Michael Richardson, Straits Times 1 Jun 09;
OFFICIALS meet today in Bonn, Germany, for a fortnight of negotiations on a new set of global arrangements to prevent runaway climate change. The deal to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which ends in 2012, is supposed to be clinched at a summit convened by the United Nations in Copenhagen in December.
Concluding an agreement by then will be tough. Even as they defend national interests, negotiators need to bear in mind the latest evidence of the build-up of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere despite the economic slump, and the projections for a further rise as growth resumes, particularly in Asia.
The top United States energy forecaster reported last week that without a binding international agreement to replace Kyoto, world carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels will rise from 29 billion tonnes in 2006, to just over 33 billion tonnes in 2015 and 40.4 billion tonnes in 2030.
The Kyoto Protocol seeks to control six greenhouse gases. But just two of them - CO2 and methane - are responsible for 91 per cent of the global warming attributed to the six gases.
Earlier this year, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said that its researchers measured an extra 16.2 billion tonnes of CO2 and 12.2 billion tonnes of methane in the atmosphere last year - despite the economic downturn in the second half of the year. As a result, the concentration of CO2 rose to 386 parts per million (ppm), compared to its natural, pre-industrial level of 280ppm. This concentration is unprecedented for at least the last 650,000 years.
A CO2 level of 450ppm is virtually inevitable and a level of 600ppm by 2050 would be difficult to avoid if the burning of fossil fuels continues at its present rate. It will be expensive and disruptive to make a switch from fossil fuels to renewable sources such as hydro, geothermal, solar and wind power as well as nuclear energy, although it can be done gradually.
The forecast last week by the US Energy Information Administration said that energy-related CO2 emissions from the 30 member-states of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) were declining relative to those from non-OECD developing nations.
In 2006, non-OECD fossil fuel CO2 emissions exceeded OECD emissions by 14 per cent. If recent trends continue, non-OECD emissions in 2030 will come to 25.8 billion tonnes, exceeding OECD emissions of 14.6 billion tonnes.
Asia, which in 2006 emitted 9 billion tonnes of CO2 from burning coal, oil and gas, will release 17 billion tonnes in 2030, making the region by far the world's leading polluter over the period. Much of the pollution will come from coal, the most carbon-intensive of the fossil fuels. In 2030, CO2 emissions from China and India combined are projected to account for 34 per cent of total global emissions, with China alone responsible for 29 per cent.
These projections underline the need for developed countries (responsible for most of the accumulated greenhouse emissions) to reach a deal with developing countries (expected to be the source of most future emissions) on a new framework for limiting global warming gases.
Scientists say CO2 from burning fossil fuels and cutting forests is accumulating in the atmosphere twice as fast as it can be absorbed by oceans and plants. Once released, CO2 persists for a long time. The panel advising the United Nations on climate change says about 50 per cent of a CO2 increase will be removed from the atmosphere within 30 years, and a further 30 per cent within a few centuries. But the remaining 20 per cent may stay for many thousands of years.
How will this affect the climate system? It depends on the level at which CO2 in the atmosphere can be stabilised.
A study by French, Swiss and US scientists published in January concluded that if CO2 peaked at 450-600ppm, the results would include persistent decreases in dry-season rainfall in a number of areas, including southern Europe, northern Africa, the south-western US, southern Africa and western Australia.
It warned that the effect would be comparable to that in the North America Dust Bowl in the 1930s, with decreasing water and food supplies, increased fire frequency and expanded deserts.
These are just a few of the many likely adverse consequences of global warming. The question is whether the evidence is compelling enough to convince political leaders preoccupied with short-term problems that the cost of taking action now to safeguard future generations is a worthwhile investment.
The writer is a visiting senior research fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
