Red, Green, and Blue

Just as it seemed that differences over contentious issues regarding the next climate treaty were ironing out and all parties moving ahead with a common agenda, the developed countries, US in particular, threatened to stall negotiations until developing countries pledge equal emission reduction measures.

According to new reports, American negotiators demanded that there should be similar mitigation obligations for developed as well developing countries. The demand was strictly against the unanimous decision to draw distinction between capacities of developed and developing nations to reduce carbon emissions taken at the Bali Climate Conference in 2007.

Developing countries, led by India, opposed the demand in one voice and forced the American negotiators to back down.

United States’ stance came as a surprise given that officials from the Obama administration have been in constant talks with various developing countries and that these talks have resulted in many developing countries agreeing to voluntary emission reduction plans. It was that since the carbon output of most developing countries is much less than that of developed countries and that they are not technically and financially equipped to take up bold mitigation measures a clear differentiation between mitigation measures taken up by the two parties. Read the rest of this entry »

About ten weeks from now leaders from nearly 200 countries will meet in Copenhagen to discuss the next climate treaty. During the last two to three years governments around the world moved to and fro over contentious issues like funding, technology transfer, intellectual property rights and emission reduction targets. As the world started to look for a replacement of the Kyoto Protocol, the start was slow with no sign of urgency even as the UNFCCC recommended a 25 to 40 percent reduction in global carbon emissions by 2020.

But the change at Washington brought a colossal change in the pace of global climate negotiations. The United States had played a vital role in formalization of the Kyoto Protocol but never ratified the same which created a gapping hole in global efforts to reduce carbon emissions. With the failure of Kyoto Protocol acknowledged by almost all it is clear that the we cannot afford to repeat the mistake committed in the past. United States’ commitment to act boldly and swiftly has become the make or break issue for the next climate treaty. Read the rest of this entry »

San Francisco based power utility Pacific Gas & Electric has announced it will leave the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in protest over the organization’s “extreme” position on climate change.

Last month the Chamber of Commerce called for a “trial” on climate science as a means to thwart efforts in Congress to pass climate legislation, stymie the EPA’s endangerment finding regarding CO2 emissions, and needlessly continue to sow discord and confusion over the issue. It is an extremist position with which PG&E apparently wants no association. On a company blog post yesterday entitled Irreconcilable Differences, their position was made clear.

Read the rest of this entry »

After spending some time bringing together Israel and Palestine for a handshake photo-op in New York, President Obama turned his attention to a problem that may prove equally daunting: global cooperation on climate change.

In his first UN appearance since taking the Oval Office, Obama staked a lofty position for the US, promised that the US is “determined to act,” and that the US “will meet our responsibility to future generations.” Chinese President Hu Jintao matched Obama’s rhetoric, pledging that the Chinese would commit to a host of progressive steps around renewable energy and emissions reductions, but also cautioning that developing economies like China’s “should not … be asked to take on obligations that go beyond their development stage.”

The summer saw a lot of pre-positioning in advance of Copenhagen, and with today’s UN General Assembly marking the beginning of a series of mini-summits in the lead-up to December’s big climate change conference, the volume on those announcements will only increase along with their frequency and grandeur.

Still, with Obama facing an uphill battle on domestic climate change legislation and China hiding behind their “developing” status, Copenhagen is threatening to become little more than a public relations event with little real concerted action. The US will have to avoid making the push for global leadership on climate change into a new breed of arms race that would find Obama and US policymakers at a significant disadvantage against the Chinese in the following ways:

Paying Lip Service is Costly – China, India and other developing countries want the US-led West to subsidize their carbon reduction efforts. If the West balks and no comprehensive global agreement emerges, the US could still find itself saddled with costly commitments made in going toe-to-toe with China as a demonstration of leadership and willingness to cooperate. For example, at the UN, President Jintao made the headline-grabbing promise to plant enough new trees in China to cover the area of Norway. Jintao also promised to get China to 15% renewable energy within 10 years, a much more ambitious timeline than any US plan. While it may not represent the kind of economy-crippling commitment that China fears will result from a global agreement, these programs will be costly, and Obama has his hands full just trying to pay for health care.

Democracy’s Dilemma - Not only is Obama hamstrung by health care, an increasingly troublesome war in Afghanistan, and an economy that is still teetering; but, he also has the mettlesome matters of bipartisanship, political pressure and budget restraints. While a strongly Democratic House could barely pass a weakened climate bill, Jintao and the Chinese have a one-party system overseeing a command economy that gives the Chinese a lot more adaptability as circumstances dictate in Copenhagen, in the world press, and on the geopolitical landscape.

The World Won’t Grade on a Curve - The Chinese are already crying foul over efforts to stifle their economy for the sake of climate change action and the world community is not expecting much from the world’s fastest growing economy and most voluminous emitter. Commitments like those above are enough to make a splash and convince the world that China really is trying. By contrast, Senators from Obama’s own party are refusing to discuss the prospect of domestic climate change legislation unless it includes trade protections. That kind of opposition in his own party makes a lot of his words ring hollow while the Chinese will certainly be able to deliver on whatever proposals they float. There are no handicaps in this game, so even if they overshoot on a much lower standard, the Chinese promise to steal Obama’s thunder.

Conventional wisdom says you should never enter a land war in Asia. The same might be said for wars of words.

Flickr photo.

Recently the Food and Agriculture organisation (FAO) of the UN reported that millions more people may find themselves facing long term hunger and even starvation, in east Africa.

Climate change affects Africa

El Nino is blamed for changing rainfall patterns, and that, combined with inadequate harvests and increasing conflict has led to a drop in cereal production already affecting Uganda, Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia. This could lead to an increase in the number of people relying on food aid.

Already more than 20 million people are receiving food assistance in the Horn of Africa region and their numbers are only likely to increase further towards the end of the year as El Nino drives heavy rains across the region, leading to mudslides on tree-denuded hillsides and the destruction of crops close to harvest time. The same rains often destroy roads and other infrastructure required to bring food aid and medicine into the region and can kill livestock or cause epidemic diseases in animals or human populations, all of which add to the complexity of managing food security in a region where conflict is endemic and border raids and ‘tribal’ disagreements are a standard response to poverty.

Horn of Africa countries badly hit

The worst hit country at present is Somalia, where the FAO claims that around half the population already need some form of aid; either food or medical supplies or both. Ethiopia is also expected to tip into reliance on emergency aid, as the second harvest of the year has failed and that means that food aid reliance could rise from 1.3 million to over six million people.

Kenya and Uganda are both expecting poor harvests, and Uganda has an even more disastrous prognosis as the ongoing unrest between government forces and rebels has forced people off their land or led them to stay barricaded in their compounds, resulting in less cultivation and a probably halving of the harvest of staple food crops. The current violence has left more than a million people in Uganda struggling with food security and the number is expected to rise steadily throughout the next twelve months, according to FAO experts.

Somali roadside wreckage courtesy of Carl Montgomery at Flickr under a creative commons licence

Recent forest fires resulted in a quarter of the Angeles National Forest being burned to a crisp. More than 160,000 acres of wood and chaparral were destroyed.  Impassioned editorials are calling for the restoration of the forest’s beauty spots and trails, but what is the political cost of restoring the environment at a pace faster than nature’s, or of failing to do so?

Natural regenaration causes its own problems

The chaparral will reappear within a couple of seasons,  and the trees will begin to regenerate although for some species, seed germination won’t be possible until years of rain-water leaching remove the carbonised layer of ash and debris from the soil surface. While pines are willing to push through anything, oak is less rugged, and seedling trees don’t tolerate soil acidity as nearly as well, tending to fail before the end of their first year if they can’t get their roots down into rich humus.

Without tree cover, there is more damage on the way. If there are strong winter rains, then landslides will sluice fallen branches and trees down the steep slopes, pushing over remaining plants and creating debris jams in the watercourses with two results: denuded hillsides and flooded lower lands. Jams mean that water can’t run cleanly or well and that means that fish like trout, which rely on clear, fast running streams, die.

Recreation versus regenaration

But The Angeles is not just an area of forest – it’s a massive escape route for the people who live near it. From Patrick Swayze, who owned the five acre Rancho Bizarro at the foot of the forest, through to the poorest Angeleno who hitches to the Angeles to backpack the forest trails, the National Forest is both a green lung and a vast playground.

Not all visitors are enthralled by the beauty of the landscape: biker gangs frequently cut new trails through the woodland, and are hunted in turn by rangers, while gangs growing marijuana find or create clearings in which they can establish their crops. One of the strangest illegal activities in The Angeles is the searching out of hidden Native American sites, often to be found in caves hidden in the hills, and the looting of sacred items left there by previous generations of shamans and artists.

Another area of conflict that will appear very rapidly is that when a quarter of a habitat disappears, many animals need to relocate. They will move into other areas of the forest, but because human habitation now presses right up to the edges of the forest, they will also move into backyards and gardens, and while the odd rabbit or raccoon might not present too much of a problem, the migration of rattlesnakes will present many families with nightmares and mule deer stripping suburban yards of all their carefully nurtured plants will be very unpopular. And that’s without the mountain lions and bears …

Managing habitats requires funding and people

So funding the restoration of the habitat has to be a priority, for several reasons – the tourism factor, the need to ensure Los Angeles has enough greenery to act as a pollution soak, and the simple fact that failing to remedy the effects of fire will lead to greater problems later as invasive species, both plant and animal, take over the scorched spaces.

The great problem is that the earliest re-growth is the ecosystem that requires most management. Chaparral is a mixture of hardy small trees and shrubs such as scrub oak and ceanothus, Manzanita and bush rue, many of which will, in seven to twelve years, have become largely old, dead wood. This wood acts as a tinder to forest fires. And managing chaparral is a labour-intensive business – it has to be stripped out by hand or grazed by goats or mountain sheep, and the Forest has been understaffed by rangers, let alone foresters, for years.

However, there’s no obvious political will as yet to establish a large-scale reinvestment programme for the Forest and until some substantial replanning of the Forestry resources occurs, it will continue to be a fire risk.

National Forest courtesy of Rennet Stowe at Flickr under a creative commons licence

After months of staunch resistance to mandatory emission reduction targets the Indian government has hinted that it is willing to consider a national legislation on voluntary emission reduction targets.

India’s environment minister Mr. Jairam Ramesh acknowledged for the first time that his country needs to take up bold responsibilities in order to mitigate the adverse impacts of climate change. The proposed legislation could include emission reduction targets for the year 2030 for the most polluting and carbon intensive industrial sectors.

India has been against mandatory emission reduction targets putting forward two main arguments – one, its per capita emissions are among the lowest in the world and two, taking bold measures to reduce its carbon emissions would adversely impact its endeavor to eradicate poverty. The proposed bill would address both these issues and could serve as a path breaking legislation striking a balance between the economic and social costs and the mitigation measures. Read the rest of this entry »

Mean Joe Green #73: When Climate Change and Health Care Reform Collide

Can “We the People” who got us into this mess be counted on to get us out of it?

…not looking good.

Mean Joe Green Cartoon Archive

Follow Mean Joe Green on Twitter @GreenCartoons

The European Union has proposed a climate change funding of €2-15 billion every year for developing countries to help them make transition from fossil fuel based energy systems to clean energy based systems. However, EU does not see the advanced developing counties like India and China eligible for this financial help.

EU in its Global Finance Blueprint for Ambitious Action by Developing Nations paper stated that advanced developing countries should contribute to the climate adaptation fund instead of expecting funds for themselves. According to the paper, advanced developing countries posses ample financial resources to initiate and sustain emission reduction programs.

The Commission said that from 2013, it would depend on the carbon market to fund 40% of the money required for climate change mitigation and adaptation in developing nations. The emerging economies should be able to generate 20-40% of the proposed global fund, it said. The remaining—around $22-50 billion a year—will be paid for by the European Union and the rest of the developed nations.

Developing countries have been at loggerheads with the developed countries on the issue of funding for adaptation to clean fuel technologies. Decision to set up an adaptation fund for helping poor and developing countries was taken at the Bali climate conference in 2007. However, the developed countries are yet to act on their promises of aid as they find themselves constrained by the global economic crisis and objections by their own people. Read the rest of this entry »

Oh, they call him a communist. They call him a Red. But the actual problem is that President Obama is too Green. Barack Obama is our first truly Green President.

This is the real reason the fossil industries whose profits are threatened by renewable energy go after him – and stir up emotional opposition groups to threaten him with outlandish attacks. Because he has already implemented or funded an extraordinary string of renewable energy initiatives.

He will likely be remembered as an FDR figure; the president who powered the nation with solar and wind.
Read the rest of this entry »