group, said: "At a time when
greenhouse emissions are rising in Britain, it proposes to continue to allow
the nuclear industry, which emits no greenhouse gases, to run down."
back to contents
54) PM:
'CONCERTED INTERNATIONAL EFFORT' NECESSARY TO FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE
Number 10
February
24, 2003
Internet:
http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page3072.asp
Prime
Minister Tony Blair has reiterated his commitment to placing sustainable
development at the heart of government policy-making. Speaking at an event
organised by the Sustainable Development Commission, he set out the case for
a new international consensus to tackle key issues of sustainable
development like climate change. "The international community achieved a lot
at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in South Africa last year,"
he said. "But today, I want to argue that we have not yet been nearly bold
enough. To stop further damage to the climate we need a worldwide 60 per
cent reduction in emissions by 2050. I am committed to putting us on a path
towards that target."
Mr Blair
said there is little point in the UK acting alone: "We need concerted
international effort and we will continue to make the case that climate
change is a serious threat." The government's third annual report on
sustainable development updates progress on the 15 headline indicators
making up a 'quality of life' barometer in the UK. It shows:
-
continued progress on tackling poverty and social exclusion
-
fewer
households living in poor housing, and an increase in the percentage of
new homes built on previously-developed land or through conversion of
existing buildings
-
a rise
in recorded violent crime, particularly robberies, although there is
strong evidence that levels of all crime have been falling
-
increased road traffic volume, but a weakening of the link between
economic growth and road traffic growth
-
an
increase in the levels of household waste produced, though some
improvement in the amount recycled
-
emissions of greenhouse gases and carbon dioxide increased slightly
compared with the previous year, but are still much less than a decade ago
The UK is
still on target to meet its Kyoto commitments and move towards the domestic
goal to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 20 per cent by 2010.
back to contents
55) CHARTS OPEN THE BOOK ON ARCTIC CLIMATE RIDDLE
Independent Online (South Africa)
February 23 2003
Internet:
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id=143&art_id=qw1046017981391B251&set_id=1
Oslo, Norway - Using 500-year-old logbooks and sea
charts, scientists are examining the effects of global climate changes in
the Arctic. Terje Loyning, an oceanographer with the project, said there is
evidence of less ice. "Yes, we have seen climate change, but we don't know
how much has been created by humans," he said on Friday. The Norwegian Polar
Institute and the World Wide Fund for Nature compiled the Arctic Climate
System Study Historical Ice Chart Archive to gauge global warming on the ice
around the Arctic Sea. The Norwegian Meteorological Institute also took
part. 'The climate change in the Arctic is caused by the burning of fossil
fuel' The archive contains details of climate change in and around the
Arctic from 1553 to 2002.
Loyning has been collecting sea charts covering an
area from Greenland east to Novaya Zemlya, Russia, to compare the amount of
ice explorers encountered hundreds of years ago. "Much has been made in
recent years of the connection between global warming and sea ice extent,"
said Lynn Rosentrater, a scientist with the International Arctic Programme.
"But prior to the development of satellites few direct observations of sea
ice were made in any systematic manner." Rosentrater said: "We believe,
along with two-thirds of scientists, that the climate change in the Arctic
is caused by the burning of fossil fuel," she told The Associated Press. "It
is very clear that there are natural cycles, but there is a clear human
footprint."
Many scientists believe that the burning of fossil
fuels is causing an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, triggering what
is called the greenhouse effect. 'There has been a steady decrease of the
ice starting long before the industrial age'. A higher concentration of
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would trap more of the sun's heat, possibly
causing temperatures to rise. Other methods of tracking the effect of
climate change in the Arctic have used drilling deep within the ice. Ice
cores contain detailed, natural records of climate change. Using the charts
of seagoing explorers, both groups said they created a massive database that
extends 500 years back. "With the charts and logbooks we can compare the ice
edge as it was. We have to be a bit careful about the assessment, but there
has been a steady decrease of the ice starting long before the industrial
age," Loyning told the AP. "We have to assume that those who travelled
without engine power sailed in areas where a third of the ocean was covered
by ice." The oldest records are from 1553 when English explorer Hugh
Willoughby sought to find a northeastern route to China. Willoughby and his
crew perished when their ship got stuck in ice, but the voyage eventually
resulted in trade between Britain and Russia. The ship's log and other
documents were recovered by later explorers. - Sapa-AP
back to contents
56) COMPANIES IGNORE WEATHER WARNINGS AT THEIR
PERIL
The Courier-Mail
February 22, 2003
Internet:
http://finance.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6032082%255E14302,00.html
SEVERAL major industry sectors are in danger of
losing a wide section of their investor base if they continue to avoid the
issue of climate change, according to leading analysts. They say an
increasing numbers of investors are now identifying those industries and
companies that will lose from a warming climate and the resultant jump in
climate variability. AMP Henderson Global Investors senior research analyst
Ian Woods said companies that were potential losers must be doubly diligent
in managing climate change risks.
"Investors can get out far quicker, usually, than a
company can correct bad decisions, including the mistake to ignore the issue
until it's too late," he said. Obvious losers were businesses like the
coal, aluminium and car industries that made, used, or were big consumers of
non-renewable energy or non-renewable energy goods.
However, Queensland Mining Council chief executive
Michael Pinnock said while many resource companies were being depicted as
"bad boys", they were already taking very positive steps to cut greenhouse
gas emissions. The money currently being spent on new technologies in
industries like coal, steel and pulp and paper would eventually see the
greatest cuts in greenhouse emissions, he said.
But many industry sectors were still exposed to a
potential investor backlash, Mr Woods said. Energy trading systems would
punish energy retailers that relied on non-renewable energy for power while
federal laws were forcing makers of whitegoods, air-conditioners, water
heaters and other goods to label their products' energy use. The building
industry could also expect similar pressure.
An AMP Henderson Global Investors survey of 119 of
Australia's biggest companies showed that 51 per cent of 64 companies that
responded were yet to address the risks of climate change at board level.
Less than half had a risk-management strategy in
place and only 56 per cent had considered how climate change might affect
customers or suppliers. "Don't doubt that many businesses are at risk from
warmer weather," Mr Woods said. Insurers and reinsurers were exposed to the
heightened frequency of extreme weather while the agricultural sector was
also vulnerable to changing weather patterns that cut water supply.
"Wine, fruit and cotton industries will be damaged.
Fertiliser, transport and agrichemical industries will be indirectly
harmed," he said. Tourism would also be hit if, as forecast, coral
bleaching spread, snowfields shrank and natural heritage was destroyed. "If
these potential losers don't tackle the risks, investors will obviously
review their holdings in these companies," Mr Woods said. "Investors can
direct their money to the many companies taking advantage of the
opportunities sparked by climate change," he said.
AMP Henderson research had identified five
"industry of the future" sectors that could provide sustainable development
growth prospects for investors. These included companies involved in clean
and renewable energy, education and training, environmental services, health
and nutrition and public transport. AMP Henderson Global Investors' SRI
business manager Angus Dennis said obvious winners included wind power
generator group Pacific Hydro and Australian Magnesium whose products made
cars lighter and therefore used less petrol. Other examples included Origin
Energy that was moving away from carbon intensive emissions into coal seam
methane, Simsmetal's extensive use of metal recycling as well as the
international Shell group of companies that was spending millions of dollars
on renewable energy initiatives, he said. There were other offshore stocks
that were actively addressing the issue of climate change in their business
models and were included in AMP Henderson Global Investors international SRI
portfolio, Mr Dennis said. The Danish Vestas Wind Systems was the world's
leading maker of wind turbines and was exploring the links between wind
power and fuel cells as well as the development of offshore wind farms.
The RE power wind turbine maker in Germany and the
UK's Johnson Matthey that made exhaust emission catalyst control and fuel
cell systems were both actively addressing the issue of climate change, he
said.
back to contents
57) WIND
TURBINES A GOOD CASH CROP
Journal
Pioneer
February
22, 2003
Internet:
http://www.journalpioneer.com/article.cfm?showid=3008
The
controversy over a J.D. Irving Ltd., proposal to build more than 40
300-foot-tall wind turbines in picturesque Malpeque has overshadowed the
benefits wind-generated electricity can bring if wind turbines are welcomed
with open arms. In the Febuary issue of a publication called The Furrow, an
article called Selling the Wind describes the benefits that farmers have
reaped in states such as Iowa and Kansas from harvesting wind power. It has
proven to be a guaranteed moneymaker for people willing to embrace the
concept. One Iowa farmer earned as much as $2,400 a year in land-use
payments for allowing a wind turbine and monitoring equipment on his
160-acre field. That money is a godsend for many producers battered by low
commodity prices, harsh weather, ravenous pests, and uncertain, volatile
overseas markets.
A farmer in
Kansas was able to reap $2,000 a year per turbine on his farm and he
collects payments for 20 wind turbines.
Meanwhile,
according to the article, growing numbers of households throughout the U.S.
are receiving electricity generated from a clean, non-polluting source of
energy that can never be exhausted. Over the past three decades as
techology has improved the cost of electricity generated by wind turbines
has been slashed, and by 2010 many experts are predicting it will cost less
to produce wind-generated electricity than it does creating new plants that
rely on fossil fuels. Tuesday, in Finance Minister John Manley's first
budget, hundreds of millions of dollars a year worth of incentives were
provided for research involved in developing and marketing alternative
fuels, as part of Ottawa's commitment towards implementing the Kyoto
Protocol and reducing the threat of global warming. There is an expanding
market that companies such as J.D. Irving Ltd., are hoping to tap. Malpeque
may not be the best place to pitch the virtues of wind energy even though
the company has apparently had little trouble finding at least a half dozen
property owners willing to provide land for wind turbines at up to $5,000 a
year per tower.
As
Agriculture Minister Mitch Murphy stated in a recent presentation to
Malpeque residents, the province doesn't currently have a framework policy
on alternate sources of energy, including wind-generated power.
The Binns
government needs to consult Islanders and develop a comprehensive policy as
soon as possible, or the province risks falling behind other provinces -
North Cape notwithstanding. There are benefits to wind energy, provided the
markets are properly developed and the appropriate incentives are in place.
One of those benefits would involve offering an alternative to many growers
currently struggling to make ends meet on razor-thin profit margins. Potato
growers could convert more of their land to wind turbines and other sources
of green power, and reduce their reliance on a type of agriculture that
relies on massive applications of pesticides and soil practises that lead to
erosion and runoff. According to the Furrow article, each wind turbine
displaces 11,000 pounds of carbon dioxide, sulpher dioxide and nitrogen
oxide per day - gases that contribute to global warming. What are we
waiting for?
back to contents
58)
EMISSIONS TRADING COULD BE COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE TO KYOTO
Edie weekly
summaries
February
21, 2003
Internet:
http://www.edie.net/gf.cfm?L=left_frame.html&R=http://www.edie.net/news/Archive/6679.cfm
The Kyoto
Protocol is in danger of becoming a first step backwards in environmental
regulation, warns a new report from the research body Trans National
Institute (TNI). Carbon trading, an integral part of the Kyoto Protocol,
could allow countries to meet their targets through purchase of carbon
credits without actually reducing any greenhouse gas emissions, says a
report by Carbon Trade Watch a new project set up by TNI. The study The
Sky is Not the Limit: The emerging market in greenhouse gases says the
credit scheme allows some polluted areas to remain polluted, whilst
countries declare their improved environmental record and big businesses
profit in the free market system. Under the carbon trading schemes
countries can buy and sell carbon credits. They are accumulated through the
reduction of greenhouse gases, and if purchased they can substituted for
emissions reduction measures effectively contributing to reducing targets.
The US
trades mainly in sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide, says the report. These
gases contribute to smog, acid rain and cut short the lives of 30,000
Americans annually. Yet the problem is not alleviated, but allowed to
continue under the trading scheme, states the report. The study also gives
the example of plans by the World Bank to extract methane from a landfill
site in Durban, South Africa and use it to generate electricity. The
reduction in methane will be converted into emissions reduction credits, and
then sold to other companies. However a by-product of the electricity
generation will be methane production, which will continue to adversely
affect the health of people living near the site.
Emissions
trading has become big business, and corporate cost effectiveness and
self-regulation is likely to undermine the Kyoto process, warns the report.
It states: Issues of human rights, public participation, community survival
and ecological integrity become subordinated to a technocratic and
corporatist agenda.
In this its
first publication, Carbon Trade Watch accuses the trading scheme of
pandering to big business and allowing it to dodge their emissions reducing
action. It criticises the regulation of the emissions market as inadequate
and says the free-market ideal cannot fulfill the goals of the Kyoto
Protocol. The only instance where an emissions trading scheme could work,
for more than the free-market economic system, is if it were small, highly
regulated, tightly defined, had no co-pollutant side effects, had rigorous
independent monitoring and verification and vibrant community consultation,
participation and assessment, says the study. A spokesperson from the UK
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, which has masterminded
the worlds first nation-wide emissions trading programme, could not be
contacted to comment on the report.
back to contents
59)
MOOSA WELCOMES THE LAUNCH OF ESKOM'S WIND ENERGY FARM
SA Ministry
of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
February
21, 2003
Interment:
http://www.environment.gov.za/NewsMedia/MedStat/2003feb21_1/wind_210220031.html
FRIDAY, 21
FEBRUARY 2003: The Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Mohammed
Valli Moosa, has welcomed today's launch of Eskom's experimental wind energy
farm aimed at exploring the use of wind energy for bulk electricity
generation. Wind energy is environmentally friendly and helps reduce global
warming and greenhouse gases. The Eskom farm, the first of its kind in
Africa, is located in Klipheuwel, Western Cape. Minister Moosa said the
launch of the wind farm speaks to NEPAD's vision of sustainable development
as it seeks to ensure sustainable energy use. He said the Department of
Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) has initiated studies on the
vulnerability and adaptation of South Africa to climate change, the findings
of which will better equip the country to develop informed policies and
strategies to react to global climate change.
Furthermore, DEAT has embarked on a joint initiative with the Department of
Minerals and Energy (DME), to implement a public sector energy management
programme to save energy and reduce the negative impacts of climate change.
Global climate change includes the serious changes in weather and climate
patterns. These changes affect rainfall, and can cause extreme weather
events and rising sea levels. Climate changes mean that temperatures rise
higher and faster than can be explained by the sun's activity.
"Reducing
emissions of green house gasses could be achieved by reducing the demand for
energy, altering the way that energy is used or changing the method of
generating energy," he pointed out.
"Eskom's
first wind energy project is an example of an alternative source of energy
which is environmentally friendly and more importantly, does not produce any
emissions".
In March
last year, South Africa's Parliament acceded to the Kyoto Protocol on
Climate Change, which seeks to implement legal and economic instruments
whereby developed countries can reduce greenhouse gas emissions whilst
furthering sustainable development in developing countries. "Eskom, as one
of the largest generators of electricity from coal, should be applauded for
deviating from their usual way of generating energy to explore a new and
sustainable pattern of energy production. Through this project, Eskom is
demonstrating to the people and the world out there that South Africa is
concerned about climate change and wants to do something about it. "This is
a challenge to other industries to follow on Eskom's steps by engaging in
energy efficient activities and strive to use green energy for the sake of
this and future generations," concluded Moosa.
back to contents
60)
GERMANY UNLIKELY TO MEET CO2 REDUCTION TARGETS - DIW
Planet Ark
February
21, 2003
Internet:
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/19897/story.htm
FRANKFURT -
Germany is unlikely to deliver on its pledges to curb emissions of carbon
dioxide (CO2), despite a further reduction last year, the Berlin-based
German Institute for Economic Research DIW said.
In 2002,
CO2 emissions in Germany fell 1.5 percent to 834 million tonnes, as the weak
economy and mild weather limited consumption of primary energy sources, the
main factors generating greenhouse gases, it said. "In the period
1991-2002, emissions were, however, only reduced by an annual average of
just about one percent. On the back of these figures, it seems hopeless that
(Germany) will meet its targets set for 2005," DIW said in a statement.
Germany aims to cut CO2 emissions by a quarter by 2005 compared to 1990,
but to deliver on its pledges the country would need to reduce CO2 emissions
by an annual 3.8 percent or around 30 million tonnes, it said. "Such a high
reduction was so far only seen at the beginning of the 1990s as a result of
the immense economic slump in the former Communist states of Eastern
Germany," DIW said.
Germany
might also fail to meet targets on total greenhouse gas emissions set out in
the Kyoto Protocol, it said. Under Kyoto, Germany has committed itself to
cutting total greenhouse gas emissions by 21 percent from 1990 levels over
the period 2008-2012. The Kyoto Protocol, agreed by the United Nations in
1997, aims to reduce the developed world's output of the gases which trap
heat in the atmosphere with potentially grave long-term consequences for the
global environment.
back to contents
61) INVESTORS INSIST COMPANIES PREPARE FOR CLIMATE
CHANGE
Edie weekly summaries
February 21, 2003
Internet:
http://www.edie.net/gf.cfm?L=left_frame.html&R=http://www.edie.net/news/Archive/6683.cfm
Climate change is recognised as a serious business
threat by 80% the worlds 500 largest companies. However less than half of
these have taken preventative action according to a survey conducted by
shareholders. The Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) was set up to provide
information to investors and funders. An acknowledged knowledge deficit
concerning the financial impact of climate change, left shareholders unable
to demand company action in this area. CDP surveyed big businesses to make
up the shortfall in information. Collectively CDP represents US$4 trillion
in assets; their report is sending a clear signal to business to take
precautions against global warming and protect shareholders investments.
As well as in the emission-intensive sectors, where
greenhouse gas pollution will be regulated, the report also warns of climate
change impacts on other industries from telecommunications to real estate.
Extreme weather events affected the turnover for many companies in 2002, and
the report predicts similar patterns for this year and advises business to
protect themselves.
Last year edie reported on ExxonMobils dismissal
of a theor that it would lose long term investors due to its stance on
climate change. Were talking about shareholder value and carbon
competitiveness, said Tessa Tennant, Chairwoman of the CDP. Companies
failing to take the messages of this report seriously are likely to hear
from their shareholders. There is also a threat that legal action may be
taken against socially and environmentally unconscious industries. In
January three US states announced a plan to sue the Environment Protection
Agency because it has not enforced CO2 regulation such a case would
doubtless have repercussions for business. Whilst some businesses are
making alterations and investments against climate change many more have a
long way to go, according to the survey. In response to the CDP survey, UK
Prime Minister Tony Blair commented: No industry can afford to ignore the
issue.
back to contents
62)
CLIMATE CHANGE SET TO IMPACT GLOBAL MARKETS - REPORT
Planet Ark
February
19, 2003
Internet:
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/19868/story.htm
LONDON -
Global warming is set to have a big impact on financial markets as investors
revalue companies based on their exposure to climate change risk, according
to a report published. Businesses could face huge extra costs from
increasingly frequent natural disasters and from new legislation aimed at
reducing emissions of global warming gases, the report by the Carbon
Disclosure Project says. Some could see their value slashed - by as much as
40 percent for some heavy carbon emitters, said the report, which was
commissioned by a group of institutional investors overseeing around $4.5
trillion of assets.
Others that
identify the risks and implement policies to reduce them will have a
competitive advantage, boosting their share price. "It is almost certain
that in the years ahead, a series of trends will continue to amplify the
financial impacts of climate change," said Tessa Tennant, Carbon Disclosure
Project chairperson. "This is about security of financial returns as well
as about protecting the global environment."
Despite the
huge risks and rewards, however, many of the world's top companies are
ignoring climate change. Although 80 percent of respondents in the survey
of the world's 500 largest companies recognised climate change as a
financial risk, only 35 percent to 40 percent have taken action to mitigate
the dangers.
HEAVY
WEATHER
The
business world faces threats from climate change on several fronts.
Industries such as agriculture and tourism are vulnerable to increasingly
extreme weather conditions. But the effects will be felt across most
sectors. With economic losses from natural disasters doubling every 10
years, banks' and insurers' profits are at risk. Also, governments are
increasingly looking at regulating carbon emissions. Industries such as oil,
gas and manufacturing are obvious targets for regulatory action. The
European Union, parts of the United States and Japan all plan new laws.
Likely tax increases will push up the cost of energy, hitting all
industries.
There are
gains to be made as well. Reducing carbon emissions can make companies more
efficient.
Whole new
industries and sectors will also develop, bringing big rewards for companies
able to exploit them. For example, the renewable energy market will grow to
around $1.9 trillion by 2020 from between $234 billion and $625 billion in
2010, the report says. With the financial impacts of climate change
becoming clearer, investors are beginning to push for change. Fund
companies are increasingly channelling investment into companies that adopt
high standards on environmental, social and ethical issues. The belief is
that companies which manage these risks are likely to provide better
long-term returns to shareholders.
In Britain,
parts of Europe and Australia, legislation is also pushing big investors
such as pension funds to act, adding to the pressure on companies. "This
report is required reading for directors, executives and investors
everywhere," said Tennant. "Companies failing to take the messages of this
report seriously are likely to hear from their shareholders."
back to contents
63)
EUROPE AHEAD OF U.S. IN RENEWABLE POWER
ENS
February
19, 2003
Internet:
http://ens-news.com/ens/feb2003/2003-02-19-09.asp#anchor3
DENVER,
Colorado, February 19, 2003 (ENS) - Europeans have far outdone Americans in
developing new sources of renewable energy and a sound environmental policy,
argue researchers. As the world's only remaining superpower, the United
States is often at the cutting edge of science and technology. But according
to researchers at the American Association for the Advancement of Science
(AAAS) meeting this week, the Europeans are way ahead in renewable energy
research and development. "Europe has made a major commitment to renewable
energy and is leading the United States in deploying it," said Allan
Hoffman, a renewable energy expert and senior advisor to the Clean Energy
Group at Winrock International, a nonprofit group dedicated to
sustainability and based in Arkansas. Of all the potential sources of
renewable energy, wind is the most widely used. It is the world's fastest
growing energy source, with the current worldwide capacity at around 30,000
megawatts. In less than five years, wind power capacity is expected to rise
to around 60,000 megawatts, according to speakers at the AAAS meeting.
Citing a
recent survey of renewable energy initiatives worldwide, L. Hunter Lovins of
The Global Academy, an interdisciplinary think tank based in Florida,
rejected the contention of U.S. President George Bush that U.S. adherence to
the Kyoto protocol would place the United States at a competitive
disadvantage.
"It turns
out that the U.S. will be at a competitive disadvantage by not signing" she
said. As consumers begin to notice the benefits that renewable energy
sources bring to the environment and their quality of life, Lovins said,
companies in nations that have invested in the new sources of energy will
gain a marketing edge. Lovins added that the investment community has also
begun seeing an increase in "socially responsible investing," investments in
companies that agree to practice environmentally and socially responsible
policies.
As a
result, such investment options have received the attention of the big
institutional investors - pension funds with assets equal to 46 percent of
U.S. gross domestic product. One of these, The California Public Employees'
Retirement System, (CalPers), with $130 billion in assets, has announced
that it has begun screening investments. From such decisions, Lovins expects
to see a ripple effect that will lead to changes in U.S. energy policy. "As
Americans we are in a time of unprecedented opportunity and unprecedented
peril. We have more choices than ever in terms of efficient energy and
renewables," Lovins said. "At the moment, however, our administration's
policies are going in the wrong direction."
back to contents
64) CONSERVATION GROUP CALLS ON GOVT TO SIGN KYOTO
PROTOCOL
February 17, 2003
Internet:
http://abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s786282.htm
The Australian Conservation Foundation says
Australia is blindly following the United States in not signing the Kyoto
Protocol to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Australian Conservation
Foundation says the release of a new report today has revealed the economic
cost to Australia of not signing the protocol. The report, commissioned by
the New South Wales, Victorian and South Australian Governments, claims
business has changed its views on the treaty and wants opportunities for
investment. However a spokeswoman for Federal Environment Minister David
Kemp says the report will not influence the Government's stance.The
Australian Conservation Foundation's executive director, Don Henry, says
Australia and the US are the only two developed countries who have not
signed. "I think now that this report clearly shows that it's in our
economic and environmental interest to ratify," he said. "One just has to
assume our Federal Government is blindly following the anti-Kyoto stance of
President Bush in the US."
back to contents
65) SIGNING THE KYOTO PROTOCOL IS NOT A SIMPLE
TASK: BEATTIE
Abc.net
February 17, 2003
Internet:
http://abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s786388.htm
The Queensland Government has rebuffed renewed
calls from three states for the Federal Government to sign the Kyoto
Protocol. A new report sponsored by the New South Wales, Victorian and South
Australian Governments has found Australia's economy will suffer if the
Federal Government does not sign the agreement to reduce greenhouse gases.
Last year Queensland Premier Peter Beattie said the situation was not that
simple. Today he says nothing has changed. "It's easy to say sign up to
Kyoto if you're not disadvantaged and I know Bob Carr is a very committed
environmentalist, and so am I, and so is Steve Bracks but the two states
that suffer as a result of it are Queensland and Western Australia," he
said. "All I've asked for is time, I believe in the long run we will comply
with any Kyoto agreements."
back to contents
66)
WE'RE BETTER OFF IN KYOTO: CARR
News.au.com
February
17, 2003
Internet:
http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,5996624%255E1702,00.html
AUSTRALIA
should split from the United States on greenhouse gas policy and become an
environmental superpower, NSW Premier Bob Carr said today. Mr Carr released
a report showing Australia would be economically better off ratifying the
Kyoto Protocol rather than trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions outside
the treaty. The report, prepared by the Kyoto Ratification Advisory Group
which Mr Carr established, found Australia could lose important investment
in new clean, green technologies if it remained outside the treaty
framework. It said Australia's GDP would be around 0.26 per cent or around
$2 billion a year worse off outside the Kyoto Protocol, compared with 0.11
per cent or $875 million worse off if Australia ratified the agreement and
met its targets. Companies investing in countries which have ratified the
global agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would receive credits in
exchange for investing in carbon absorbing initiatives like plantations, Mr
Carr said.
back to contents
67)
SELLING SMOKE
Time
March 10,
2003
Internet:
http://www.time.com/time/insidebiz/article/0,9171,1101030310-428067-1,00.html
When Dawn
Schrepel, an environmental and energy consultant in Washington, wanted to
thank her 10 interns for a job well done, she bought each of them an unusual
gift - a ton of carbon dioxide. "They were pretty surprised," she says,
laughing. "And it took a little explanation." Schrepel, 33, bought the
carbon dioxide not in giant tanks but on paper, through Natsource, an energy
brokerage based in New York City.
Natsource
trades not only standard commodities like coal and natural gas but also a
new currency known as greenhouse-gas credits. These credits represent, in
effect, the right to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide, methane or
other gases thought to contribute to global warming. Such credits trade in
earnest in nations like Britain and Denmark, which have capped emissions
from such sources as factories and power plants. And the credits are trading
on an experimental basis in the U.S., as industries anticipate the eventual
imposition of similar emission limits here.
Natsource
arranged for Schrepel to pay a retail price of $17 a ton for carbon dioxide
that is part of the natural chemistry of a 1,200-acre patch of Illinois
grassland in a nature preserve. In return for part of that payment, the
land's owner agreed not to burn, pave over or otherwise release that carbon
dioxide. Schrepel wryly explained to her interns that buying the credits
would help offset the carbon dioxide they emitted by, among other things,
breathing. Schrepel's gift is but a tiny part of a global greenhouse-gas
trading industry that is growing rapidly. Between 1996 and 2002, about $500
million worth of carbon dioxide was traded among companies in the U.S. and
Europe. The World Bank's Prototype Carbon Fund, which helps countries
preserve forest and reduce CO2 emissions, says the number of greenhouse-gas
trades and the volume of gas affected will double this year. Experts predict
that the right to emit a ton of carbon dioxide, which costs between $3.50
and $6 if purchased in bulk today, will cost between $7 and $12 by 2005.
That would make the global market for greenhouse-gas credits worth well over
$3 billion a year.
Two events
drive this growth: the expectation that the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change
will go into effect this year and require many countries to reduce carbon
dioxide emissions by 2008, and the emergence of government-backed
emissions-trading schemes in Britain and Denmark. Despite President George
W. Bush's assertion two years ago that Kyoto would wither, 2003 looks to be
the year the treaty will come to life. Canada ratified it in December, and
if Russia joins this year, as its President has promised, the treaty will
have enough support to go into effect. It would not bind the U.S., but it
could induce U.S. multinationals to reduce emissions by their plants in
signatory countries. Even in the U.S., there is a growing consensus that
greenhouse-gas reductions are inevitable. In January, Senators John McCain
of Arizona and Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut introduced legislation that
would cap emissions and allow rights trading. Thirteen U.S. companies,
including American Electrical Power, Dupont and Ford, have joined the new
Chicago Climate Exchange. Members volunteer to reduce carbon dioxide
emissions in a system that lets them practice trading greenhouse-gas credits
while trying to deflect regulation and public criticism.
Jack Cogen,
president of Natsource, couldn't be happier about this trend. Besides
trading in energy and emissions credits, Natsource consults with firms that
are weighing the idea of operating cleaner. Greenhouse-gas trading and
consulting provide only 10% of Natsource's revenue, but the company expects
that share to rise to 50% by 2007. "It's a fascinating business opportunity.
Can you use market forces to effect environmental and societal goals?" asks
Cogen, 46. "Can you put a cost on what was a free resource?"
Cogen
thinks you can, and he's not alone. In 1990 the Clean Air Act capped
emissions of sulfur dioxide, a major contributor to acid rain, and ordered
that they be gradually reduced. The government issued "allowances" to
companies and let them trade polluting rights on the open market. A power
company that cut its emissions at relatively low cost could sell its
leftover emission rights to another utility facing higher costs for
pollution control.
Robert
Stavins, an economist at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, estimates
that this cap-and-trade system, vs. a system of rigid caps on each firm's
emissions, saves U.S. companies about $1 billion a year in compliance
expenses. "It's the most cost-effective way to reduce emissions," he says,
"and companies have an incentive to cut pollution so they can sell credits."
The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that sulfur dioxide emissions
have been halved since 1990 and that Americans save $50 billion a year in
health and environmental costs associated with acid rain.
Expecting
that international support for Kyoto will grow despite U.S. government
opposition, companies around the world - including U.S.-based multinationals
- want to be prepared. Cogen says today's nascent trading of CO2 credits
forces executives to "sit in a room and figure out how to manage, market,
verify and account for their emissions. We call it learning by doing." Some
U.S. companies are not just experimenting; they are buying carbon dioxide
credits today, at relatively low prices, as insurance against future
regulations. World wholesale prices of carbon dioxide credits have jumped
more than 600% since 1996, but prices differ from country to country. Kyoto
allows credit trading only among signatory countries, and when it became
clear in 2001 that the U.S. would not adopt Kyoto in the first round, the
price of U.S. credits fell.
Michael
Intrator, a managing director at Natsource, believes that the U.S. should
have led the way. "America had a massive information advantage," he says.
"We understood how cap-and-trade worked because we traded sulfur dioxide.
Now we are left in a sea of uncertainty because we didn't ratify Kyoto. The
overarching belief is that sometime we will. But by then, we might be at a
competitive disadvantage."
Melissa
Carey, a climate-change analyst at the Environmental Defense Fund, says that
despite all the greenhouse-gas trading under way, it won't reduce emissions
until Kyoto takes effect. "Sulfur dioxide was successful," she says,
"because there are huge penalties for failing to comply." One Kyoto
provision lets industrialized countries fund carbon-reduction projects in
developing countries that do not have emission caps. For example, a U.S.
utility may find that cutting its emissions is more expensive than planting
a carbon-trapping forest in Bolivia. But until Kyoto is ratified, there
won't be any independent verification that the forest has been planted.
Another
obstacle to wider trading of emissions is nature. Forests burn down.
Hurricanes wash away fields. Then there are governments that ignore
international agreements and change environmental policies in ways that can
radically affect the value of existing emissions credits. Until financial
instruments are developed to ensure credits against the ravages of politics
and nature, trading greenhouse gases will be a risky business. But the
traders at Natsource are betting that multinational firms are also learning
about the risks of doing nothing in the face of regulations that they know
are coming, sooner or later.
back to contents
68) THE
GROWING RELIGIOUS MISSION TO PROTECT GOD'S CREATION by Jim Motavalli
ENN
March 7,
2003
Internet:
http://www.enn.com/news/2003-03-07/s_2770.asp
Jim
Motavalli is editor of E/The Environmental Magazine
STEWARDS
OF THE EARTH
Sally
Bingham, the environmental minister at Grace Cathedral in San Francisco,
cites the second chapter of Genesis as a motivation for her work: "God put
Adam in the Garden to till it and to keep it. We haven't done a very good
job of that. Christians are commanded to love their neighbors, and you can't
do that by polluting their air and their water." Rev. Bingham isn't just
talking. She formed a group aimed at persuading California's 50,000
congregations to buy green power, and when the state's energy crisis ended
that option, she switched to convincing them to become more
energy-conscious. Bingham, who was briefly jailed in Washington in a
nonviolent protest against proposed oil drilling in the Alaska National
Wildlife Refuge, now operates California Interfaith Power and Light, which
has Jewish and Muslim congregations in its fold.
Congregations are being asked to sign "covenants" committing them to
improving the energy efficiency of their buildings, to creating global
warming education campaigns, and to using renewable energy when possible.
There are now solar panels on the roofs of Gloria Dei Lutheran Church in
Sacramento and Congregation Shir Hadash in Los Gatos, for instance.
With
volunteers like Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown, Bingham and her volunteers have
replaced church lights with compact fluorescents and made many other
energy-saving changes at more than 150 member parishes. Massachusetts has
followed California's lead with the formation of the Massachusetts
Interfaith Energy Conservation Group. Churches are clearly going beyond
green rhetoric, and one powerful convincer is climate change. The religious
community is part of a growing movement against global warming that, against
a vacuum of leadership from the federal government, is building from the
bottom up. As the Grist online magazine put it, "In dorm rooms and board
rooms, in city halls and houses of worship - all across the country - a
grassroots network of activists is implementing the best maxim the
environmental movement ever coined: They are thinking about global climate
change, and combating it locally." Meeting in Oxford, England last July, a
landmark gathering of environmental scientists, theologians, and
policymakers issued a declaration stating very firmly that global warming is
real and that it is the duty of committed Christians to do something about
it.
"By
reducing the Earth's biological diversity," their statement said,
"human-induced climate change diminishes God's creation.... The call to
'love the Lord Your God and love your neighbor' (Matthew 22:37-39) takes on
new implications in the face of present and projected climate change." "This
was an important breakthrough," said Climate Forum 2002 participant Rev.
James Ball, the American Baptist minister who heads the Evangelical
Environmental Network. "The meeting brought together senior climate
scientists and Christian leaders, and it really helped us understand this
crucial issue." It helped that many of the participating scientists were
themselves evangelical Christians, including co-convenor Sir John Houghton
of the John Ray Initiative, a former science advisor to Margaret Thatcher
and co-chair of the United Nations climate change panel's Scientific
Assessment Working Group. Houghton's impressive credentials include work as
editor of both the first and second Assessment Reports of the
Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, which laid the foundation for
the Kyoto Protocol.
Among the
declaration's signers was Reverend Richard Cizik, vice president of the
National Association of Evangelicals, an influential body that represents
between 25 million and 40 million churchgoers. "I was persuaded enough by
the evidence to sign the document," Reverend Cizik said. "Many evangelicals
have been led to believe that the challenge of global warming is simply
fiction, but I don't see how they could take a look at the evidence of these
scientists-many of whom are also Christians-and not be convinced. The church
community is challenged to examine the evidence for global warmin, and to
respond to the fact of it."
For many
environmentalists, the phrase "evangelical Christian" is likely to conjure
an implacable enemy who supports Jerry Falwell, the Christian Coalition, and
the polluters' lobby in Congress. But in fact, there is a wide spectrum of
opinion among Christians - and a growing activism for the environment.
Rev. Jim
Ball, for instance, is an American Baptist minister and also executive
director of the Evangelical Environmental Network. "Our purpose as an
organization is to help evangelical Christians understand what the Bible
says about caring for all creation," said Ball, another Oxford signatory.
When conservative evangelical Christians join wide-ranging coalitions
calling for action on global warming and Episcopal priests plug in to green
energy, the battle lines are clearly being redrawn in what has long been
recognized as a Manichean struggle for the political hearts and minds of the
world's believers. Faith-based environmental activism is soaring, and with
it comes new criticism that the activists are straying from church doctrine.
Many of the arguments hinge on a seemingly simple point of doctrine: Did God
give human beings "dominion" over the Earth, to control as we see fit, or
did He give us "stewardship" of his creation as a sacred trust?
ENVIRONMENTAL EQUITY
It is
possible to date the resurgence of faith-based environmentalism to 1993,
when the National Religious Partnership for the Environment (NRPE) was
founded by a former radio talk show host and spokesman for the Episcopal
Cathedral of St. John the Divine named Paul Gorman. NRPE quickly proved its
effectiveness by joining together such disparate and mainstream bodies as
the U.S. Catholic Conference, the National Council of Churches of Christ,
the Coalition on Environment and Jewish Life, and the Evangelical
Environmental Network and helping educate their vast congregations. With
dynamic leadership like that, church leaders are moving environmental
concerns to the heart of their ministry and calling on their congregants to
take increasingly radical action. "A child born in a wealthy country is
likely to consume, waste, and pollute more in his lifetime than 50 children
born in developing nations," said the Archbishop of Canterbury in a New
Year's address on the eve of 2001. "In fact, our energy-burning lifestyles
are pushing our planet to the point of no return. It may not be time to
build an ark like Noah, but it is high time to take better care of God's
creation. Indeed, in my view this is a challenge humanity must not ignore."
In 1997,
the Patriarchate of the Greek Orthodox Church, His Holiness Bartholomew I,
used strong language against polluters: "To commit a crime against the
natural world is a sin," he said. "For humans to cause species to become
extinct and to destroy the biological diversity of God's creation ... for
humans to degrade the integrity of [the] Earth by causing changes in its
climate, stripping the Earth of its natural forests or destroying its
wetlands ... for humans to contaminate the Earth's waters, its land, its
air, and its life with poisonous substances, these are sins," he said. In a
speech before the Scenic Hudson environmental group in 2000, he added
another element: a ringing declaration against over-consumption, "which
leads to exploiting and lording it over nature." In a 1990 Word Day of Peace
message, Pope John Paul II emphasized that Christian responsibility toward
nature is an essential part of one's faith.
Statements
like these are heartening and common across many denominations, but it's the
concrete actions and growing faith-based activism that represents an
important change. "It's one thing to have theological arguments, but the
average member of a congregation needs to be able to connect those with
their own lives and actions," said Rebecca Gould, Professor of Religion and
Environmental Studies at Middlebury College in Vermont. "Environmental
issues are a reminder that there is a connection." According to Gould,
congregations are beginning to step forward and say, "Our house of worship
should reflect our beliefs for creation." The resulting determination has
rippled across faiths, creating unlikely coalitions. A pioneering example is
the National Religious Partnership for the Environment (NRPE), composed of
four groups: the U.S. Catholic Conference (the policy agencies for all
Catholic bishops, clergy, and parishes); the National Council of Churches of
Christ (a federation of Protestant, Eastern Orthodox, and African-American
denominations); the Evangelical Environmental Network (a coalition of
evangelical Christian agencies and institutions); and the Coalition on
Environment and Jewish Life (COEJL, an alliance across all four Jewish
movements). Its priority: to "weave the mission of care for God's creation
across all areas of organized religion."
Since 1993,
the NRPE has striven to do so by incorporating environmental activities into
programs already established to address social issues. Habitat for Humanity,
a Christian housing organization, began identifying chemical threats in
construction and promoting environmentally friendly materials. The United
Jewish Appeal underwrote curriculum for outdoor Jewish environmental
education. The Association of Evangelical Relief and Development agencies
prepared field staff to become environmental advocates, as well as hunger
workers, in the 40 countries in which they are placed. Congregation-based
projects were soon born as well: Jesus People Against Pollution in Columbia,
Miss., has surveyed 20,000 citizens affected by chemical dioxins, built up a
coalition of community organizations, and forced Superfund clean-ups. The
Sisters of the Immaculate Heart in Detroit, Mich., have turned a former
crack cocaine house into a community garden and cleared 120 lots for
planting trees and flowers. The Hamburg Presbyterian Church in upstate New
York adopted the nearby Eighteen Mile Creek, monitored pH levels, and won it
state designation as a protected habitat.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Since this
kind of pollution concentrates in poor neighborhoods, many churches see the
struggle for environmental justice as ideally combining the twin missions of
concern for the world's disadvantaged with concern for the Earth itself.
Incorporating environmental justice into social programs is a natural step
for many churches, and it has been the sole purpose of The United States
Catholic Conference's Environmental Justice Program. Regional grants awarded
by the program have helped raise awareness about the environmental impact to
the Chesapeake Bay from Maryland's poultry industry and clean up the Clinton
River Watershed in Michigan. Other grants have organized parishes to develop
reuse plans for abandoned brownfields, educated communities about the health
problems of toxic emissions, and trained teachers in land stewardship and
ethics.
The
Church's involvement has become more pronounced in the last 10 or 15 years,
said Walt Grazer, director of the program. "One of the charges made is that
'you guys finally showed up,' and that's not unusual," he said. "The
Catholic Church has been around for 2,000 years; we don't rush into things."
Some 20,000 resource kits have been distributed to every parish in the
United States, offering tips on how to integrate environmental justice into
ongoing parish ministries. Target Earth, a national Christian group, has
activities in 15 countries, including field stations for research, service
projects to accommodate hands-on involvement, and conservation programs to
preserve land and culture. Particularly active on college campuses, Target
Earth training programs have taught students to lobby issues such as the
Endangered Species Act and reform of the 1872 Mining Law. Alternative spring
break programs have sent them to build container gardens for the elderly and
engage elementary students in community clean-ups.
Other
examples include the Catholic Coalition for Children and a Safe Environment
- created by several major Catholic religious, health care, social service,
and policy organizations - which advocates on the behalf of children exposed
disproportionately to environmental hazards. Pat Waak's guide Faith,
Justice, and a Healthy World has been widely used to train clergy and
religious laypersons alike on the subject of population and the environment.
It is to be expanded in its eighth printing to include exercises, sample
sermons, and activities for faith communities. Environmental Ministries in
Southern California, which has "Mission to Planet Earth" task forces within
its congregations, and has worked to prevent Native American land in the
Mojave Desert from becoming a nuclear dumpsite.
CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY
Faith
communities have not shied away from the corporate arena either, where
shareholder activism has been a particularly effective tool, said Tim Smith,
director of Socially Responsive Investment for Walden Asset Management and
former executive director for the Interfaith Center on Corporate
Responsibility (ICCR). Religious bodies have evolved from using their
investments to speak out against Southern Appalachian strip mining to
tackling issues as broad as climate change, genetically engineered foods,
and greater disclosure of environmental impacts. A proxy resolution
sponsored by religious organizations was a powerful persuader in General
Motors' move to endorse the CERES principles, a blueprint for sustainable
business practices, and in the withdrawal of several corporations, including
Ford and Sun Oil, from the Global Climate Coalition, an industry group that
tried to debunk global warming.
A coalition
including the General Board of Pension & Health Benefits of The United
Methodist Church called upon Sony's American division this past November to
accept standards proposed by the European Union for recycling obsolete
computers and ending their use of toxic heavy metal components.
The range
of faith-affiliated groups finding power in this approach is wide. They
include churches, such as Episcopalians, Presbyteriansm and United
Methodists; health care systems, such as Catholic Health Care West; money
managers, such as Christian Brothers Investment Services; and Catholic
charities, such as Adrian Dominican Sisters and the Sisters of Charity. ICCR
alone claims 275 religious groups, representing $100 billion in portfolio
money, as national members.
JOINING
FORCES
More
cut-and-dried environmental groups see the power in such an approach as well
and, increasingly, are seeing the power in joining with religious bodies to
more effectively accomplish like goals. "There is a growing partnership,
cooperation, and synergy between the religious community and environmental
groups," said Smith. Environmental nonprofit Friends of the Earth, for
instance, works in close partnership with the religious community through
its Green Investments program to increase corporate disclosure. Ozone
Action, now folded into Greenpeace, has been the official resource group for
faith groups in shareholder actions that pertain to global warming. "One
often gets a sense of extremism with media portrayal of environmental
organizations," said Mark Regier of MMA Financial Services, the financial
services arm of the Mennonite Church, which manages $1.2 billion in assets.
"Religious organizations can find common ground in a way a little more
possible than if Exxon and Greenpeace were to sit together at the table.
Faith organizations understand the values and concerns that environmental
groups share but are also familiar with the demands on companies to perform
and how they can respond. They can play a bridging role to open new and
creative channels otherwise not possible between two groups so opposed."
That role,
when bridging between environmental groups and government, also "adds a
degree of power for effective public policy change," said Bill Meadows,
president of The Wilderness Society. The Society has a strong relationship
with the Episcopal Diocese in Alaska, which has resolved that the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge is important to protect for reasons other than for
oil or economic interest. The Society provides the Diocese with information
about public policy and access to staff economists and ecologists and leaves
dialogue with leaders in Washington, D.C., to the diocese constituency who
live in their districts and states. It's not that big of a stretch, added
Meadows. "It's not as if a person is singularly an environmentalist, a
conservationist, or a religious practitioner," he said. "We have many
aspects to our lives. People who hold religious values are often very strong
conservationists, and the reverse is true as well. But the move from values
to action is really important, and church is very, very effective in making
that happen."
ACTIVE
FOR ISLAM
Especially
in light of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, it's important to point
out the deep ecological teachings inherent in Islam, and the very real
on-the-ground projects that are manifest from those teachings.
Although
high-impact environmental projects are still not widespread in Islamic
societies, some efforts have taken root. The Sultan of Oman, for instance,
has worked with the World Wildlife Fund on a project called Operation Oryx,
which has successfully reintroduced the native oryx (an antelope that had
disappeared from the wild in the 1970s) to that desert land. And in Saudi
Arabia, King Fahd established the National Commission for Wildlife
Conservation and Development, which by 1999 had set up research centers to
breed endangered species (including the oryx, ibex [another antelope],
ostrich, and bustard), created a network of nature reserves covering 4
percent of the kingdom, and initiated a nationwide public education
campaign." Allah entrusted man with the guardianship of the Earth," said the
Islamic Foundation for Ecology and Environmental Sciences, founded in the
mid-1980s. "We have to fulfill that ancient trust now, before it becomes too
late."
The
foundation has set up an extensive training program in environmental
teachings based on the Qur'an. It promotes self-sufficiency in farming
through organic agriculture and permaculture and serves as a demonstration
center for solar technology, water wheels, waste recycling, and wind power.
The foundation distributes a slide-based teaching pack titled "Qur'an
Creation and Conservation" and is setting up the Muslim Alliance for
Conservation as an international grassroots organization. Dr. Richard Foltz,
an Islamicist who teaches in the religion department at the University of
Florida, says the strongest environmental activism in the Muslim world
occurs in Iran, which also has the only explicitly Islamic government in the
world. Although the mullahs are not themselves sponsors of green
initiatives, the revolutionary constitution adapted in 1979 asserts that
protection of the natural environment is "a public obligation," and that
therefore "all activities, economic or otherwise, which may cause
irreversible damage to the environment are forbidden."
Despite the
strong words, however, Teheran, Iran's capitol city, has some of the worst
air pollution in the world, killing an estimated 7,500 people a year from
related illnesses. The country also faces both water and population crises.
These problems have been a spur to the launching of some 149 nongovernmental
environmental groups in Iran. Among the most active is the Green Front of
Iran, established by four medical students in 1989. In 2001, for example,
the Green Front held a Clean Mountain Day that educated people about
protecting the Alborz Mountains northwest of Tehran. In 1999, it organized
hundreds of volunteers in a cleanup of the Caspian Sea coast. "This is a
symbolic action to raise consciousness about environmental issues," said
Siamak Moattari, who heads the Green Front. Although many Muslim countries
campaign against women's reproductive rights, the Islamic government of Iran
has one of the most extensive birth control programs in the world. Family
planning courses are mandatory for couples about to be married, and birth
control devices are free and widely available.
Contraceptive use rose from 37 percent of married women in 1976 to 73
percent in 1997. As a result, both population growth and women's fertility
rates has been drastically reduced. According to the Population Reference
Bureau, an annual growth rate of 3.9 percent in 1976 has been slashed to 1.2
percent today. Fertility dropped from 5.6 live births per female in 1986 to
two - or even replacement level - today.
"Iran is a
very interesting test case that shatters all the stereotypes about Islam and
the environment," said Foltz. Unfortunately, while Iran is a role model for
much of the Islamic world, it has found few adherents on the environment. In
most Islamic countries, population control is a taboo subject, and rigid
centralized control stifles nongovernmental activity, including grassroots
environmentalism. Women's rights and, by most measures, freedom, are the
lowest in the world in Arab societies, according to the United Nations' Arab
Human Development Report 2002
THE
BUDDHIST WAY
There is a
strong tradition of nonviolent respect for nature in Buddhism as well. As
Nick Wallis of the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order explained, "All the
most significant events [of Buddha's life] occur in the countryside and are
associated with trees." Buddha was born as his mother grasped the branch of
a sal tree and achieved Enlightenment beneath the Bodhi tree. "As a body
studying Buddhism, I was taught the importance of a caring attitude toward
the environment," writes His Holiness the Dalai Lama. "Our practice of
nonviolence applies not just to human beings but to all sentient beings or
any living thing."
In
practice, environmentalists face an uphill battle being heard in societies
that are authoritarian and rapidly industrializing, but religious faith has
manifest itself in courageous ways.
Some 700
Thai monks and nuns are united in Sekiya Dhamma, a network that has fought
logging and other environmental exploitation and increasingly takes on
governmental development policies. One such monk is Pha Pachak, who in order
to protect forests from loggers, wrapped saffron monk's cloth around
imperiled trees and blessed them. The tactic worked, for killing an ordained
being is a dangerous undertaking for people of Buddhist faith. But Pha
Pachak was persecuted for his obstruction of the powerful lumber industry,
beaten, and thrown in jail. Pachak's work is carried on: in 1999, a
International Solidarity Walk through Thailand ended with an Interfaith Tree
Ordination. The monk Buddhadasa Bikkhu, who died in 1993, was a kindred
spirit; he was very politically active and a strong environmentalist. "The
greedy and selfish are destroying nature," he declared. Also in Thailand,
writer and activist Sulak Sivaraska has helped form a number of groups,
including the International Network of Engaged Buddhists. Like Pha Pachak,
he has been arrested for his work. "Not only our traditional culture, but
our natural environment, too, is in crisis," he said.
HINDUISM
Although
Hinduism expresses a reverence for nature, imbuing even the rivers, forests,
and mountains with divine significance, India today is in its worst
environmental crisis, facing 2.5 million premature deaths annually from air
pollution alone. As Hinduism Today points out, "Most economic advancement
during the last half century has come at severe environmental cost: falling
water tables, soil loss, air and water pollution, forest degradation,
overgrazing, loss of species, and unmanageable municipal waste."
"Hindu
religious leaders can always help in protecting the environment," said Dr.
P.R. Trivedy, chairman of the Indian Institute of Ecology and Environment.
"In the Vedas and other religious books there are detailed discussions and
descriptions on nature and how to protect it. There is an urgent need to
have a competent cadre of Hindu leaders educated and trained in religion,
culture, and the environment. Let there be trained saints having an
eco-mind."
Dr. Suman
Sahai, who campaigns for farmers' rights, points out that the 5,000-year-old
Hindu tradition respects all forms of life, "Religious leaders can do
wonders, but we are forgetting our traditions and have done nothing so far,"
she said. Perhaps "nothing" is a little strong. Through the work of the
Institute of Himalyan Environment and Development, Hindu pilgrims to
mountain provinces ravaged by clear-cutting have been convinced to plant
trees in God's name - with dramatically successful results. "I tell them to
plant trees throughout India for the sake of peace and well-being for all,"
said an orange-robed sadhu who runs a rest house for pilgrims in the
Himalayas. One such sadhu, or holy man, 80-year-old Swami Vankhandi,
personally replanted 15 acres of deforested land and fought off loggers.
India's wealthiest Hindu temple, Tirumala Tirupati in Andhra Pradesh, has
organized the planting of several million trees across the country.
One of
India's foremost environmentalists, Dr. Vandana Shiva, predicts that the
country will be in severe food and water crisis by 2020. But she also points
to some points of light in the form of faith-based activism. "I know several
Hindu religious leaders active in the environmental movement," Shiva said.
"Swami Chidanand of Hardiwar blessed the struggle against Tehri Dam [in the
hills of Uttar Pradesh, the dam will submerge 100 villages and destroy the
Ganga River] and the Chipko movement [Indian "tree huggers" who have stopped
loggers dead in their tracks]." Vashudha Narayanan, in an eloquent essay
titled "One Tree is Equal to 10 Sons: Hindu Responses to the Problems of
Ecology, Population, and Consumption," summed up the reformists' message:
"It is we who belong to the Earth," she wrote, "and by wrongly usurping what
is not ours and what should be shared with the future generations of human
beings, we are indulging in adharmic, or unrighteous behavior."
JEWISH
REVERENCE FOR LIFE
"The
Talmudic sages express great concern about preserving the environment and
preventing pollution," writes Richard Schwartz in his book Judaism and
Global Survival. "It is forbidden," he quotes, "to live in a town which has
not garden or greenery." And he quotes an ancient Jewish story, in which two
men who are quarreling over ownership of a piece of land go to see their
rabbi, who puts his ear to the ground and proclaims, "Let us ask the land."
As the rabbi straightens up, he announces, "Gentlemen, the land says it
belongs to neither of you, but that you belong to it." Trees are the focus
during the Hebrew month of Shevat. In what has become something of a Jewish
Earth Day, congregations plant trees and pursue agricultural projects on Tu
B'Shevat, the 15th day of the month. On that day, observant Jews believe,
God decides how bountiful the fruit trees will be in the next year.
Rabbi
Arthur Waskow, who founded and runs the Philadelphia-based Shalom Center,
reminds observant Jews of such traditions in books such as Trees, Earth, and
Torah and Torah of the Earth: Exploring 4,000 Years of Ecology in Jewish
Thought. "Our work is deeply rooted in Jewish spiritual tradition," Rabbi
Waskow said. "We are reviving ancient harvest festivals, helping to
integrate concern for the Earth into the fabric of Jewish life. But instead
of simply asking God to protect us from famine and locusts, we are asking to
saved from General Electric's pollution of the Hudson River with PCBs." The
Shalom Center is on the front lines. "Focusing on the Jewish heritage of
protecting trees," Rabbi Waskow said, "we joined with such groups as the
Redwood Rabbis and brought people to Maxaam shareholders' meetings to
protest against the planned logging of ancient redwood trees. We held a
'plant-in' on company land and were nearly arrested."
The Redwood
Rabbis were also a sponsor of the National Forest Protection and Restoration
Act to protect all national forests from any form of commercial logging, a
piece of legislation spearheaded by Christians Caring for Creation and by
the Religious Campaign for Forest Conservation (RCFC).
The
Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life (COEJL), headquartered in New
York, has 26 member organizations. When it was formed in 1993, it issued an
eloquent statement. "Our agenda is already overflowing," it said. "Israel's
safety, the resettlement of Soviet Jewry, anti-Semitism, the welfare of our
people in many nations, the continuing problems of poverty, unemployment,
hunger, health care, and education as well as assimilation and intermarriage
- all these and more have engaged us and must engage us still. But the
ecological crisis hovers over all Jewish concerns, for the threat is global,
advancing, and ultimately jeopardizes ecological balance and the quality of
life." Energy security, and global warming are primary COEJL concerns, and
members conduct letter-writing campaigns and other actions. COEJL Chair
Sharon Bloome blasts efforts to drill for oil in the Alaska National
Wilderness Refuge and specifically refutes attempts to link that issue with
Israel's future security. "The road to energy independence does not go
through the Artic wilderness," she said. "We do not need to drill in ANWR to
maintain our capacity to ensure Israel's oil supply. Israel's oil use is
less than 2 percent that of the United States."
Mark
Jacobs, executive director of COEJL, says that, like the Shalom Center, the
group is very involved in forest protection. "The roadless forest initiative
represents an extraordinary opportunity for us to fulfill our obligation as
tenants in God's world," he said, "preventing destruction of the last
remaining wild forests and creating a legacy of fully protected forest
ecosystems." Another Jewish activist, Rabbi Fred Scherlinder Dobb of the
Adat Shalom Reconstructionist Congregation in Maryland, is a co-chair of the
Massachusetts-based Religious Witness for the Earth (RWE). "To me, religion
and ecology just go together," he said. "Religion points to our relations
with each other and with creation; ecology reminds us that everything is one
and opens doors of mystery and spiritual power." He added, "The prophets
weren't always popular, but speaking truth to power, their calls to justice
became the enduring voices of their generation."
RWE
concentrates on the New England states, where it hopes to duplicate some of
the work of California Interfaith Power and Light. "The New England
governors have committed themselves to a platform of sustainability," Rabbi
Dobb said. "To hold them to it and to enable those states to further the
progress we've recently seen in California will take continued pressure from
people of faith."
RWE has
circulated calls for religious witness against the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge signed by more than 170 clerg,; organized a prayer witness outside
the U.S. Department of Energy that was followed by a nonviolent protest that
resulted in 22 arrests (10 of them clergy members), and held events in each
New England state capital. The increasing momentum on domestic environmental
issues is unfortunately not mirrored in the Middle East. Tragically, one
casualty of the intifada in Israel and the West Bank has been environmental
partnerships between Jews and Muslims. For instance, a mutual project on air
pollution managed by Professor Menachem Luria of Hebrew University and Dr.
Jad Isaac of the Research Institute of Jersusalem (ARIJ) in Bethlehem
received Palestinian cooperation, but the joint effort ceased after the
conflict began. Nevertheless, there is a strong tradition of interfaith work
on issues ranging from water distribution and pollution
A
GALVANIZING ISSUE
The Oxford
Declaration on global warming, supported by mainstream evangelical
Christians, was not a shot in the dark or an isolated incident. An unstable
climate is perceived as a threat to all of creation, and there is growing
awareness in the religious community that not only has the science become
irrefutable but the effects are already causing extensive damage to the
Earth. "The involvement of the religious community is growing quickly - and
it is essential," said climate journalist Ross Gelbspan, author of the
influential book The Heat is On. "When I talk about the climate crisis to
policymakers, I cast it in terms of bottom-line thinking because that's
their vocabulary. But at root, climate change is not an economic issue; it's
a moral and ethical one. To continue to ignore it means putting at risk
billions of poor people who are immediately vulnerable to climate impacts."
He
continued, "That's why it is so heartening to see the Oxford Declaration as
well as recent initiatives by the World Council of Churches, the Eastern
Orthodox Church, Interfaith Power and Light, Jewish congregations around the
country, the Interfaith Center for Corporate Responsibility, and numerous
other faith-based groups. They're demanding that all of us - as human beings
- address the fundamental moral imperative of the climate crisis." In 1997,
the Christian Environmental Council did just that by passing a resolution
calling upon the United States to reduce its emissions of greenhouse gases
10 percent by 2010; two years later, it passed another resolution calling
for government and business leaders to implement the type of clean-energy
policy that would allow this to happen. In 2001, the U.S. Catholic Bishops
said in an unequivocal statement: "While some uncertainty remains, most
experts agree that something significant is happening to the atmosphere.
Human behavior and activity are, according to the most recent findings of
the international scientific bodies charged with assessing climate change,
contributing to a warming of the Earth's climate.... Consequently, it seems
prudent not only to continue to research and monitor this phenomenon but to
take steps now to mitigate possible negative effects in the future."
That same
year, Congregational minister Dan Smith took to his pulpit in Lexington,
Mass., and asked the memorable question: "What Would Jesus Drive?" Such
questions are rooted in evangelical tradition, where "What Would Jesus Do?"
is a common query. With help from the environmental writer Bill McKibben,
Smith crafted a campaign that included demonstrations at local sport-utility
vehicle dealerships.
"I was
motivated to bring my faith to bear, not on the crisis I perceived in the
environment per se, but in God's creation," Smith told his congregants. In
an interview, he added, "I wanted to say something about global warming, but
our church parking lot is usually half full of SUVs. For me to be involved
in an activist rally surprised some people, but I have to say that the
congregation has been supportive." The Evangelical Environmental Network
hopes to launch "What Would Jesus Drive?" as a national campaign.
The Jewish
Council for Public Affairs (representing 13 national and 122 local Jewish
public affairs organizations) adopted a resolution advocating that Congress
move toward a clean and sustainable energy system that will diminish
reliance on imported oil and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. COEJL director
Mark Jacobs testified before Congress in support of increasing vehicle fuel
economy standards.
Interfaith
global climate change campaigns have formed in 18 states, educating
congregations and organizing visits with their elected officials. The
National Council of Churches (NCC), working with COEJL, created the
Interfaith Climate Change Network, which describes global warming as "a
matter of justice ... for future generations who will inherit an unstable
climate." Bob Edgar, the Methodist minister and former Congressman who is
NCC's general secretary, is proud of the group's role in helping reduce
carbon dioxide emissions. "We've led efforts on climate change and educating
people about energy efficiency," he said. And we've helped them understand
that the depletion of ozone layer is not a good thing."
VOICES
OF DISSENT
If
religious campaigns for the environment were ineffective, they probably
wouldn't generate much opposition. But, perhaps sensing a gathering
consensus, some groups have been critical, particularly the Michigan-based
Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty, headed and co-founded
by a Catholic priest, Father Robert A. Sirico. Father Sirico, a frequent
visitor to the Vatican, denounces "this ongoing alliance between the radical
environmental movement and the faith community" as "tragically
unreflective." In an e-mail response to E questions, he invoked the pastoral
division between God's mission for humankind: stewardship or dominion. "In
the first chapter of Genesis," he wrote, "man is given dominion over the
Earth. This clearly specifies that man - not the birds or cows - is
responsible for the world and enjoys a large degree of prudential discretion
in how he uses his authority over the nonhuman elements and creatures of the
world."
Father
Sirico strikes out at what he calls "the New-Ageist neo-paganism in which
people ascribe divine status to animals and plants," though most of the
religious activism has been coming from mainstream denominations. The Acton
Institute was inflamed by a television advertisement jointly sponsored by
the Sierra Club and the NCC that attacked President Bush's proposal to drill
for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as incompatible with "caring
for creation." It was further incensed when the Wall Street Journal quoted
Sierra Club President Carl Pope as saying the relationship with the churches
gives him new clout on Capitol Hill. According to Father Sirico's associate,
Phillip DeVous, "That kind of activist campaign serves the interests of the
Sierra Club more than it does the interests of Christianity. The nuanced
church message is lumped in with the green political agenda. The National
Council of Churches is doing a disservice to the Christian believers who
hold orthodox viewpoints. There's a disconnect between the leadership and
the people in the pews."
By being
out front on a number of issues, NCC has become a lightning rod of criticism
for conservative theologians. "The NCC is in the pocket of a lot of those
environmental groups," said Michael Cromartie, vice president of the
Washington-based Ethics and Public Policy Center. Because he signed the
Oxford declaration on global warming, Rev. Richard Cizik of the National
Association of Evangelicals worries that "friends at the Heritage Foundation
and on the political right" will now think him a candidate for NCC
membership. But Rev. Cizik isn't going that far. "The NAE is the
conservative alternative to the National Council of Churches," he said. "We
represent mainline Christianity today, which the NCC does not."
Bob Edgar
of NCC says NCC earned its scarlet letter from conservatives 50 years ago,
when it translated the Bible from the original Hebrew and Greek and helped
to foster the idea of stewardship, rather than dominion over the Earth. "We
were also part of the civil rights movement, working with Martin Luther King
and loaning a young man named Andrew Young to his organization, so that was
a factor in our liberal reputation," Edgar said. "We don't agree with the
Sierra Club on everything, but on some issues we have like-mindedness."
The
conservative theologians formed their own coalition, the Interfaith Council
for Environmental Stewardship (now dormant, it spoke out against "a romantic
view of nature"), and they have written their own declarations about God's
plan for humanity. In 1999, 25 of them got together in West Cornwall, Conn.,
and drew up what's known as the Cornwall Declaration. This document praises
human advances in human health, nutrition, and life expectancy and says that
economic progress shouldn't be traded for environmental goals. "Many people
mistakenly view humans as principally consumers and polluters rather than
producers and stewards," the Declaration states. "Consequently, they ignore
our potential, as bearers of God's image, to add to the Earth's abundance."
Paul Gorman of the National Religious Partnership says that, despite the
rhetoric, it's not accurate to see the current struggle as one between
stewardship and dominion. The evidence of humankind's dominion is all around
us, in our warming atmosphere, in our polluted seas, and in our deforested
plains. An increasing number of the faithful see that evidence, too, and
that - rather than an excess of romanticism or mistaken neo-pagan beliefs -
is what's turning believers all over the world into activists for the Earth.
INTEREST
ALL AROUND
The ability
of religion to advance the environmental cause has not gone unnoticed by
those who stand to lose. In September 1999, two logging companies filed suit
against the U.S. Forest Service and the environmental groups Forest
Guardians and Superior Wilderness Action Network. It argued that the groups'
"deep ecology" philosophy is religious in nature, and that when the Forest
Service sided with these environmentalists, it was violating the
constitutionally mandated separation of church and state. The lawsuit was
thrown out of court the following February. Others fight religion with
religion, touting the book of Genesis (1:28) that states that God granted
humans "dominion over every living thing that moves on Earth." The
Interfaith Council on Environmental Stewardship was created in April of 2000
with the express purpose of prioritizing human needs over those of nature
and unleashing free-market forces as a panacea to environmental ills.
Besides
scientists and academics, the founding group includes high-profile
Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish leaders aligned with conservative politics,
such as Dr. D. James Kennedy of the Florida-based Coral Ridge Ministries,
who has been quoted saying, "If ever an issue needed sound Biblical doctrine
brought to bear, it's the environment." Many in academics, however, are
interpreting that doctrine more compassionately and passing the revised
version along. The Forum on Religion and Ecology aims to establish religion
and ecology as an area of academic study and research in both theological
and nontheological institutions of higher learning. It is guided by the
belief that engaging the world's religions - their traditions and ethic of
respect for nature - is critical to effectively implementing environmental
policy. The Theological Education to Meet the Environmental Challenge (TEMEC)
has like goals, seeking to green institutional operations while making
principles of eco-justice integral to higher education. The Baylor
University Department of Religion, Toronto School of Theology, and Wesley
Theological Seminary are just a few of TEMEC's participants.
President
Bush, in a controversial move, signed executive orders to establish the new
White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, which will
provide government funding for social service programs, allowing secular and
religious organizations alike to become part of the government-funding loop.
Though its purpose is primarily to increase the role of private
organizations in offering the types of social services typically provided by
the federal government, it marks an intentional - and precedent setting -
nonseparation of church and state. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
is one agency that already encourages faith-based involvement with its
Energy Star for Congregations Award, which recognizes actions that reduce
operating costs while protecting the Earth's natural resources. The program
offers free energy-efficiency and pollution-prevention technical information
and support, tailored for the nuts-and-bolts issues of lighting, office
upgrades, and heating and air condition systems.
Although
only seven congregations won the award in 2000, about 250 take advantage of
this program, with significant results. The Sligo Adventist School in Takoma
Park, Md., for example, saves $11,136 annually, preventing the release of
213,909 pounds of carbon dioxide in the process. The ultimate goal of the
program is to influence individual parishioners to choose less
environmentally exhaustive sources as well.
Philanthropic foundations have similarly found this development worthy of
support. Environmental Media Services has been generously funded to educate
Americans about the movement among faith institutions to purchase renewable
energy. The National Catholic Rural Life Conference has received monies to
expand advocacy programs on sustainable agriculture, water quality, and land
use. Ministries and church councils in Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
and West Virginia have been funded to train religious leaders to educate
their congregations about climate change.
"For many,
many people, their religious education is their only means of education,
social stability, community, and where their ultimate values and concerns
are talked about and lived," said Gould. "That's their center. If they start
getting the message there that the natural world is something to think and
care about, they will listen. These conservative organizations are bringing
environmental issues into the fold," she said. "If they were coming from the
political left, people would be quite resistant, but through the churches
people are much more open, filtering the issues through their own
understanding of the world."
back to contents
69)
RESTRUCTURING THE ENERGY ECONOMY by Lester Brown
The
Globalist
March 6,
2003
Internet:
http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=2991
The key to
restoring climate stability is shifting from a fossil-fuel-based energy
economy to one based on renewable sources of energy and hydrogen. The good
news is that this shift is under way. But is it happening fast enough to
avoid a climate-disrupting buildup of pollution? Lester Brown provides a
roadmap. The burning of coal, the dirtiest and most carbon-intensive fossil
fuel, peaked in 1996 and has dropped by 6% since then.
NEW
TRENDS
This
historical peak, marking the first decline in the use of a fossil fuel, may
be followed by a similar peak in oil use within the next 5-15 years. As the
world turns to alternative fuels as primary energy sources, the energy
economy is localizing, reversing a 100-year trend. In contrast, renewables,
starting from a small base, are growing at an extraordinary pace. Worldwide,
wind electric generation grew by 32% a year from 1995 to 2001. In 2001, it
grew by a robust 36%. And in the United States, wind electric generating
capacity jumped by a phenomenal 66% in 2001.
HERE
COMES THE SUN
Solar cell
sales, growing by 21% a year from 1995 to 2001, are likely to grow even
faster in the years ahead. Once economically competitive only when used in
satellites and pocket calculators, solar cells are now becoming competitive
for residential lighting in villages in developing countries not yet
connected to the grid. In many countries, if getting electricity to
villages means building both a centralized power plant and a grid to deliver
the power, it is now often cheaper for families simply to install solar
cells.
SUNSHINE
OR CANDLES
In Andean
villages, for example, the monthly installment cost (with a 30-month payment
period) on an array of solar cells to provide lighting is comparable to the
cost of candles. A similar price relationship exists for the more remote
villages in India that depend on kerosene lamps for light. The natural gas
infrastructure can easily be adapted for hydrogen as gas reserves are
depleted. Another renewable source, one with a largely overlooked potential,
is geothermal energy, which is growing at 4% a year. This is a vast
resource - and one that is likely to figure prominently in the energy
economies of the Pacific Rim - particularly where widespread volcanic
activity indicates that geothermal energy is close to the earth's surface.
TURNING
VOLCANOES INTO ENERGY
The western
coasts of South America, Central America and North America have an abundance
of geothermal energy. Perhaps the geothermally richest region is the western
Pacific, including Indonesia, the Philippines, Japan and the eastern and
southern coasts of China. Another rich region is the Great Rift Valley,
which stretches through East Africa up into the Middle East. In fact, the
entire eastern Mediterranean is geothermally well-endowed. Some countries
have enough geothermal energy to meet all their electricity needs.
DAMMED
IF YOU DO
Hydroelectricity, which supplies over one-fifth of the world's electricity,
has expanded by 2% a year since 1990. In contrast to the other renewable
sources of energy, the growth in hydropower is losing momentum.
One way to
accelerate the restructuring needed to stabilize climate is to adopt
full-cost pricing, requiring that those using energy pay the full cost of
doing so. Suitable sites for new dams are scarce - and public opposition is
mounting to large-scale inundation of land, the associated displacement of
people and the disruption of ecosystems. One of the difficulties in
restructuring the energy economy is that doing so typically depends on
small, fledgling industries challenging large, well-established, often
heavily subsidized industries. One way to accelerate the restructuring
needed to stabilize climate is to adopt full-cost pricing, requiring that
those using energy pay the full cost of doing so.
SETTING
THE STAGE FOR NATURAL GAS
Fortuitously, the fastest-growing fossil fuel is natural gas, which is the
obvious transition fuel from a carbon-based energy economy to a
hydrogen-based one. The natural gas infrastructure - including distribution
networks and storage facilities - can easily be adapted for hydrogen as gas
reserves are depleted.
NEW
ENERGY EQUILIBRIUM
The new
century is bringing new directions in the world energy economy. The last
century was characterized by the globalization of energy as oil emerged as
the leading energy source. As the effects of climate change become clearer,
the public's desire to avoid extreme climate events will intensify.
Indeed, the
entire world became heavily dependent on one region, the Middle East, for a
disproportionately large share of its energy. Now, as the world turns to
wind, solar and geothermal as the primary energy sources and to hydrogen as
an end-use fuel, the energy economy is localizing, which reverses the trend
of the last 100 years.
back to contents
70)
TILTING AT 8000 WINDMILLS TO CUT EMISSIONS BY 10PC by Keith Orchison
Canberra
Sunday Times
March 6,
2003
Internet:
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=features&subclass=science&category=feature&story_id=213422&y=2003&m=3
Mr
Orchison is managing director of the Electricity Supply Association of
Australia.
ONE of my
contacts in Canberra confided the other day that he had reached the "MEGO"
stage on the topic of renewable energy in the face of the unrelenting
barrage of claim and counter-claim by stakeholders in the greenhouse debate.
"MEGO", he enlightened me, stands for "My Eyes Glaze Over". This is not a
reaction I find beyond comprehension. The arena for greenhouse dialogue does
seem from time to time to be overflowing with the exceedingly zealous, the
not-terribly-keen-to-listen and the statistically artistic, and not just on
one side of the fence. The bad news for my "MEGO" mate is that there is no
prospect of the debate letting up in 2003. Indeed, with the mandated
renewable-energy target review being about to get under way, it will
intensify.
One of my
own pet beefs is the insistence of some on underpinning their arguments for
whatever policy they espouse by using every new weather development to argue
that this demonstrates (a) that climate change is upon us and (b) that
complete catastrophe is just around the corner. "We have no more than two
generations to save the planet," opined one contributor to the London
Guardian recently as the British coped with widespread early winter
flooding. Well, "MEGO". On the other hand, while finding the alarmists'
arguments dubious, I agree that it is prudent to limit greenhouse-gas
emissions to levels that more objective climatologists consider acceptable,
while allowing a sensible lead time for the introduction of new technology
that can bridge the "carbon gap".
A writer in
the American Public Utilities Fortnightly late last year neatly summed up
the two questions that industry and policymakers have to address in this
situation. This is my paraphrase of his points: "First, what resources,
options or strategies are available, and offer the greatest opportunity for
success, in a transition process over this century to sustain the level of
human, economic and social progress made possible today by fossil fuels?
Second, which fuels and processes offer the lowest cost impact in reducing
the 'carbon gap' in the relatively near term (say the next 25 years)?"
The
proponents of renewable energy, of course, will be quick to argue that they
have the answer to both problems, and the current Australian "mandated
renewable energy target" (MRET) scheme is, in fact, a 20-year approach to
the issue. The problem with the renewable-power options now available or in
the process of commercial development is that they are inherently
intermittent, difficult to integrate on a large scale with the power grid
and more costly than fossil-fuel alternatives. Even wind power, the most
advanced and widely used renewable-energy option after large hydro, brings
with it real problems of intermittency and grid management, as well as the
likelihood of more intense "not in my backyard" opposition when it starts
being used in large complexes at many sites.
Research
into compressed-air storage of wind power to overcome the "dispatchability"
problem is one of the more interesting research and development activities
being undertaken, but this brings us back to the issue of cost, as, indeed,
do proposals for capture and disposal of CO from fossil-fuelled generation.
Both come today with price tags way above present wholesale electricity
prices. The need for subsidies to make wind power viable in competition with
fossil fuels (at least when they are unburdened with carbon taxes) is not
about to go away. Investment bankers Babcock and Brown made it clear in a
submission to the Parer Panel that even the suggestion of dropping the MRET
subsidy arrangement was enough to "create an adverse investment climate and
slow the pace of investment". This is a banker with $1.3 billion worth of
wind projects in the planning stage in Australia, so its opinion should
carry some weight.
The
unwillingness of some in the renewables debate to be fully open and up-front
about the issue of cost is another one of my "MEGO" things. In the context
of some of the propositions being bandied about at present for expansion of
the MRET scheme, I asked the Electricity Supply Association of Australia's
resident greenhouse expert, assistant director Harry Schaap, for some cost
estimates. He says that the current scheme (designed to deliver 9500 GWh of
new renewable power in 2010) will add around $380 million to power costs and
increase retail prices by about 2.3 per cent at the end of the decade.
Pushing up the subsidy target to deliver 2 per cent of the 2010 consumption
of power (13,000 GWh) would add about $520 million to costs and send up
retail prices by 3.2 per cent. A 5 per cent target (20,600 GWh in 2010)
would add $824 million and increase retail prices by 5 per cent, and a 10
per cent target (33,300 GWh) would drive a $1.3 billion cost rise and
increase retail prices by 8 per cent, assuming such a large amount could be
delivered at the current penalty price.
The last
option, by the way, would involve erecting more than 8350 wind turbines in
more than 540 "farms", virtually all requiring good coastal sites at
cost-effective grid-connection points, leading to large-scale "NIMBY-itis",
one imagines. The Federal Environment Minister, David Kemp, and Federal
Cabinet are going to need a massive amount of reliable information about
such costs and other factors, as well as about the benefits in terms of
abatement, employment and so on, before they can come to a policy landing
this year about MRET and about greenhouse programs generally. As a
consequence of the Parer Report, they also need to undertake a thorough
assessment of such programs against use of an emissions-trading scheme.
back to contents
71)
CLIMATE CHANGE FOR EUROPE'S UTILITIES
The
McKinsey Quarterly
March 5,
2003
Internet:
http://www.forbes.com/2003/03/05/cx_mckinsey_europe.html
Europe's
plan to control the greenhouse gases responsible for global warming will
probably lead to higher energy prices for both consumers and businesses and
greatly accelerate the shift from coal to gas as the primary fuel used in
power plants. These are the main conclusions to be drawn from a McKinsey
model of Europe's energy market as it would emerge under a European
Commission scheme to cap the emissions of power and heavy industrial plants
and make the individual caps allocated to plants tradable.
But the
model also generated a paradoxical finding: Unless utility regulators
intervene, many power producers could receive unexpected financial gains
under the scheme, even though they include some of the fossil-fuel-burning
generators that emit the largest amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2), the
greenhouse gas that the European Union is trying to control. The proposal
as it stands would lead utilities to invest in new gas plants and to write
off obsolete coal plants. But in many cases, the cost would be more than
covered by increased operating profits arising from a forecast 40% rise in
wholesale electricity prices. Europe's power regulators have never given
utilities a free ride, however, and are unlikely to do so now, when the
whole point is to curb emissions. If, as the model suggests, some power
plants would gain from the current proposal, modifications to the
scheme--scheduled to take effect in January 2005--almost certainly lie
ahead.
Given the
far-reaching strategic implications of the European plan, power generators
and heavy energy users have so far given its details surprisingly short
shrift. Yet those details will determine which (and how many) coal- and
oil-burning plants should be closed in favor of new gas-fired ones, how and
when the remaining coal and oil plants can be run most profitably, and the
amount of additional gas Europe will need. What is more, higher electricity
prices could force heavy energy users to consider new conservation methods,
alternative energy sources, or other cost savings--all of which would affect
producers.
The
McKinsey model's projected higher electricity prices might be partly offset
by the increasing efficiency of existing plants and by reductions in
transmission and distribution charges over the seven-year (2005 to 20012)
duration of the plan. In any event, the model makes the expected cost of CO2
regulation more transparent to all parties. Whatever final regulations
emerge from Brussels, the European power generation business, is likely to
change fundamentally. Many of Europe's power utilities were caught
unprepared by the last shock to the industry--deregulation, a decade
ago--and the same thing might happen again. Despite a growing awareness of a
carbon-constrained future, most utilities don't understand how the proposed
cap-and-trade scheme could transform their market, let alone each particular
business.
Yet almost
any form of CO2 regulation would enable utilities to make attractive
adjustments to their portfolios--for example, by expanding into the gas
sector. Other developments, such as acquiring high-emissions plants in
Eastern Europe to secure access to cheap emissions rights, will depend on
the final shape of the plan. Meanwhile, owners of coal-fired plants should
be calculating how long they could remain competitive and perhaps consider
limiting their use to periods of high demand. Managers of gas-fired plants
should review ways of guaranteeing their access to energy supplies and hedge
their exposure to rising prices. And since the scheme alone won't increase
the demand for renewable energy, its producers might be wise to employ their
improved margins to pursue other growth strategies. As for large users of
electricity, the time is right to consider conservation measures or to try
locking in long-term supply contracts.
Uncertainty
remains over how targets and rights will be allocated to individual plants,
which countries will be included in the scheme, and whether investment in
plants outside them may be included in it if emissions from those plants
fall. Such details will be ironed out as European governments strive to meet
their energy and environmental-policy needs and to address the economic and
social consequences of the scheme. Rather than simply try to stop it,
companies that own investments in power generation should ensure that the
final details protect the rights of all stakeholders. Industry organizations
are involved in the fray, but in view of the enormous economic value to be
redistributed, individual utilities--not to mention heavy energy users--must
attend to their own interests.
back to contents
72) GLOBAL WARMING: THE
PERVERSION OF SCIENCE by Alan Caruba
Sierra Club
March 3, 2003
Internet:
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/03/03/alcaruba.htm
Alan Caruba is the founder of The National Anxiety
Center, a clearinghouse for information about media-driven scare campaigns.
The Center maintains an Internet site at www.anxietycenter.com. where he
writes a weekly column, "Warning Signs". He is also the author of "A Pocket
Guide to Militant Islam" and "The United Nations Vs. The United States",
another pocket guide available from the Internet site of The National
Anxiety Center.
Who are you going to believe? The Green claim of
global warming or the huge piles of snow left behind by the latest
record-setting blizzard? The one thing that the claim of global warming has
achieved is the debasement and perversion of science. This corruption has
been foisted on the world by environmentalists who hate science that does
not conform to their political and social agendas. They use the façade of
science to advance their ceaseless attacks on industrialization and modern
technology. Their purpose is to force the reduction of energy sources,
primarily petroleum, but including coal, and, surprisingly, nuclear energy,
the cleanest form. If they could claim that hydroelectric energy was a form
of pollution, they would.
The latest example of their willingness to
completely reverse reality is a claim by Melissa Carey, a so-called "climate
change policy specialist" with the Environmental Defense fund. On February
20, a reporter for CNSnews, Marc Morano, quoted her as saying the blizzard
that immobilized the East Coast of the United States was, in her view, proof
that global warming was occurring. She was quoted saying that "increased
extreme events like this are very, very much in line with the predictions of
climate models, definitely." The Earth is not experiencing increased extreme
events. It is simply experiencing natural events, blizzards, hurricanes, and
floods that have been part of its climate for its 4.5 billion years of
existance. Climatic cycles such as the El Nino contribute to swings in the
number of events, as does the Sun that has cycles of high magnetic
discharges.
It is not global warming. It is just the weather.
Claims that the so-called science of global warming is "settled" are
hogwash. As Paul Georgia pointed out in a recent commentary on Tech Central
Station, "One can find a half dozen National Academy of Sciences reports
from the last five years that argue that not only is the science not
settled, but that scientists are operating in almost complete ignorance on
many of the most basic and key assumptions behind the theory." This, of
course, does not disturb Ms. Carey and the army of Greens who have been
insisting for years now that global warming is real. It is not. It is not
even science. It is politics as seen in the United Nations' effort to force
the world to accept its Kyoto Treaty in order to reduce energy use. The
claim is that greenhouse gases produced by human activity will doom the
Earth.
Not surprisingly, the greenhouse gases claim is
disputed by figures for 2001 released by the U.S. Energy Department.
Greenhouse gas emissions, for the first time since 1991, actually dropped.
These are emissions composed primarily of carbon dioxide from burning fossil
fuels. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is essential to the growth of
crops, forests, and all vegetation on the face of the Earth. Humans emit CO2
every time they exhale. The Greens are so desperate to advance the Big Lie
of global warming that the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
literally offers forty different scenarios to support its specious claim in
the hope that one of them might actually prove correct. That's not science.
That's science fiction.
If the "debate" over global warming was just
something confined to the Greens and the thousands of scientists who dispute
it, one could assign it to academia, but the U.S. has invested nearly $20
billion dollars in research since 1990. Its conclusion for this insane
amount of investment is that the science does not support rapid and intense
cuts in energy emissions. We do not need to reduce energy use. It is the key
to a successful economy here and around the world. The Earth has been
warming ever since the last Ice Age. You better hope it continues to enjoy
its current cycle of moderate weather because another Ice Age, predicted in
the 1970s by the very same Greens advocating a catastrophic global warming
today, will make the Earth a cold place on which to live. So far, the only
real hot air has been coming from people who can look at a huge blizzard of
snow and claim it proves that global warming is real.
back to contents
73)
EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON MARINE BIODIVERSITY
CO2 Science
March 2003
Internet:
http://www.co2science.org/journal/2003/v6n10b1.htm
WHAT WAS
DONE
The authors
used "appropriate measures of biodiversity" to test "whether a molluscan
death assemblage from a single sand beach on the north Cornish coast is
representative of the biodiversity of the regional species pool," after
which they "compare[d] the biodiversity of a fossil death assemblage from
the same coast, laid down when the climate was similar to that of the
present Mediterranean, to assess possible climate change effects."
WHAT WAS
LEARNED
It was
determined that the death assemblage of molluscs from the sandy beach at
Harlyn Bay, north Cornwall, was "fully representative of the biodiversity of
the regional species pool from all habitat types." A late Pliocene fossil
assemblage of molluscs from St. Erth Pits, north Cornwall, was also found to
be "not significantly different in biodiversity ... from the present-day
regional species pool."
WHAT IT
MEANS
Noting that
the climate of the late Pliocene was similar to that of the present-day
Mediterranean, the authors conclude that "predicted changes in climate, by
the end of this century, will not affect molluscan biodiversity, although
the species composition will undoubtedly change." With respect to this
latter change, they note that if the climate warms by 2°C over the next 50
years, "we can expect future latitudinal shifts in the marine biota of
300-600 km." In enlarging upon these findings, the authors note that
although "there is increasing concern about the effects of global warming on
biological diversity," in coastal marine ecosystems "widespread extinctions
seem unlikely, but changes in community distributions and compositions will
inevitably occur." These changes, they say, "will track the timing of global
warming quite closely because of the high fecundity and dispersal
capabilities of most marine organisms." In summary, coastal marine
ecosystems will likely experience latitudinal shifts and species
redistributions in response to any additional warming that may occur in the
future, but it is unlikely that any extinctions will occur, as the species
that comprise these ecosystems can readily relocate themselves and thereby
follow latitudinal shifts in water temperature.
Reference
Warwick,
R.M. and Turk, S.M. 2002. Predicting climate change effects on marine
biodiversity: comparison of recent and fossil molluscan death assemblages.
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 82:
847-850.
back to contents
74) IS
THE EUPHORIA OVER CDM UNWARRANTED? by Preety Bhandari
Financial
Express
February
24, 2003
Internet:
http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=28699
The
writer is Director, Policy Analysis Division, Tata Energy Research Institute
(TERI)
Notwithstanding the controversies related to the uncertainty in predicting
climate change, let alone the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol to the UN
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the new and emerging issue
insofar as the developing country context is concerned is the access to
additional funds and technology through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).
Will CDM actually live up to the expectations of developing countries? The
CDM, as described in the Kyoto Protocol, is ostensibly to help developing
countries in achieving sustainable development and in contributing to the
ultimate objective of the Convention as also developed countries to meet
their emissions reduction targets. This will be effected through projects
sponsored by developed countries in developing countries and resulting in
certified emission reductions to be used by the former in complying with
their commitments.
As things
stand now, the Kyoto Protocol will enter into force if it is ratified by 55
countries including Annex I (synonymous with developed country Parties)
countries accounting for 55% of the reduction commitment of the developed
countries. The status at the moment is that 101 countries (including only 30
from developed world) have ratified the Protocol but these account for only
43.9% of the emission reduction commitments of developed countries. This
has significant implications for the size of the market for the CDM.
According to the Kyoto Protocol, the total emission reductions that need to
be undertaken by the first commitment period i.e. 2008-12, is about 620 Mt
C. With the withdrawal of the US, the emission reduction requirement has
reduced the international requirement to only 196 Mt C. Further, with recent
vociferous bargaining by developed countries which enables them to use
forest management to sequester carbon to meet their carbon commitments, it
further reduces the requirement to 125 MtC. Another detractor from the pie
is the provision in the Protocol for emissions trading (Article 17) of the
protocol. This allows countries such as Russia and the CIS states who, due
to unforeseen circumstances such as economic slowdown, have fortuitously
managed to reduce their emissions to be able to sell their excess quota to
buyers in the market.
These
countries were given targets that are likely to be above what their
emissions will be even if no conscious measures are taken to reduce
emissions. It is estimated that supplies from these countries could be be of
the order of 92 MtC, which aggravates the situation further, leaving a
paltry 33 MtC. The market size at the moment is thus about 33 MtC, and these
reductions could be met by three alternative pathways domestic action in
developed countries or by jointly implementing projects in other developed
countries or through the CDM, the much-touted mechanism for sustainable
development in developing countries.
Even if one
were to discount recourse to hot air of 92 MtC, and assume optimistically
that all of 125 MtC would be met through the CDM, it would amount to a flow
of funds of only $2 billion at the current expected price of Certified
Emission Reduction (CER) to be $18/t-C (or $ 5/t of CO2). On the other hand,
inflows through the FDI to developing countries is as high as $200 billion.
So why the
euphoria for CDM? And it is strange that many have jumped into the fray, for
developing CDM projects. At the moment the Prototype Carbon Fund of the
World Bank, and some European governments are taking the lead, and some
consultancies such as Price Waterhouse Coopers are gearing up to play a role
as operational entities for validating and verifying CDM projects. How much
business would it generate for them? Or are these plans contingent on
imponderables such as the return of the US to the fold, or development of a
parallel market? Decisions of this kind are remarkable, as the rules of the
game are yet to be evolved, and CDM may turn out to be relatively
unattractive in that part of the proceeds from sales of CERs would be taken
away to meet the administrative expenses of the CDM Executive Board,
compounded by 2% of the proceeds going toward a vulnerability and adaptation
fund. Also, there is a likelihood of a fees to register a project with the
CDM Executive Board. Also, validation of projects and verification of CERs
by independent entities imply a drain on the project economics, implying
that CDM may not be the preferred avenue for meeting commitments.
What are
the implications of the above for India? With China as the preferred
destination, and much of the experimentation on the subject being undertaken
with bilateral money or multilateral funds, would a true market develop,
internationally? Ostensibly, the small scale CDM projects (including
renewables of about 15 MW size), for which the international rules and
procedures are likely to be simplified, are the way out, and India may like
to pursue this option vigorously on two accounts-one to corner as much
market as it can and also to garner experience for developing projects in
the event and hope that a large market does materialise. To this extent the
Ministry of Environment & Forests has come up with some interim criteria for
approving projects under CDM and in fact of the 18 projects forwarded by the
MoEF for the Certified Emission Reduction Procurement Tender of the Dutch
Government, six small scale projects have been shortlisted for further
screening. But would this be enough to attract investors to the country? Or
does the answer lie in project proponents in India developing unilateral
projects, with ample expression of interest and support from the Government
of India, to enable initial creation of a portfolio of projects? This would
imply that the government would have to play a more proactive role in
facilitating a supply menu rather than wait for the demand to grow. Are we
geared for that?
The
international rules for CDM are evolving gradually. At the eighth session of
the Conference of the Parties (CoP-8), the rules of procedure for the
Executive Board of the CDM, and the methodology panel appointed by the CDM
Executive Board were adopted. The international process may be moving slowly
but surely in formalising the framework within which CDM could function, but
the process in India is yet to gather momentum. For India to benefit from
the CDM process, it is imperative that appropriate institutional mechanisms
and modalities are established, and clear signals are provided to project
proponents on national priorities.
back to contents
75) 'CONCERTED INTERNATIONAL EFFORT' NECESSARY TO
FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE by Tony Blair
Number 10
February 24, 2003
Internet:
http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page3073.asp
The recent divisions in international relations are
plain. I remain hopeful we can pull people round to a common position. But
in reality they mask a deeper and more worrying divide. The world is in
danger of polarising around two different agendas. On the one hand there are
the very clear and dangerous threats of unstable states developing or
proliferating weapons of mass destruction and the evil of terrorism
exemplified by September 11th. These are the issues, if you like, of
immediate security. They are a threat we can see confronting us directly and
now. On the other hand, there are the issues that affect us over time. They
are just as devastating in their potential impact, some more so, but they
require reflection and strategy geared to the long-term, often straddling
many years and many Governments. Within this category are the issues of
global poverty, relations between the Moslem world and the West,
environmental degradation, most particularly climate change.
The trouble with long-term issues is that they
seldom fit political time-scales. The impact of some of the measures we
announce today will not be felt under this Government, or even this
generation. We have to do what is right for the long-term. The truth is
investment now to meet the challenge of these issues is worth every penny in
the long-term. But the polarity is there. And it is dangerous. It divides
sometimes along left/right lines. It divides along North/South lines. It
divides the US and its allies from the rest. It can lead to people striking
positions that are wholly counter to their professed beliefs. One of the
saddest things in politics was to see some African countries decry attempts
to isolate Mr Mugabe as neo-colonialism when on any rational basis his rule
is impoverishing millions of black Zimbabweans, taking away their democratic
rights and hugely undermining our concerted attempts to partner Africa out
of poverty. Why did they do so? One reason is because if "the West" wants
it, it must be resisted.
The only answer is to construct a common agenda
that recognises both sets of issues have to be confronted for the world's
security and prosperity to be guaranteed. There will be no lasting peace
whilst there is appalling injustice and poverty. There will be no genuine
security if the planet is ravaged by climate change. Yet we know we cannot
wait to tackle terrorism and WMD. They are affecting us now and have to be
dealt with now. The whole of British policy since 1997 has been geared to
trying to establish such a consensus. It is why at the same time as being
prepared to take military action to fight terrorism or ethnic cleansing or
states with WMD, it is the UK which is increasing its aid substantially as a
percentage of GNI; doubling it to Africa to reach £1 billion in 2005;
working with countries and pharmaceutical companies to tackle AIDS; leading
the way on Kyoto and climate change; and trying to influence for the better
the MEPP which is the single biggest source of mistrust between the West and
the Arab and Moslem world.
Of these issues, it is global poverty and
environmental degradation that come together in the cause of sustainable
development. Today I want to argue that we have not yet been nearly bold
enough; and that real investment now to tackle the causes of poverty and
degradation would not only yield enormous benefits to us in years to come;
but they could be such a strong signal of our determination to pursue
justice in an even-handed way. At Rio in 1992 sustainable development was
put squarely on the world agenda.
Last year in South Africa the international
community met again at the World Summit on Sustainable Development. A lot
more was achieved than was recognised. I pay tribute to the hard work of the
UK team, under the leadership of Margaret Beckett, and to the enormous
efforts made by business, community groups and NGOs. We agreed action on
areas such as sanitation and water, renewable energy, biodiversity, and
oceans.
But in truth we are still not meeting the scale of
the challenge. In thirty years' time there will be two billion more people
on the planet. Already 40% of the population is short of fresh water; on
current trends this will rise to 50% by 2030, in west Asia it will be 90%.
One-third of the world's fish stocks and one-quarter of the world's mammals
are threatened with extinction. There are already over a billion urban slum
dwellers. With the population of the world's cities due to rise by another
billion by 2010, this will only increase. The World Bank recently estimated
that nearly one fifth of preventable disease in the developing world is
caused by environmental factors, such as urban air pollution and unclean
water. The World Summit did much to address these issues. But it is becoming
clear that we have a profound choice as an international community: continue
to make modest progress; or act decisively. We need a new international
settlement that enables us as nations, acting collectively, to address these
issues: to help the poorest countries develop; to promote a fairer
allocation of wealth and opportunity. That should comprise, amongst other
things, the $50 billion facility proposed so imaginatively by Gordon Brown;
the partnership for Africa - NEPAD, which we must take forward decisively at
the G8 in June; a successful WTO round which truly opens up the markets of
the developed world to developing nations. Real progress on these things
would be immense. And we also need a new international consensus to protect
our environment and combat the devastating impacts of climate change.
Today, I want to make the case for that new
covenant between nations. I do so firmly in the belief that tackling climate
change or other environmental challenges need not limit greater economic
opportunity nor higher living standards for the poorest in the developing
world. This - to me - is the essence of sustainable development. Economic
development, social justice and environmental modernisation must go hand in
hand.
Climate change was not on the agenda of the World
Summit. Yet it remains unquestionably the most urgent environmental
challenge. The facts are clear. The number of people affected by floods
worldwide has already risen from 7 million in the 1960s to 150 million
today. Globally, 2002 joined 2001 and 1998 as the hottest years on record,
and our own world-renowned Hadley Centre has predicted that global warming
could strongly accelerate over the next few decades. Worldwide, damage from
extreme weather events last year reached $55 billion. The United Nations
Environment Programme has estimated that economic losses from severe weather
events have doubled every decade. At this rate annual losses will reach $150
billion within ten years.
And the longer term? The latest report from the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change indicates global warming by up to
6 degrees this century - the impacts devastating, particularly in the
developing world. We face a situation in which 50 million people in Asia
could be killed or displaced by floods, further swathes of Africa could be
reduced to desert, accompanied by massive deforestation in central and South
America, and huge increases in disease, particularly malaria. And it is the
poorest countries, particularly in Asia and Africa, which will suffer the
most devastating effects of these changes. In Kyoto, five years ago, we
signed up to targets and timetables to address climate change. In Britain we
pledged to meet a target of 12.5%. This was a spur for action - the climate
change levy; the first economy-wide national greenhouse gas emissions
trading system; a reform of company car taxation to a new green system.
Today I can tell you that Britain is well on the way to meeting its target.
But whilst Kyoto was an enormous achievement, it is
simply not enough. Global emissions of greenhouse gases have risen 10% since
1990, with a 35% increase in developing countries. At best Kyoto will mean a
reduction of 2% in emissions. That is better than emissions just continuing
to rise and rise. But we know now, from further research and evidence, that
to stop further damage to the climate we need a reduction in 60% reduction
world-wide. The Royal Commission on Environmental Protection found just
that: a 60% reduction by 2050 was essential. So it is clear Kyoto is not
radical enough. But it is at the moment the most that is politically
achievable. And even the Kyoto targets have proved controversial with some
countries, notably America. Many see it as a threat to the pursuit of
economic growth. I believe this needn't be the case. If we harness new
technology the evidence is mounting that we can achieve a target of 60% -
and at reasonable cost.
A few months ago, I asked a team of experts from
Imperial College here in London to produce a report saying how the world
could reduce its emissions of greenhouse gases. I found the report
fascinating - and startling. It said that by using known technologies or
those very close to market, the world could reduce emissions by over 60%.
This would not involve huge shifts in the economy, or enormous changes in
lifestyles. It would allow developing countries to increase emissions, in
the medium term, on a conventional development path. And it could be
achieved gradually, over a period of years. Solar energy alone, for example,
could supply world energy demand using 1% of the land currently under crops
and pasture. There is also huge potential from wind, wave and other
renewable technologies. Tidal sites already identified around the UK coast
could provide up to one-sixth of our electricity needs. In a joint venture
between Southampton University, the DTI and the European Commission, there
will be a large-scale test of the technology this summer, off the Devon
coast.
Improving the efficiency with which we operate our
energy processes also offers enormous savings - up to half our energy use
could be saved by the use of known efficiency techniques. The ability of
hydrogen to replace fossil fuels, especially in transport, will also
transform our energy system - and offers a vision of a transport system that
is completely clean - with no exhaust emissions. Of course, this is still
some way off. We need to make further advances on technology and
infrastructure before it can become a reality. But possibilities exist now
to manufacture hydrogen from natural gas or biofuels, which coupled with
fuel cell technology, could offer a reduction in emissions of up to 50%
compared to conventional vehicles. And when I meet the heads of the major
car companies, they tell me that these new advances are not far away. As
Dave King said in his brilliant Zuckerman lecture, the possibilities for
scientific advance are there. But they do require urgent investment.
Are these solutions expensive? Not against the
scale of the problem. And it is a myth that reducing emissions makes us
poorer. The UK's economy has grown by nearly 17% since 1997 - in that time,
emissions have fallen by 5%. The picture on resource use is also
encouraging. Recent European research showed that the UK's total resources
requirements grew by just 13% between 1970 and 1999, whilst our GDP
increased by 93%. We in Britain have shown that it is possible to break the
relationship between economic growth and ever-rising pollution. And through
further reductions in resource use, we will benefit our economy, business
and the environment. I believe that these conclusions are so important that
they should lead to a step change in the UK's energy strategy over the next
50 years, as the Energy White Paper will show later today.
Of course there is little point in the UK acting
alone. We need a concerted international effort. As a first step, we are
working intensively with our European partners to agree a 60% target for the
EU as a whole. I wrote today a joint letter with the Prime Minister of
Sweden to the Greek Prime Minister, Costas Simitis, in his capacity as
President of the European Council. In it we confirm our ambition to reduce
emissions in the EU by 60% by 2050, and our commitment to policies that will
demonstrate how we can achieve it.
We will continue to work also with our new partners
from Central, Southern and Eastern Europe, who with us, will help extend the
EU's commitment to sustainable development further across the continent. And
we will continue to make the case, to the US and to others, that climate
change is a serious threat that we must address together as an international
community.
I want to say today in terms: that for Britain we
will agree the Royal Commission's target of a 60% reduction in emissions by
2050. And I am committed now to putting us on a path over the next few years
towards that target. I know that the Sustainable Development Commission and
others will hold us to account on this, as you have recently done on our
climate change programme. I welcome that. It is vital that we deliver on
these targets, and that we review our strategy and policies at every stage.
And there are clear economic advantages for Britain in taking the lead. We
have enormous potential in this field - in our universities, our research
institutes, our businesses. Science and technology are vital. That is why,
in partnership with governments, businesses and NGOs, we are working to find
new ways of removing barriers to investment in these technologies. I set up
the Carbon Trust two years ago, as a business-led organisation charged with
bringing forward cutting edge climate change technologies. Today I am
pleased to announce its first large portfolio of projects - including fuel
cells, wave power, photovoltaics and CHP - which together will amount to
£70m in combined public-private investment.
We will also set out later today our ambition to
double the amount of energy supplied by renewables.
And I believe that this investment is not only good
for the environment, but will also benefit our economy and communities.
Indeed, in our drive to improve energy efficiency, to shift to renewable
energy, and to help the fuel poor, new employment opportunities have been
stimulated across the country. For me this strikes at the heart of what
sustainable development means in practice. At its core, modern social
democracy stands for a high wage, high skill society, supported by decent
environmental and social standards. We shouldn't forget that one of the
first great Labour modernisers, Keir Hardie, included the reforestation of
Lancashire as one of the ten proposals in the first Labour manifesto. Or
that we are now considering proposals to create the first National Parks in
50 years. The environment is as much a part of the progressive left
tradition as the economy and public services.
And it is through our actions we demolish the myth
that sustainable development is only important for the well off - or that it
is only the wealthy that have the time and resources to be green. I believe
the environment, not just globally, but locally, in our towns and cities, is
overwhelmingly an issue of concern for the poorest citizens in our
communities. It is the poorest that live in the worst housing, and are the
most affected by traffic pollution, live closest to landfill sites and have
the worst graffiti and litter problems.
The Social Exclusion Unit has analysed the concerns
of people living in the 10% most deprived wards in England. Overwhelmingly
they listed pollution, the appearance of their estate, and public transport
as major concerns. In spite of efforts to clean up our industrial areas,
poorer people are twice as likely to live near polluting factories. Children
from families on low incomes are five times more likely to be killed by road
transport than children from affluent areas.
We are acting now to improve quality of life by
tackling poor local environments, particularly in areas of higher social
deprivation. In addition to the large amounts invested in inner city
regeneration, we have made available £200 million for improving streets,
parks and public spaces in the Communities Plan launched by the Deputy Prime
Minister earlier this month. And we have introduced the Anti Social
Behaviour Bill and the Street Crime initiative with the express aim to
deliver safer, less threatening streets. By raising the standards of our
local environments overall, we have the greatest impact on the poorest
areas. All these policies have sustainable development as a guiding
principle. But we must do more to embed this at the heart of policy-making.
That is why I believe that the report on sustainable development in the UK
that is published today is so important. The UK was the first country in the
world to publish a comprehensive set of indicators of sustainable
development. And the first country to report annually on our progress
against those indicators.
Many inside government felt we were taking a big
risk - that the indicators wouldn't go in the right direction. Some of them
are not. But they show clearly the direction we should be moving in. This
is a bold experiment. And I think it is right that Defra have decided to
review the set of indicators in consultation with individuals and experts
like yourselves, to determine whether we have got it right. But most
importantly I think it is vital that we don't stop trying. The challenge
for this Government today is in continuing to integrate the goal of
environmental modernisation into our vision of Britain. To combine greater
economic development with better environmental impact - bringing the
environment, economic development and social justice together. I believe
our approach offers the best hope for reversing the conditions that lead to
hunger and division, and for building a more prosperous, just and stable
world. Ultimately this is about our world as a global community - a cliché
perhaps but true. Interdependence is the defining characteristic of the
modern world. What we lack at present is the common agenda that is broad and
just and global institutions to execute it. That is the real task of
statesmanship today. And the time-scale is urgent.
back to contents |