Category Archives: Global Action Inaction

PLEA Network

3 December 2015, Carbon Brief, EXPLAINER: the ‘ratchet mechanism’ within the Paris climate deal. One outcome of the Paris deal is already certain: it will not succeed in limiting temperatures to below 2C. This has been repeated ad infinitum, by studies, by politicians and by observers. Perhaps the most widely quoted figure for the impact of countries’ climate pledges on global temperature is the 2.7C rise calculated by Climate Action Tracker. The World Resources Institute has analysed the numerous other studies that come to similar conclusions. The 2C limit has been enshrined as the aim of UN climate negotiations since 2010 — so if Paris has already failed to achieve it, why is it not already being labelled as a failure? This is where the so-called ratchet mechanism comes in, or the “ambition mechanism”, as some are calling it. This will ensure that actions to deal with climate change become progressively more ambitious over time. What is the ratchet mechanism? This week, countries have started the process of negotiating a 54-page draft text, helped on the way with the input of world leaders who made an appearance on day oneto set the direction. But there’s no point in searching the document for the “ratchet” — the word does not even feature once. It is not a self-contained issue within the text, but is scattered throughout the deal, linked with and integrated into other issues. Observer groups, such as Greenpeace, are pushing for a fairly simple structure. In theory, countries would submit new “intended nationally determined contributions” (INDCs) every five years, outlining how much they intend to reduce emissions. Each submission would be more ambitious than the last, namely, ratcheting up. These submissions would then be reviewed to assess their overall impact on stemming the rise of global temperatures. In particular, it will be benchmarked against the long-term goal set up in the text. A weak long-term goal — still a distinct possibility — will mean the ratchet mechanism has to work even harder. With the knowledge gained from this review in mind, countries would then have a “homework” period, where they have the opportunity to make their intended contributions even more ambitious. And, finally, the contributions would be formalised and inscribed in the agreement. Greenpeace has written a detailed timeline of how they see the ratchet mechanism playing out for the first two cycles of INDCs. Read More here

 

PLEA Network

3 December 2015, The guardian, UN on wrong track with plans to limit global warming to 2C, says top scientist. One of the world’s leading atmospheric scientists has told the UN that its present attempt to limit emissions is “half-arsed and half-baked” and risks handing the next generation a climate system that is out of their control. James Hansen, former head of Nasa’s Goddard Center and the man who raised awareness of climate change in a key Senate hearing back in 1988 said that the UN meeting was on the wrong track by seeking a 2C maximum rise in temperatures. “What I am hearing is that the heads of state are planning to clap each other on the back and say this is a very successful conference. If that is what happens, we are screwing the next generation, because we are doing the same as before. “[A rise of ] 2C is definitely dangerous. We are at the point now where temperatures are hitting the 1C mark and are are on a path above 1C. Even if we reduce emissions 6% a year we will still get 1C. “Instead we hear the same old thing as Kyoto [in 1997]. We are asking each country to cap emissions, or reduce emissions. In science when you do a well conducted experiment you expect to get the same result. So why are we talking about doing the same again? This is half-arsed and half-baked.” Read More here

PLEA Network

2 December 2015, Renew Economy, As Paris talks, Australia’s energy emissions are going in the wrong direction. As all readers will know, publication of this report comes during the first week of the crucial UN Climate Change Conference (COP21 under the UNFCCC) in Paris. For that reason, we devote most of the full report to looking at overall trends in Australia’s energy combustion emissions, including changes since 2004-05, the reference year chosen by the Australian government for its official 2030 emissions reduction target. Energy combustion emissions covered by CEDEX® include all emissions arising from the generation of electricity in the National Electricity Market (NEM), all emissions from the combustion of petroleum products within Australia, i.e. excluding international ship and aircraft bunkers, and all emissions from the combustion of natural gas by gas consumers (i.e. not including emissions from the gas industry’s own use of gas – see below) in NSW, Victoria, SA and Tasmania. All data are reported as moving annual totals, so as to remove seasonal effects on consumption of relevant products, and in terms of the changes since June 2009. The emissions reported by CEDEX® reached their historical maximum in December 2008, i.e. in the calendar year 2008. By June 2009 the annualised total, i.e. total for financial year 2008-09, had fallen by 0.7%. The financial year 2008-09 is also the year in which Australia’s total emissions from fossil fuel combustion, as reported in Australia’s National Greenhouse Gas Inventory, reached their historic maximum. Read More here

PLEA Network

2 December 2015, Renew Economy, Paris, COP21: Poor countries want 100% renewables, not coal. PARIS: If coal is good for humanity, then someone has forgotten to tell the world’s poorest countries. In a strongly worded statement that came out on the first day of talks at the Paris climate summit, the leaders of 30 of the world’s poorest countries said they wanted the world to be 100 per cent renewable by 2050. The level of ambition on renewable energy and the climate target will be a key theme of these talks. There is a major push by poorer nations for their – and the world’s – energy needs to be supplied by renewable energy, as part of their insistence that the climate target be tightened to prevent average warming of more than 1.5C. Philippine President Benigno Aquino said it was part of the push for a “fairer”, more “climate-proactive world.” The basic message is that they see themselves as most vulnerable to climate change, and don’t want more coal fired generation that could worsen their prospects. This, of course, is in stark contrast with the marketing campaign of the global coal lobby – and its echo chambers in governments like Australia’s – could not be more profound. Indeed, when environment minister Greg Hunt was challenged at an OECD event about the approval of the controversial Carmichael coal mine, a project that could emit more than many country’s total emissions, he retorted: “I am not a neo-colonialist. I think the poorest should be able to make their own decisions.” And some of them have. The call by the 30 developing countries was followed by a separate announcement on Tuesday that African countries intended to install 10GW of new renewable capacity by 2020, and up to 300 GW by 2030. The majority of this will come in solar and wind, rather than hydro. France is contributing a total of nearly $10 billion. Read More here