Smooth Otters & Water Monitors
from Life's Indulgences
Giant clam "Secrets"
from Psychedelic Nature and ID026 - Boring giant clam
Cigarette Man, The Poacher
from Life's Indulgences
Semakau
from Singapore Nature and wild shores of singapore and snakes in a fish feeding frenzy.
Whitehead’s Trogon
from Bird Ecology Study Group
Peter Ng's mission is to build bridges between specialists in diverse disciplines
Chang Ai-Lien, Straits Times 7 Nov 09;
PROFESSOR Peter Ng's idea of heaven is to don his rubber booties and wade knee-deep in muddy swamps, trawling through the muck for new crab species.
Former students fondly remember a host of different crustaceans he kept as pets, including a huge coconut crab so strong that it broke out of its wire cage and probably ended up in someone's cooking pot.
But these days, the internationally acknowledged crustacean expert is spending more time on dry land.
As a member of a new National University of Singapore (NUS) task force on environmental sustainability research, his first mission is to help build bridges between experts from diverse disciplines such as engineering, law, science and economics.
Only then is there any hope of dealing with complex environmental issues such as climate change, he says.
'We need all players on board to strike a balance. Each pillar is strong as a single discipline, but environmental issues are multi-faceted and we need a big picture approach,' says Prof Ng, 49, who is with the university's biological sciences department, 'so the biologists and environmental scientists can study the impact on nature and biodiversity, and the economists and lawyers can formulate policies that will strike a balance between sustainability and economic development.'
NUS president Tan Chorh Chuan announced last week that a research cluster on environmental sustainability had been formed to develop solutions for problems such as pollution, the fuel crunch and global warming.
NUS intends to take the lead regionally in tackling such issues. Even its upcoming NUS University Town campus in Kent Ridge is being planned 'green', with sustainability at the heart of its design.
But Prof Ng admits he is facing an uphill task in the imprecise field of climate change, where even experts cannot agree on how, or how badly, the planet will be hit by rising temperatures and sea levels.
'There are no short-cuts or simple solutions here. We can only try our best to manage our losses and stave off defeat. But we also cannot afford to lose this battle as it's the fate of humanity we are talking about here. It's the fate of our future generations,' he says.
The first challenge is to get researchers talking to each other.
'Getting scientists from different fields to work together is one of the most challenging things on the planet. Like me, if I had a choice, I'd focus on crabs...Why should I care what a policymaker thinks?'
So what prompted him to move beyond crabs to climate change?
'I believe that if you keep hurling crap at the environment, sooner or later it's going to throw something back. We all agree that there's a problem, and if we don't do something, there will be no more new crabs to discover in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve or anywhere else,' he says.
He is leading the charge at the Tropical Marine Science Institute, which he heads.
The research facility was set up in 1998 to carry out research across marine disciplines, from studying water quality to the role of mangroves in the ecosystem and the impact of coastal development.
One promising project which has roped in experts from all fields aims to take the Garden City concept to the seas.
About 70 per cent of Singapore's shoreline is composed of hardened structures such as sea walls and breakwaters, he explains.
Pilot projects on Pulau Tekong and St John's Island are looking at how to attract marine life to such barren areas, by getting coral to take root, and sea life to congregate. So, marine engineers are working with biologists to design the best homes for coral, algae and sponges, in consultation with the National Development Ministry and urban planners.
Another project aims to showcase the rich animal and plant life in Singapore and the region to the public.
He is charged with moving the Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research - a repository of the region's rich wildlife - from its cramped quarters at the university's science faculty to a spanking new building to be built on campus.
Fund-raising efforts to the tune of at least $30 million are under way, to create a full-blown natural history museum.
This will house over 300,000 preserved animal specimens, such as the highly endangered massive leathery turtle, which landed on the shores of Siglap beach in 1883, and the near-extinct cream-coloured giant squirrel, which was so common here 40 years ago that Prof Ng even had one as a pet.
The public will have free admission to the museum, which is expected to open in three years.
It will also showcase environmental research, such as how air and water quality is monitored, in a building which will itself boast green features, such as heat-reflecting glass panels and recycled materials.
'It helps to put a face to the environmental effort, and animals and plants are this face. If you show people a beautiful flower or crab, they feel for it,' says Prof Ng, who is married with three sons aged seven to 15.
'And if you save one species, you will hopefully save a host of other creatures as well.'
PRESSING NEED FOR ACTION
'I believe that if you keep hurling crap at the environment, sooner or later it's going to throw something back. We all agree that there's a problem, and if we don't do something, there will be no more new crabs to discover in Bukit Timah Nature Reserve or anywhere else.'
Prof Ng
AN ICON OF EXTINCTION
'I love the dodo bird, it's the icon of extinction. Man wiped it out in less than 100 years, and there isn't a single preserved specimen left.
'We recreated our model at the museum based on bones, skeletons and literature on the bird. We named it Clarence, and it's the most accurate recreation around. Even the world's dodo experts agree.
'It shows that the creature was not the clumsy, stupid bird it has often been depicted as.
'We are living in a world that is losing 50 to 100 species every single day. Singapore has already lost about half its animal species in the last 200 years, we need to act fast to slow this trend.'
Prof Ng
Straits Times Forum 7 Nov 09;
AS A resident of West Lake Avenue, next to MacRitchie Reservoir, I am concerned over the increasing presence of monkeys in the area. The population of monkeys seems to have grown exponentially recently.
Over the past few weeks, every morning or evening they would arrive in a pack of eight to 10 in our street, go on a rampage opening dustbins and spilling trash. They enter homes if a door or window is left open and make a mess. They even chase people with bags, in a desperate search for food, I assume.
Previously, the monkeys were passive and stayed on the trees, and never bothered people. Now they have become violent and aggressive.
When I called the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA), I was given the following options:
- I would be given a monkey trap, free of charge. I would put it in my house (not even out on the lawn) with a banana inside. If a monkey is trapped, I would call the AVA and officers would come and remove the monkey.
Is this realistic - and safe for my family? What if the monkey decides to attack us rather than take the banana?
- If a monkey becomes violent, I must call the police who will shoot it if harms residents.
This advice obviously assumes the monkey will wait for police to arrive and that the victim is able to call the police via mobile phone before the monkey steals it.
- I should chase a monkey off with a stick or spray of water.
This is fine if there is only one monkey, but they move in packs of eight to 10. What can one resident armed with a stick do?
What realistic assistance can the authorities provide? For a start, can the garbage bins be replaced with monkey-proof bins? If they have no access to food in the bins, the monkeys may not come out.
Shanti Achanta (Mrs)
KC Chan, The Star 7 Nov 09;
JOHOR BARU: Shrinking forests due to land clearing for economic activities will not only affect the ecosystem but will also lead to water shortage problems, Malaysian Nature Society Johor branch chairman Maketab Mohamed said.
“If the forest is cut down, it will seriously affect the surroundings and change the ecosystem. It will also lead to water shortage and soil erosion,” he said.
He was commenting on the Auditor-General’s report which said the state’s forest reserves were rapidly shrinking due to poor management, including illegal activities within the reserves.
The report also stated that a total of 557,864ha had been gazetted as forest reserves but until December last year, this had shrunk to 340,940ha, or just 18% of the size of the state.
On the forestry department’s move to plant rubber trees on cleared forests, he said it was pointless to talk about conservation when the forest would be replaced by a rubber plantation.
“When natural forests are replaced by rubber plantations, the forest’s ecology will begin to unravel. This will impact many species that rely on the forest,” said Maketab.
WWF-Malaysia Forest Conservation Manager Ivy Wong Abdullah said the state should have a good forestry management and development plan involving the public and non-governmental organisations.
The state authorities should improve their enforcement and monitoring procedures, especially the Forestry Department, to prevent forest reserves from encroachment and illegal logging activities, she said.
Meanwhile, Johor State Forestry Department director Yahaya Mohamood said the department was unable to maintain the original size of forest reserves.
“We understand that preserving the forest is important and the Government also realises that more areas need to be gazetted.
“However, it will take time for us to to do the relevant research and conduct proper measurements to confirm the status of gazetted areas,” he said.
Martin Carvalho, The Star 7 Nov 09;
MALACCA: Authorities are probing claims that foreign construction workers building the state Wildlife and National Parks Department centre next to the Tanjung Tuan forest reserve are involved in poaching activities.
Wildlife and National Parks Department deputy director-general Misleah Mohd Basir said immediate investigations would be carried out and action would be taken against the culprits.
“This is the very reason why we are setting up the centre there. This will allow us to carry out round the clock checks at the forest reserve,” she said yesterday.
The project was launched in May this year and is to serve as an interpretative centre and quarters for three wildlife enforcement officers.
The poaching problem was highlighted by Mohd Basir Abdullah who claimed many workers at the RM3mil project have sneaked into the reserve to fish and hunt its dwindling wildlife.
Mohd Basir, 60, who has been advocating total preservation of Tanjung Tuan for the last 20 years, said he was saddened by the lack of enforcement resulting in unabated encroachment in recent years.
“Sometimes, visitors from nearby resorts carry out night spear fishing along the coast,” he said.
He also raised concern over the lack of development guidelines for areas bordering the forest reserve.
“Tanjung Tuan forest reserve used to be much larger but portions of it had been alienated and subsequently sold to private owners.
“My fear is that we will lose this unique natural treasure if nothing is done to control and restrict surrounding development,” he said.
Malaysian Nature Society head of communication Andrew Sebastian said the forest’s unique bio-diversity had come under increasing threat. Owing to its historic links, Tanjung Tuan, also known as Cape Rachado, belongs to Malacca although it is located across the Negri Sembilan border about 15km from Port Dickson.
The area initially covered about 93.1ha of forested area and was gazetted as a forest reserve in 1921.
However, in 1953, only 60.7ha was given total protection when declared as a virgin jungle reserve.
The area was subsequently gazetted as a wildlife reserve and bird sanctuary in 1971.
Besides being home to the oldest lighthouse in the region built by the Portuguese in 1528, Tanjung Tuan is also internationally renown for its annual Raptor Watch Week held to monitor thousands of migratory birds of prey that use the area as a transit point.
AFP Google News 6 Nov 09;
DAKAR — A Senegalese environmental NGO announced on Friday that it had planted 34 million mangrove trees in three months in a project largely financed by French dairy giant Danone to offset its carbon footprint.
According to the environmental organisation Oceanium some 34 million mangrove seedlings were planted between August and November, 27 million in Senegal's southern Casamance region and 7 million in the Saloum river delta. Over 78,000 volunteers from 323 villages participated in the massive planting campaign.
"To my knowledge it is the first time ever that (over) 30 million trees have been planted in three months," Oceanium's president Haidar El Ali said.
Mangrove trees and shrubs form characteristic forests in saline coastal areas in the tropics and the subtropics.
In Senegal, the distinctive mangrove landscape is under threat and in the southern Casamance region the mangrove forests shrank to half their original size in the last 30 years.
The mangroves have an important place in Senegal's ecosystem. Without the mangrove forests the water becomes too salty to grow rice, a staple food for the Senegalese, fish die and the soil becomes exhausted.
French dairy giant Danone paid for the planting of the majority of the seedling, 30 million plants, Oceanium said.
"Danone wanted to compensate the carbon emission from its Evian business. They want to offset what they cannot reduce" in terms of carbon emissions, Jean Goepp of Oceanium told AFP.
He added that scientists are currently studying how much of the carbon emissions can be offset in the 5,000 hectares of mangrove seedlings planted due to Danone's 700,000-euro (one-million-dollar) investment.
Erwida Maulia and Panca Nugraha, The Jakarta Post 6 Nov 09;
A number of countries concerned by fish poaching activities in the region kicked off a meeting Wednesday aimed at reducing the frequency of such practices.
Taking place on Lombok, West Nusa Tenggara for two days, the second coordination meeting of the Regional Plan of Action (RPoA) is expected to produce an agreement among country members to jointly reduce “illegal, unreported, and unregulated” fishing practices in the region.
The RPoA was set up in 2007, with members consisting of the 10 ASEAN members plus Australia. Indonesia has been appointed as the secretariat of the forum.
The two-day meeting in Lombok is being attended by delegates of all RPoA members excluding Malaysia. Also attending were delegates from East Timor and Papua New Guinea.
Director general for surveillance and control at Indonesia’s Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Ministry, Aji Sularso said the RPoA enabled the sharing of information between country members, on issues such as the new poaching-related regulations enacted in a country.
“Indonesia, for example, can inform other RPoA members that we now apply firm measures against poachers, and that we will shoot and drown their vessels if they’re found to poach in our water areas, so they can inform their fishermen,” Aji, the meeting co-chair, told reporters after opening the meeting.
While Indonesian fishermen have often been found poaching in Australian waters mainly because of a lack of information on boundaries, Indonesia is a victim of poaching by fishermen from China, the Philippines and Thailand, among other countries, he said.
“Indonesia is estimated to lose Rp 30 trillion [US$3.15 billion] per year to poaching,” Aji said.
“We have an average potential to catch 6.4 million tons of fish annually, but it has shrunk by 25 percent thanks to the illegal fishing.”
Aji said his office had caught at least 185 foreign ships for illegally fishing in Indonesian waters in 2007, saving some Rp 435 billion from possible state losses. There were 242 foreign ships caught in 2008, saving some Rp 650 million in losses.
“This year we have discovered more than 200 cases of illegal fishing already, excluding those handled by the police and navy,” he said.
“This means that our waters are still very prone to illegal fishing practices.”
Although only Indonesia and Australia will benefit from reduced poaching activities, other countries in the region also joined the RPoA because they share the responsibility of preventing their fishermen from poaching in their neighbors’ territories, said Aji.
“No countries would want their fishermen to poach in other countries’ areas.
“For example, we [Indonesia] feel embarrassed that some of our fishermen intrude into Australia’s waters, while we have fish in our own territory,” he said.
Head of the Australian delegation, Ian Thompson, said the RPoA had provided a “very good” mechanism for Australia to work closely with Indonesia and other countries in ASEAN to prevent irresponsible fishing practices.
“We’re pleased with the progress we’re making in legislation, in the sharing of information, and in helping each other build our capacity to address illegal fishing,” he said, referring to the aftermath of the 1st coordination meeting of the RPoA that took place in Manila last year.
Thompson said that while the first meeting was aimed at making country members understand the poaching-related problems of each country; the second meeting was expected to “reinforce the efforts everybody is making to reduce illegal fishing”.
“We also hope there will be sharing of more practical measures such as legislative responses to illegal fishing and opportunities for training or capacity building programs within each nation to address the problem,” he said.
Aji expressed hope the RPoA would become a permanent forum.
Daily Express 6 Nov 09;
Kota Kinabalu: A renowned expedition leader has expressed concern over the scale of flotsam and the fact that some people use dynamite to fish and even cyanide in Sabah waters.
"We found during our journey a lot of ocean debris. We want people to realise that this is harmful for the environment. All these things cannot be changed in one day but you can change it through education and by getting them involved. They can change it if they have a reason in the future to change it.
"But we don't want to rush in and tell people how to live. We want to come and learn of these people that live along the coastline," said Mike Horn of Pangaea Expedition's Young Explorers Programme.
Mike, from South Africa, is currently in the State conducting one of several expeditions he has planned for the third stage of his four-year expedition programme.
"We've had the most welcoming reception, the most smiling faces that we've ever had from around the world and that goes to show that if people have a smile on their face they're still pretty much happy with the circumstances they're living in.
"But as the ocean debris is growing and growing and growing, it becomes a concern for me and the young explorers. That's why it's important for us to have a Malaysian that can take ownership. It must become the job of the youth, and that is to tell everyone that we have to all take care of the planet together," Mike told a media conference at Sutera Harbour, Thursday.
Also present were Tourism, Culture and Environment Minister, Datuk Masidi Manjun and Sabah Tourism Board Chairman, Datuk Seri Tengku Zainal Adlin, among others.
The expedition takes Mike and his young explorers on a 35-metre yacht called Pangaea, which was named after the super continent that existed 250 million years ago, before it split into the parts we know today.
The expedition is trying to reunite the continents but only this time in the fight for nature.
Of crucial importance to the Pangaea Expedition's environmental goals is the participation of young adults.
Mike is arguably the most experienced explorer on the planet, and what he has seen so far points to a natural peril.
His aim is to pass down his experience of exploration and identify areas where people can focus to find solutions for a better world. Explore, learn, act will empower future generations to create sustainable solutions for nature and mankind.
This explains the objective of the Young Explorers Programme and what Mike wants is to have a representative from Malaysia to join the programme.
According to him, the Pangaea now is like a floating United Nations where the nine young explorers and crew represent South Africa, New Zealand, South Korea, Brazil, United States, Russia, Poland, France, Switzerland, Germany and the Czech Republic.
"We would be privileged to have a Malaysian youngster aboard on one of our future projects, so that he or she could come back and make a major contribution to conservation in Malaysia, and around the world," said Mike.
The Mike Horn Pangaea Expedition is a remarkable modern-day adventure over land and sea, which will visit all the continents as well as the North and South Poles.
Joining Mike on board in different locations is a select group of "Young Explorers" who conduct practical environmental projects wherever they go.
The expedition, which started in October 2008 at the Antarctic Peninsula, is now in Sabah where Mike and nine young individuals from all over the world are exploring the marine biodiversity and islands of Malaysian Borneo.
"Malaysian Borneo has infinite natural beauty. We are delighted to see that so much is being protected and we want to help with that so that our children see it in the same way we are now.
"We've received wonderful support from the Sabah Tourism Ministry who are helping us celebrate this beautiful region," said Mike.
Andrew Darby, The Age 7 Nov 09;
THE Federal Government has pulled plans to publicise the discovery of massive illegal fishing nets in the Antarctic, with the ship that found them, Oceanic Viking, now under a different spotlight.
Bottom-set gill nets are posing a new fisheries threat in Australian regional waters, where the ''curtains of death'' are being laid by foreign fishers on the deep-sea floor. Nets totalling 130 kilometres were found in April on Banzare Bank in the Southern Ocean by Oceanic Viking on fisheries patrol, sources told The Age yesterday.
The nets' use is outlawed by the 25-nation Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, but rich pickings of Patagonian toothfish are leading illegal fishers to set them anyway.
Plans by the Australian Government to publicise the find to coincide with the commission's meeting in Hobart this week were put on hold with Oceanic Viking detained with Sri Lankan asylum seekers in Indonesia, and the Federal Opposition asking why it is not doing its fisheries job instead.
When Oceanic Viking found the nets, the converted cable-laying ship did not have the gear to pull them up. Instead, it called on a nearby licensed fishing vessel owned by the Perth-based Austral Fisheries, which recovered 29 tonnes of toothfish, a bycatch of skates, and about 10 kilometres of net. The rest was ripped up and sunk.
Glenn Sant, global marine program leader for the wildlife monitoring network, TRAFFIC, said the nets were devastating for the environment. He described the nets as ''invisible curtains of death'' for everything that swims into them.
Mike Stark, Associated Press Google News 5 Nov 09;
HELENA, Mont. — Scientists searching for Yellowstone National Park's lesser-known life forms — beyond its famed bison, bears and wolves — found more than 1,200 species, including several never known before to exist in the park.
A one-day study of the park in late August found microscopic worms, mushrooms, a bluish-green lichen, a slender grass and a colorful tiger beetle, among other creatures, in about two square miles of Yellowstone, according to initial results released this week.
Some 125 scientists and volunteers spent 24 hours canvassing an area in northern Yellowstone during the "bioblitz" — a scientific mad dash to document as many species as possible over the course of a day.
The park's wolves, bears, bison and elk are a popular topic for study but rarely do scientists turn their attention to insects and other smaller creatures that provide the ecological building blocks for those larger mammals to survive, said Kayhan Ostovar, an assistant professor of environmental science at Rocky Mountain College in Billings, Mont.
"There are a lot of them, and we don't even know which ones are there," said Ostovar, who helped organize the one-day study in Yellowstone.
Ann Rodman, a Yellowstone scientist who helped organize the event, said the study "lets people see the value of Yellowstone is not just the big mammals we preserve that people drive down the road and see. There's a whole lot more here."
And while the worms, mushrooms and beetles may not inspire cuddly plush toys for sale at America's first national park, they do add to the scientific knowledge that has favored Yellowstone's charismatic mammals and breathtaking network of geysers and hot springs.
It could be months or longer before the inventory is finished. But the initial report showed a rich biodiversity including 46 kinds of bees, 373 plant species, 86 mushroom types, five kinds of bats, 24 butterflies and more 300 kinds of insects.
The finished list won't provide a complete picture of what's living in the park. The inventory only notes species found on that particular day and in an area that is just a fraction of the park's 3,400 square miles.
But it provides enough for comparative use in the face of climate change and other stressors that can sometimes cause rapid changes and declines, Rodman said.
These brief and intensive inventories of species have been held in at least 40 national parks, including the Great Smoky Mountains between North Carolina and Tennessee, Maine's Acadia National Park and New Mexico's Valles Caldera National Preserve. Scientists say they provide important snapshots for future researchers tracking the effects of climate change, human development and other stressors.
The information adds a deeper understanding to the kinds of plants and wildlife in a park and their responses to changes in their environment, said Kirsten Leong, a Colorado-based park scientist who leads a team that studies interactions between people and the natural world.
Yellowstone's bioblitz was sponsored by the Greater Yellowstone Science Learning Center and funded by the National Park Service and a grant from Canon U.S.A. Inc.
On the Net:
* Greater Yellowstone Science Learning Center,: http://www.greateryellowstonescience.org/index.php
* Yellowstone National Park,: http://www.nps.gov/yell/index.htm
Drew Warne-Smith and James Madden, The Australian 7 Nov 09;
SEA levels on Australia's eastern seaboard are rising at less than a third of the rate that the NSW government is predicting as it overhauls the state's planning laws and bans thousands of landowners from developing coastal sites.
The Rees government this week warned that coastal waters would rise 40cm on 1990 levels by 2050, with potentially disastrous effects.
Even yesterday Kevin Rudd warned in a speech to the Lowy Institute that 700,000 homes and businesses, valued at up to $150 billion, were at risk from the surging tide.
However, if current sea-level rises continue, it would not be until about 2200 - another 191 years - before the east coast experienced the kind of increases that have been flagged.
According to the most recent report by the Bureau of Meteorology's National Tidal Centre, issued in June, there has been an average yearly increase of 1.9mm in the combined net rate of relative sea level at Port Kembla, south of Sydney, since the station was installed in 1991.
This is consistent with historical analysis showing that, throughout the 20th century, there was a modest rise in global sea levels of about 20cm, or 1.7mm per year on average.
By comparison, the NSW government's projections - based on global modelling by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as well as CSIRO regional analysis - equate to a future rise of about 6.6mm a year. Such a projection has caused widespread concern for landowners and developers, derision from "climate sceptics" within the scientific community and even some head-scratching from Wollongong locals such as Kevin Court, 80.
"I have swum at this beach every day for the past 50 years, and nothing much changes here," Mr Court said yesterday as he emerged from the surf at Wollongong's North Beach, just a short paddle from the Port Kembla gauging station.
"All this talk about rising sea levels - most of us old-timers haven't seen any change and we've been coming down here for decades.
"A few years ago part of the bank at the back of the beach was eroded. But you look at it now, and all the grass has grown back over it. The water hasn't washed back there for years.
"And that's nature. It's up and down, it comes and goes in cycles - nothing dramatic."
The complex task of tracking sea levels is being performed by the Australian Baseline Sea Level Monitoring Project, which is co-ordinated by the National Tidal Centre.
Body: The project operates 16 gauging stations around the country, with the eastern seaboard monitored by stations at Port Kembla, as well as Rosslyn Bay and Cape Ferguson, in Queensland.
Bob Carter, a geologist and environmental scientist with James Cook University in Queensland, said he was "baffled" as to why states and local councils would develop policy based primarily on global averages and not the records of local tidal gauges.
In the past year, the Port Kembla gauge has recorded a sea-level rise of just 0.1mm
"When you design a house in Sydney, do you entrust the architect and builder to do the heating and air-conditioning based on global average temperature? Of course not," Professor Carter said.
He added that even if seas were rising as much as 3.3mm a year - the CSIRO's current global estimate - they would remain within the bounds of natural and normal variation. "There have been lots of times in our history when sea levels rose as much or more than now," Professor Carter said. "There is nothing unusual in the current situation."
Meteorologist Bill Kininmonth, former head of the National Climate Centre, is another to express concern about the way future sea-level rises have been modelled. Mr Kininmonth believes only a thin layer of the ocean is actually warming - about 200m - making it unlikely the oceans are expanding to any great degree.
He said there was little compelling evidence that the polar caps were melting and causing sea levels to rise.
Computer models also tended to underestimate the way evaporation regulated temperature, thereby exaggerating future temperature predictions, Mr Kininmonth added. "There's little reason to think the little bit of extra heat generated by greenhouse gases will make a dramatic difference," he said.
However, the consensus view of the scientific community remains that sea-levels are rising at an accelerated rate because of human activity that has warmed Earth.
The CSIRO's John Church, considered one of the world's leading authorities on sea-level rise, told The Weekend Australian yesterday he remained convinced waters along the eastern seaboard were rising in line with global averages. He noted that the BOM's gauge results for Port Kembla as published here did not include the effect of barometric pressure, which, if included, would lift the sea-level increase to 3.1mm, not much less than agreed global estimates.
The Australian continent was also rising slightly - about 0.3-0.4mm a year around Sydney - which had partially offset increases in sea levels, he said. And an analysis of records from a gauge at Fort Denison in Sydney Harbour - not incorporated in the National Tidal Centre report - also revealed that, after 1950, periods of extreme sea-level rises occurred three times as frequently as in the first half of that century.
"There is a clear acceleration in the rate of sea-level rise," Dr Church said. "In the last 20 years, it's almost twice the global average for the 20th century."
Dr Church said the NSW coast was likely to experience sea-level rises greater than global estimates due to changes in the wind stress patterns in the Pacific Ocean, which will strengthen the East Australian Current. And if polar ice caps were indeed melting at a significant rate - which is not yet established - Australia could witness even bigger swells still.
Dr Church challenged Mr Kininmonth's assertion that only a thin surface layer of the ocean was warming, saying recent studies provided evidence of deep ocean warming although it couldn't be quantified as yet.
A spokesperson for the NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water said NSW had selected the upper end of the IPCC modelling predictions because both emissions and measured global sea-level rise were now at or above the upper IPCC estimates.
Critics say the scheme merely permits people to continue polluting
Jerome Taylor, The Independent 7 Nov 09;
One of Britain's leading ethical travel operators has launched a scathing attack on the carbon offset industry and has decided to stop offering offsets to its customers as a way of reducing their greenhouse gas emissions. Justin Francis, the founder of responsibletravel.com, said he had decided to abandon offsets because he believes they have become a "medieval pardon that allows people to continue polluting".
In 2002 his company became one of the first British travel operators to begin offering customers the opportunity to buy into an offsetting scheme. By paying money to a third party operator that ran carbon-reducing projects in the developing world, holidaymakers could jump on board flights supposedly happy in the knowledge that any carbon dioxide released during their journey would eventually be reduced by the equivalent amount somewhere else.
Supporters of the scheme, which has now become a multibillion pound industry, say it is a vital way of quickly reducing the world's carbon emissions and combating climate change. But a growing number of critics say it is simply a way for people and businesses in the developed world to buy their way out of a problem without actually committing themselves to reductions in their own emissions. After years of falling into the former camp, Mr Francis has now joined the growing number of offset critics.
"Carbon offsetting is an ingenious way to avoid genuinely reducing your carbon emissions," he said yesterday. "It's a very attractive idea – that you can go on living exactly as you did before when there's a magic pill or medieval pardon out there that allows people to continue polluting."
As some of the top polluters, the aviation and travel industries have been keen to promote carbon offsetting to their customers. Until a fortnight ago responsibletravel.com used Climate Care, a major offsetting company which was recently acquired by the investment bank JP Morgan. But Mr Francis said he became increasingly uneasy about the way the travel industry was using carbon offsets and pulled his company out of the scheme.
He added: "It was not an easy decision. It would have been much easier for me to go on blithely offering offsets, keeping my head below the parapet. But ultimately we need to reduce our carbon emissions. We can do this by flying less – travelling by train or taking holidays closer to home for example, and by making carbon reductions in other areas of our lifestyles too." His decision, however, has been criticised by carbon offset companies who are adamant that buying carbon credits does lead to a tangible reduction in greenhouse gases.
Climate Care did not comment yesterday but James Ramsay, the commercial director of another offsetting firm, Carbon Clear, said: "If you are going to take the view that offsets don't work then presumably you just stop there. But the trajectory that we've got to achieve for climate change doesn't give us the luxury of time. Waiting for, say, the aviation or travel industry to reduce its emissions leaves us way behind the trajectory of achieving 80 percent cuts in global carbon emissions by 2050."
Carbon offsetting is something that has always divided the environmental movement. It was quickly transformed from a minor experimental idea into a multimillion-pound carbon market. Europe's carbon market alone is now worth £81bn and is expected to account for at least half of the European Union's carbon reductions to 2020.
Responsibletravel.com say they will now attach "carbon warnings" to their holiday packages detailing the damage done to the environment by a flight, just as cigarette packets warn of the hazards of smoking. "What we have to do is offer holidays that are the most beneficial to the environment," Mr Francis said. "What we have to tell people is: 'Fly less and when you do fly, make it count'."
A multibillion-pound industry: The cost of a clear conscience
What do some of the major offset companies charge for offsetting a return flight from London to Sydney for two people?
*Climate Care: 11.23 tonnes of CO2 which costs £98.03 to offset.
*Carbon Clear: 2.82 tonnes of CO2 which costs £21.15 to offset
*The Carbon Neutral Company: 6.1 tonnes of CO2 which costs between £52 and £122 to offset depending on which project you choose
*Offset Carbon: 8 tonnes of CO2 at £76
*What do you get? Carbon Neutral Company offers a number of options to offset a return flight to Sydney. The cheapest, costing £51.85, goes towards capturing methane gas from a landfill in China, the most expensive (£122) invests in a dam in India.
George Monbiot The Guardian 6 Nov 09;
Small actions allow people to overlook the bigger ones and still claim they are being environmentally responsible
How many times have you heard the argument that small green actions lead to bigger ones?
I've heard it hundreds of times: habits that might scarcely register in their own right are still useful because they encourage people to think of themselves as green, and therefore to move on to tougher actions.
A green energy expert once tried to convince me that even though rooftop micro wind turbines are useless or worse than useless in most situations, they're still worth promoting because they encourage people to think about their emissions. It's a bit like the argument used by anti-drugs campaigners: the soft stuff leads to the hard stuff.
I've never been convinced by this argument. In my experience, people use the soft stuff to justify their failure to engage with the hard stuff. Challenge someone about taking holiday flights six times a year and there's a pretty good chance that they'll say something along these lines:
I recycle everything and I re-use my plastic bags, so I'm really quite green.
A couple of years ago a friend showed me a cutting from a local newspaper: it reported that a couple had earned so many vouchers from recycling at Tesco that they were able to fly to the Caribbean for a holiday.
The greenhouse gases caused by these flights outweigh any likely savings from recycling hundreds or thousands of times over, but the small actions allow people to overlook the big ones and still believe that they are environmentally responsible.
Being a cynical old git, I have always been deeply suspicious of the grand claims made for consumer democracy: that we can change the world by changing our buying habits. There are several problems with this approach:
• In a consumer democracy, some people have more votes than others, and those with the most votes are the least inclined to change a system that has served them so well.
• A change in consumption habits is seldom effective unless it is backed up by government action. You can give up your car for a bicycle - and fair play to you - but unless the government is simultaneously reducing the available road space, the place you've vacated will just be taken by someone who drives a less efficient car than you would have driven (traffic expands to fill the available road-space). Our power comes from acting as citizens - demanding political change - not acting as consumers.
• We are very good at deceiving ourselves about our impacts. We remember the good things we do and forget the bad ones.
I'm not saying that you shouldn't always try to purchase the product with the smallest impact: you should. Nor am I suggesting that all ethical consumption is useless. Fairtrade products make a real difference to the lives of the producers who sell them; properly verified goods - like wood certified by the Forest Stewardship Council or fish approved by the Marine Stewardship Council - are likely to cause much less damage than the alternatives. But these small decisions allow us to believe that our overall performance is better than it really is.
So I wasn't surprised to see a report in Nature this week suggesting that buying green products can make you behave more selfishly than you would otherwise have done. Psychologists at the University of Toronto subjected students to a series of cunning experiments (pdf). First they were asked to buy a basket of products; selecting either green or conventional ones. Then they played a game in which they were asked to allocate money between themselves and someone else. The students who had bought green products shared less money than those who had bought only conventional goods.
The researchers call this the "licensing effect". Buying green can establish the moral credentials that license subsequent bad behaviour: the rosier your view of yourself, the more likely you are to hoard your money and do down other people.
Then they took another bunch of students, gave them the same purchasing choices, then introduced them to a game in which they made money by describing a pattern of dots on a computer screen. If there were more dots on the right than the left they made more money. Afterwards they were asked to count the money they had earned out of an envelope.
The researchers found that buying green had such a strong licensing effect that people were likely to lie, cheat and steal: they had established such strong moral credentials in their own minds that these appeared to exonerate them from what they did next. Nature uses the term "moral offset", which I think is a useful one.
So perhaps guilt is good after all. Campaigners are constantly told that guilt-tripping people is counterproductive: we have to make people feel better about themselves instead. These results suggest that this isn't very likely to be true. They also offer some fascinating insights into the human condition. Maybe the cruel old Christian notion of original sin wasn't such a bad idea after all.
Ahead of Copenhagen summit, former US vice-president says 'non-violent lawbreaking' is legitimate in persuading governments to cut emissions
Oliver Burkeman, guardian.co.uk 6 Nov 09;
Al Gore has sought to inject fresh momentum into the Copenhagen build-up, saying he is certain Barack Obama will attend and predicting a rise in civil disobedience against fossil-fuel polluters unless drastic action is taken over global warming.
Amid increasing incidents of climate protesters disrupting the operations of fossil-fuel industries and airports in Britain and elsewhere, Gore suggests the scale of the emergency means non-violent lawbreaking is justified. "Civil disobedience has an honourable history, and when the urgency and moral clarity cross a certain threshold, then I think that civil disobedience is quite understandable, and it has a role to play," he says. "And I expect that it will increase, no question about it."
In his only UK newspaper interview to mark the publication of his new book, entitled Our Choice, Gore says it is crucial for Obama to attend Copenhagen in person, adding: "I feel certain that he will."
He remains optimistic, he insists, that the US Senate will pass a climate change bill before Copenhagen – a move widely seen as vital for persuading the world, especially developing countries, that the US is serious about reducing emissions.
But Gore was speaking before reports this week that Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, would back Republican demands for a full cost analysis of any such legislation – a process that could take five weeks, postponing debate until after the Copenhagen summit.
On Thursday the UK climate change secretary, Ed Miliband, acknowledged that hopes were fading that Copenhagen would result in a full treaty.
Nevertheless, there are "surprises … in store" on a potential Senate bill, Gore says, citing confidential conversations between Democrats and Republicans in which he has been involved. This week Democrats made small but significant progress when they pushed the bill through a vital committee stage despite a Republican boycott.
Reuters 6 Nov 09;
(Reuters) - A U.N. climate deal due to be agreed in Copenhagen at talks from December 7-18 may fall short of a legally binding treaty, according to the United Nations.
If Copenhagen fails to live up to hopes of a strong pact to slow global warming, what are the reasons and who risks blame? The following are some of the candidates:
ECONOMIC DOWNTURN - Recession distracted focus from climate change after the world agreed in Bali, Indonesia, in 2007 to work out a new U.N. pact by December 2009. Rich nations have put billions of dollars into green growth as part of recovery packages but, when unemployment at home is high, find it hard to promise extra money for developing countries. The slowdown in industrial output means a brief fix -- greenhouse gas emissions are likely to fall by as much as 3 percent this year, according to the International Energy Agency.
UNITED STATES - Many delegates at U.N. talks have given up hope that the United States, the number two emitter after China, will agree legislation to cap carbon emissions before Copenhagen. The United States is the only industrialized nation outside the Kyoto Protocol for cutting greenhouse emissions until 2012. Many countries welcomed President Barack Obama's promises of doing more to fight climate change when he took office in January but hoped for swifter action.
RICH-POOR DIVIDE - Developing nations accuse the rich of repeatedly failing to keep promises of more aid. Few developed countries live up to a target agreed by the U.N. General Assembly in 1970 to give 0.7 percent of their gross domestic product in development aid. Other plans, such as the Agenda 21 environmental development plan agreed in 1992, have fallen short.
DEVELOPED NATIONS - Most rich nations are promising cuts in greenhouse gas emissions well short of the 25-40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 that one scenario by the U.N. Climate Panel indicates are needed to avert the worst of climate change. Overall cuts promised by developed nations total between 11 and 15 percent. Best offers by countries including Japan, the European Union, Australia and Norway would reach the range.
CHINA, INDIA AND OTHER MAJOR DEVELOPING NATIONS - More than 90 percent of the growth in emissions between now and 2030 is set to come from developing nations -- with almost 50 percent from China alone, U.S. climate envoy Todd Stern said this week. "No country holds the fate of the earth more in its hands than China. Not one," he said. China and India say they are slowing the growth of emissions but need to give priority to raising living standards by burning more energy -- as industrialized nations have done for 200 years.
POLLUTERS - Some big industries are reluctant to embrace deep cuts in carbon dioxide, fearing they will lose a competitive edge.
THE WEATHER - 2008 was the 10th warmest year since records began in the mid-19th century. The warmest was 1998, when a strong El Nino event in the eastern Pacific disrupted weather worldwide. That has led some to argue that global warming is slowing even though the U.N.'s World Meteorological Organization says a long-term warming trend is intact.
THE PUBLIC - People have been slow in changing lifestyles to use less carbon. Simple choices like taking more public transport, using less heating or air conditioning, even changing lightbulbs can help if millions of people act.
Time runs out on road to Copenhagen climate pact
Reuters 6 Nov 09;
(Reuters) - Few international meetings are left to help agree on a strong new U.N. climate pact at a conference in Copenhagen from December 7-18.
Following is a timetable of remaining talks that could help break a stalemate between rich and poor nations on a pact after a final round of U.N. negotiations in Barcelona, Spain, on November 2-6.
ST ANDREWS, Scotland, Nov 6-7 - Group of 20 finance ministers meeting to discuss issues including ways to fund the fight against climate change.
SINGAPORE, November 14-15 - Meeting of leaders of APEC -- Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation.
SHANGHAI/BEIJING, Nov 15-18 - U.S. President Barack Obama to visit China for the first time. China is the top greenhouse gas emitter ahead of the United States.
COPENHAGEN, November 16-17 - Environment ministers from about 40 nations meet in Copenhagen for an informal planning session for the U.N. talks.
DATE/PLACE TO BE DECIDED - Meeting of environment ministers from 17 major economies, representing 80 percent of world greenhouse gas emissions. Diplomats say the meeting is likely to be a few days after the informal talks in Copenhagen.
COPENHAGEN, Dec 7-18 - Senior officials from 190 nations meet from December 7 to work on details of a new U.N. pact before environment ministers arrive for a final session, from December 16-18. Leaders of about 40 nations have also expressed plans to come for the end of the meeting.
See also Where countries stand on Copenhagen by the BBC for breakdown on "What's on the Table", "Climate Facts (2007)" and "Public Opinion".
Katy Daigle And Arthur Max, Associated Press Yahoo News 6 Nov 09;
BARCELONA, Spain – After two years of tough U.N. climate talks often pitting the world's rich against the poor, negotiators said Friday a new global agreement now rides on industrial nations pledging profound emissions cuts next month in Copenhagen.
Negotiators from industrial nations, including the United States, said eleventh-hour promises are possible and a global warming pact can be reached.
But developing countries complained that pledges so far were nowhere near enough to avoid a catastrophe, and that world leaders need to take part in the 192-nation conference on Dec. 7-18 to cut a meaningful deal.
"Part of the frustration is that a deal is so close ... all the elements are there," said Kevin Conrad, the delegate from Papua New Guinea. "But it's absolutely conceivable for senior people to come together and spend a week and clean all this up."
The United States was universally seen as the linchpin to a deal, but it has been unable to present its position or pledge emissions targets because of the slow progress of climate legislation in Congress. "Everyone else wants to calibrate against" the Americans, Conrad said.
With the U.S. position still unclear, expectations at this week's U.N. talks in Spain shifted toward a political agreement in which rich nations would pledge to reduce emissions and to finance aid to help the world's poorest cope with the effects of Earth's rising temperatures.
Under such a deal, nations would agree to stick to their promises while negotiating the treaty, taking as long as a year. If world leaders come to Copenhagen to endorse the deal, those promises would carry more weight, delegates said.
At least 40 leaders are expected, including British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy.
Former Vice President Al Gore said he believes President Barack Obama will attend, although the White House has not confirmed that. President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of Brazil has indicated he may come, and a spokesman for Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany said she is keeping the date open.
Yvo de Boer, the U.N. official who is shepherding the talks, said negotiators still hoped to achieve a significant agreement setting specific goals.
"Governments can deliver a strong deal in Copenhagen," de Boer said, adding that it would be hard for developed countries "to wiggle out" of any written commitments.
The deal may take the form of consensus decisions, including an overarching statement of long-term objectives, along with a series of supplemental decisions on technology transfers, rewards for halting deforestation, and building infrastructure in poor countries to adapt to global warming, delegates said.
Developing nations were mistrustful of any result that did not hold wealthy nations to legally binding targets, citing past broken promises in development aid and famine relief.
The aim of the negotiations has been to broker an agreement building on the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012. Without a new one, carbon emissions will have no international regulation, which would hinder the ability of industry to factor in the price of carbon and plan future business.
While some countries, such as Germany and Britain, are meeting their Kyoto emission-reduction targets, others have not. Canada's emissions grew by more than 25 percent from 1990 to 2007, U.N. figures show, although it committed to reduce them 6 percent from 1990 levels by 2012. Japan's grew 9 percent in that period, compared with a target of minus 6 percent.
De Boer was looking to Washington to announce a clear emissions target for 2020, saying "a number from the president of the United States would have huge weight."
"The United States is interested in the strongest possible agreement we can get from this process," said Jonathan Pershing, the chief U.S. delegate to the talks. He showed impatience with developing nations for wanting to hold rich nations to legally enforceable targets while arguing they should be exempt from them.
"We are looking for parallelism. We are not looking for imbalance," he said.
He declined to say whether the U.S. will be ready to submit a target for the Copenhagen accord, adding that Obama has the authority to make a commitment without congressional approval, "but a decision on whether or not we will do it has not yet been made."
U.N. scientists say rich countries must cut carbon emissions by 25 percent to 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2020 to prevent Earth's temperatures from rising 2 degrees Celsius (3.8 degrees Fahrenheit) above its average temperature before the industrial era began 150 years ago. Anything rise beyond that could trigger climate catastrophe.
So far, reduction pledges total 11 percent to 15 percent. But those could be seen as negotiable.
The wider issue of ending the Copenhagen conference without a legally binding agreement disappointed developing nations already suffering droughts, floods and other disasters blamed on rising temperatures. Those countries urged negotiators not to give up on a binding pact in Copenhagen.
South Africa's chief negotiator, Alf Wills, warned against promoting a watered-down text, saying "we will not accept a weak, green-wash outcome."
The European Union said it wanted the most ambitious deal possible. "We are going to change the fundamentals of industrial civilization, so it's no wonder there is a lot of activity going on in a negotiation like this," said Anders Turresson of Sweden.
Forty leaders plan to attend climate talks: U.N.
Alister Doyle and Gerard Wynn, Reuters 6 Nov 09;
BARCELONA, Spain (Reuters) - About 40 world leaders plan to go to Copenhagen next month to boost the chances of clinching a U.N. climate deal, the United Nations said Friday as preparatory talks wound down with scant progress.
Developing nations in Barcelona accused rich countries of seeking to lower ambitions for an 190-nation deal in Copenhagen with suggestions that up to an extra year may be needed to tie up details of a legally binding treaty.
Inviting world leaders to the end of the Copenhagen meeting on December 7-18 could help overcome disputes, said Yvo de Boer, head of the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat, on the final day of the week-long Barcelona talks.
"My understanding is that 40 heads of state have indicated their intention to be present," he said. They include British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy as well as leaders of African and Caribbean nations.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel is considering attending, a spokesman said in Berlin. U.S. President Barack Obama is among those undecided.
Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen has not formally invited leaders to the talks, currently due to be limited to environment ministers. "There is no official figure" of how many leaders will come, a Danish spokesman said.
The 175-nation Barcelona meeting made little progress toward a deal but narrowed options on helping the poor to adapt to climate change, sharing technology and cutting emissions from deforestation, delegates said.
RICH-POOR SPLIT
The meeting exposed a deep rich-poor divide about sharing out the burden of curbs on greenhouse gas emissions meant as part of a worldwide assault to avert droughts, wildfires, extinctions and rising seas.
"Developed countries are acting as a brake toward any meaningful progress" said Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping of Sudan, chair of the Group of 77 and China, representing poor nations. African nations boycotted some talks Tuesday in protest.
"We do not have the option of delay," said Dessima Williams of Grenada, representing small island states which say they risk being swamped by rising sea levels. She said a Copenhagen deal had to be legally binding and rejected talk of a delay.
De Boer said Copenhagen "can and must be the turning point in the international fight against climate change" but said time was too short to seal a full legal treaty in 2009.
He said Copenhagen should at least set 2020 greenhouse gas emissions goals for all rich nations, agree actions by the poor to slow their rising emissions and agree ways to raise billions in funding and mechanisms to oversee funds.
"I believe that the U.S. can commit to a number in Copenhagen," de Boer said.
A U.S. climate change bill cleared its first hurdle in the U.S. Senate Thursday, but Democrats are likely to fall far short of their goal of passing legislation in the full Senate before Copenhagen.
That would make it difficult for the United States, the number two emitter after China, to offer an internationally binding emissions reduction target in Copenhagen. That in turn makes it hard for other nations to make commitments.
"That's a decision yet to be made," Jonathan Pershing, head of the U.S. delegation, said when asked if Obama would give a number before the Senate agreed legislation.
Activists criticized a lack of leadership in the run-up to Copenhagen, including from Obama. Two protesters wandered the conference hall dressed as aliens with green faces Friday asking: "Where are your climate leaders?" in robotic voices.
"Where is the great Rudd?," one of them asked a group of Australian delegates, referring to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.
In St Andrews, Scotland, British finance minister Alistair Darling said he would seek progress to raise cash to fight climate change at a group of 20 finance ministers' meeting.
"I want to use this weekend to engage finance ministers in the task of making sure we can get money on the table. We have been very clear we think $100 billion will be required," he said.
(With extra reporting by Anna Ringstrom in Copenhagen, Editing by Sonya Hepinstall)
Leaders 'likely' to go to summit
Richard Black, BBC News 6 Nov 09;
At least 40 world leaders are likely to attend December's UN climate summit in a bid to secure a new global treaty.
Some observers say only intervention from heads of state and government can close the deal, given the gulf between industrialised and developing nations.
Others maintain the harsh words bandied here at the final preparatory meeting amount to no more than posturing.
The UN's top climate official said firm US targets for reducing emissions were necessary for a deal.
"I believe the US can commit to a number [at the summit] in Copenhagen," said Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the UN climate convention (UNFCCC).
"There was a number in Mr Obama's campaign, there are numbers in the legislation [going through Congress] - so I believe it's perfectly possible for the US to sign up to a specific pledge."
'Fair share'
US legislation setting caps on emissions is under discussion in the Senate, and unlikely to be finalised this year.
Quizzed by reporters as to whether the US would bring an emissions target to Copenhagen, its delegation chief here, Jonathan Pershing, said it was possible but a decision had not yet been taken.
"The science demands urgent action, and the US is committed to our fair share," he said.
"Developed countries including the US must put numbers forward; developing countries except the least developed countries must [also] make commitments."
The Copenhagen summit is supposed to conclude the two-year process that began at the Bali summit two years ago of formulating a treaty to supplant the Kyoto Protocol.
The absence of a US target is the most glaring hole in the draft treaty's complex tapestry that weaves together concerns over reducing emissions from rich countries, reducing the rate of emissions growth in more prosperous developing nations, and providing financial assistance to the developing world.
Developing countries have regularly accused the West - and the US in particular - of failing to live up to its international obligations.
"It seems that developed countries have been negotiating with their economic interests at heart rather than [the world's] environmental interests," said Angelina Navarro Llanos, head of the Bolivian delegation.
But Mr Pershing insisted that developing countries were also to blame for the apparent impasse that earlier in the week brought a walkout from African delegations.
"Developing countries want a legal deal that applies to us but not to them," he said.
The rancour evident during the week has led some observers to conclude there is no chance of achieving a legally binding deal in Copenhagen.
Many people close to the talks - including Mr de Boer - have played down the chances of tying up a full treaty this year, and there are suggestions it could take a further full year to conclude.
'Political posturing'
But others said the picture was not as dark as it seemed, and that last-minute policy revelations and compromises were still likely.
"There's a fair degree of political posturing," said Kumi Naidoo, chair of the activist coalition tcktcktck.
"[But] some of the negotiators from developed countries have come to the conclusion that they're not going to deliver what was promised in Bali, and there's a lowering of expectations going on."
Most developed countries set out targets for reducing their emissions well before this meeting convened - and they add up to a lot less than the 40% (from 1990 levels by 2020) that developing nations are demanding.
On the face of it, this is an unbridgeable divide; but other delegates suggested the G77/China bloc of developing countries would probably settle for about 30% provided other elements of a package - such as plentiful finance - were also on offer.
Mr de Boer said the Danish conference hosts had a list of 40 heads of state or government intending to attend - though it is not known whether US President Barack Obama is among them.
Some delegates suggested only political engagement at this level could turn the current situation into a new binding agreement.
Most of the negotiating here has taken place in small groups tackling specific issues; and it is clear that progress has been uneven.
Negotiations towards an agreement on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (Redd) were progressing well, delegates said, with a good chance of agreeing something in Copenhagen that could see money begin to flow into forest protection next year.
Mr de Boer cited the transfer of clean technology from the industrialised to the developing world as another area where progress has been made.
But other areas of negotiation - notably on raising money to help poor countries adapt to climate impacts, and on commitments to reduce emissions - have clearly been more difficult.
There is still disagreement too over the legal form of a new agreement at or after Copenhagen - whether it should take the form of an extension to the Kyoto Protocol, which Mr de Boer noted was the only legal agreement in existence that had curbed carbon emissions, or another legal entity.
Elements of the draft treaty remain in the form of "non-papers", delegates said - documents that do not carry the weight of a formal negotiating text.
Delegates will convene in the Danish capital on 7 December for two weeks of negotiations; although the introduction of key elements is likely to be withheld until the final few days.
Posts
visitors since Nov 07