Category Archives: Global Action Inaction

PLEA Network

3 December 2015, Climate News Network, Coal plant plans raise climate risk. COP21: As some of the world’s political leaders strive to save the planet from overheating, others still see increased coal burning as the answer to their future energy needs. More than 2,400 coal power plants already under construction or planned will have to be cancelled if the planet is not to overheat by more than 2˚C, according to an analysis released at the COP21 climate summit in Paris. Even if existing plants are allowed to continue producing electricity beyond 2030 until the end of their technical lifetimes, the world will reach temperatures that risk runaway climate change, says the report by Climate Action Tracker (CAT). The report assessed the impact of planned new coal plants globally, and found that the several of the 28 European Union members states (EU28) planned to replace existing coal stations with new ones. The EU 28 and eight large countries assessed − China, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Africa, South Korea, the Philippines and Turkey – that each plan to build new plants will together add nearly half the world’s total – 2,011 power stations. Plans undermined The report makes clear that the efforts of the 195 countries meeting in Paris to reduce carbon dioxide emissions will be undermined unless plans to replace old coal plants with new ones are scrapped. Read More here

 

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