Category Archives: Global Action Inaction

PLEA Network

6 November 2015, Carbon Brief, Look beyond emissions gap to see full force of climate pledges, says UNEP report. Climate pledges submitted to the UN reduce the emissions gap between current action and what is needed to avoid dangerous climate change, with social and political effects that reach far beyond their impact on aggregate emissions. That’s the optimistic conclusion of the latest UN Environment Programme (UNEP)Emissions Gap Report, published this morning. Nevertheless, it confirms that the collective ambition of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) is “far from enough”, leaving a “very significant” emissions gap in 2030. The analysis comes just a week after a similar report from the UN climate body the UNFCCC, which aggregated the impact of the 119 INDCs submitted by 1 October. While many of the conclusions are similar, today’s UNEP report goes beyond a simple adding up pledges and considers the wider impacts of the INDCs, as well as options for closing the emissions gap through enhanced action, sub-national initiatives and efforts to reduce deforestation. Bending the curve. Like last week’s report, UNEP concludes that the INDCs represent a real increase in ambition, compared to the policies in place before the pledges were made. Some of the INDCs include both conditional and unconditional elements. However, even if fully implemented, the INDCs would leave emissions on an upwards trajectory in 2030, UNEP says. 

A gap of 12-14 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent remains between emissions in 2030 and the cost-effective path to staying below 2C, it concludes. The 2C limit is the internationally agreed goal for avoiding the worst effects of climate change. All these points are illustrated on the UNEP graphic, below. The baseline scenario shows what might have happened to emissions if no new climate policies had been implemented after 2010. Current policies means what was in place before any INDCs were submitted in March. Read More here
PLEA Network

6 November 2015, Renew Economy, Big step finally taken towards making your fridge and air-con climate friendly. It’s hard to imagine the rhetoric soaring to greater heights. “A great signal for Paris”,”a much needed shot in the arm for climate action”, “provide an example of successful international cooperation”, “provide critical momentum for the climate negotiations”, “a strong signal to the UNFCCC to adopt a robust agreement at COP 21”, “boosting global cooperation ahead of Paris to benefit the planet”… Expectations were almost palpable. “A singular opportunity for countries to take action on climate”,”would set the stage for an ambitious and durable global climate agreement”, “lay the foundation for a global agreement in Paris that will protect generations to come”, “demonstrate that governments around the world have the political will to take bold action to avert a climate catastrophe”, “potentially catalyse far-reaching action at Paris”… Stirring stuff indeed, but who’d have guessed what all the fuss was about? You’d be forgiven for missing the muted clamour anticipating a long overdue agreement on the need to respond to the science calling for international action on the world’s most powerful and rapidly growing greenhouse gases. In a much anticipated gathering of the global community of nations in Dubai over the past week, intense negotiations have been taking place. The ultimate goal of the talks, which began in 2008, is to amend the Montreal Protocol to formally address the need to address the alarmingly rapid rise of the hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, highly potent greenhouse gases used across the refrigeration and air conditioning industries. A recent NASA study reported to the meeting also confirmed that contrary to previous understanding HFCs do have a small yet significant effect on ozone depletion, a point poignantly underscored by the appearance of the third largest Ozone hole this year. Read More here

PLEA Network

5 November 2015, Science Daily, Climate change: A wake-up call in the world of finance. As climate changes become impossible to dismiss, how does the mainstream investor community respond? Are financial decisions taking full account of risks and opportunities related to climate change, or is the topic still virtually ignored in financial decision-making? The environmental effects of climate change in our modern world are increasingly convincing, and global leaders will gather soon in a major Summit to try to address the problem. As climate changes become impossible to dismiss, how does the mainstream investor community respond? Are financial decisions taking full account of risks and opportunities related to climate change, or is the topic still virtually ignored in financial decision-making? Paula DiPerna sets out new trends and momentum to answer these questions in her article, published in the current issue ofEnvironment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, “Wall Street Wakes Up: Sustainable Investment and Finance Going Mainstream.” The forthcoming Climate Summit in Paris in December comes after many years of global negotiations. During the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Heads of States committed their nations to improving environmental conditions and battling climate change. The result? DiPerna writes, “Some progress has been made, of course, but far too little, considering the thousands of person-hours spent in strategy sessions, conferences, and scenario building worldwide.” Breakthroughs in environmental initiatives have been made, but an overall well-funded “reindustrialization and reemployment initiative” still remains unseen today. DiPerna suggests that a reason for the lag is for the failure to link environmental and economic questions in comprehensive fashion. Read More here

PLEA Network

5 November 2015, Renew Economy, 50 years after warning, no debate in Paris on the science. Diplomats steeling themselves for a historic round of United Nations climate negotiations remain divided by a handful of stubborn disputes. Discord persists over financial and procedural issues, for example, and over how pollution from farming and deforestation should be addressed alongside energy generation. The fundamentals of climate science, however, are not among the issues being debated. The 50-year anniversary of the first detailed climate change warning issued to a U.S. president is Thursday, less than a month before a historic two-week climate negotiating session begins in Paris. The golden anniversary is coinciding with a rich embrace of climate science in global negotiations. “There are plenty of challenging issues for the negotiators, but the basic science of climate change is not one of them,” said Harvard University economics professor Robert Stavins, an expert on the talks. “So-called climate skepticism is essentially irrelevant to the outcome.” Countries that have been “trying to undercut international climate action,” including Malaysia and Saudi Arabia, often “play the bad guys,” said Jake Schmidt, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council’s international program, but “not by denying that climate change exists.” The carbon dioxide chapter of the 1965 Restoring the Quality of Our Environment report, produced by President Lyndon B. Johnson’s science advisory committee, cited climate change research dating back to 1899. The science in the chapter was “basically right,” said Ken Caldeira, an atmospheric science professor at Stanford University. It warned loosely of ice caps melting, seas rising, temperatures warming, and water bodies acidifying. In the five decades since, a frenzy of multidisciplinary scientific endeavours has helped humanity pinpoint and project, with increasing and worrying precision, the consequences of rising levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases. Meanwhile, those impacts have shifted from being hypothetical to being real. Read More here