Natural disasters displacing millions: U.N. study

Reuters 22 Sep 09;

LONDON (Reuters) - Floods, storms, drought and other climate-related natural disasters drove 20 million people from their homes last year, nearly four times as many as were displaced by conflicts, a new U.N. report said Tuesday.

The study tried to quantify for the first time the number of people forced to flee their homes because of climate change.

Global warming is increasing the frequency and intensity of storms and otherwise altering weather patterns, so disasters are now "an extremely significant driver of forced displacement globally," it said.

The study said a total of 36 million people were driven from their homes by rapid-onset natural disasters in 2008. China's Sichuan earthquake accounted for 15 million of these, but climate-related disasters displaced 90 percent of the rest.

The report said many more people were probably being forced from their homes by slower-onset crises like droughts.

The report was compiled jointly by the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center (IDMC), a body which normally tracks displacement caused by conflict.

The aim was "to see whether it was possible to put numbers to the problem and come up with a methodology that will enable us to do that over time," said IDMC head Kate Halff.

The answer was a qualified "yes," though Halff warned that the monitoring effort so far "doesn't give us any idea of what time period these people have been displaced or what their needs are. At this stage it's just about a number."

MIGRATE OR FLEE?

Accurately tracking displacement resulting from slower-onset crises like rising sea levels is also expected to prove difficult, largely because it is hard to judge when voluntary movement from a problem zone becomes forced fleeing, she said.

Determining what role climate change may have played in a natural disaster will also undoubtedly remain controversial.

Still, "an increase in the number of people temporarily displaced will be an inevitable consequence of more frequent and intense extreme weather events affecting more people globally," the report said.

Last year, more than five million people were displaced by flooding in India, attributed in part to changes in that country's monsoon cycle.

In the Philippines, nearly two million people were forced from their homes by severe storms. China and Myanmar also saw large-scale displacements due to storms.

Asia accounted for over 90 percent of disaster-related displacements last year, which the report said "may simply be because Asia is the most disaster-prone region."

By comparison, 4.6 million people were internally displaced last year by conflict, according to Halff's center.

Altogether 42 million people were living as refugees or internally displaced persons last year because of fighting, she said.

(Editing by Tim Pearce)

Read more!

Drought to Keep India’s Cooking Oil Imports at Record

Thomas Kutty Abraham, Bloomberg 22 Sep 09;

Sept. 22 (Bloomberg) -- India, the biggest vegetable oils buyer after China, may import record volumes for a second year after a drought in almost half the country damaged oilseed crops, a processors’ group said.

Purchases in the year starting Nov. 1 may rise as much as 6 percent to 8.5 million metric tons, Ashok Sethia, president of the Solvent Extractors’ Association of India, said today. Palm oil will account for more than 80 percent of the total, he said.

Production of India’s monsoon-sown oilseeds, mainly peanuts, may drop as much as 1.5 million tons after the weakest rainfall in at least seven years forced farmers to plant fewer acres, the association said. Record imports by the nation may sustain a 29 percent rally in palm oil prices in Malaysia this year.

“The import taps are open, and shortages will be met through imports,” Sethia said in a phone interview from Kolkata.

December-delivery palm oil increased 0.4 percent to 2,190 ringgit ($631) a metric ton on the Malaysia Derivatives Exchange Sept. 18. Markets in Malaysia and Indonesia, the top producers, are shut today for holidays.

Prices may remain in a 2,000-2,500 ringgit a ton band until November and gain about 10 percent by the year end, Sethia said.

India’s vegetable oil imports in the 10 months ended August jumped 49 percent to 7.07 million tons, the association said on Sept. 14. Purchases of crude palm oil gained 29 percent to 4.2 million tons, and soybean oil gained 63 percent to 823,190 tons.

Crop Area

Farmers sowed oilseeds to 16.74 million hectares, compared with 17.98 a year earlier, because of drought, Sethia said. A revival in rains in the past month has increased soil moisture, likely helping early sowing of winter rapeseed crop, he said.

The government must restore taxes on edible oil imports during the harvest of monsoon crop and planting of the winter crop to ensure farmers get remunerative prices, Sethia said.

“You need farmers to boost cultivation to cut dependency on imports,” he said.

India abolished import duty on crude palm oil in April last year, and in March lifted a 20 percent tax on crude soybean oil purchases. The two commodities are substitutes. Refined edible oils are taxed at 7.5 percent.

The country relies on imports to meet half its cooking oil needs and buys palm oil from Indonesia and Malaysia, and soybean oil from Argentina and Brazil.

Read more!

Burying Climate Change: Efforts Begin to Sequester Carbon Dioxide from Power Plants

West Virginia hosts the world's first power plant to inject some of its CO2 emissions underground for permanent storage

David Biello, Scientific American 23 Sep 09;

Over the next five years at least half a million tons of carbon dioxide will be injected into rock deep underneath the Mountaineer power plant near New Haven, W.Va.

Although that is less than 0.00001 percent of global emissions of the greenhouse gas and less than 2 percent of the plant’s own CO2 output, the sequestration, which begins this week, marks the first commercial demonstration of the only available technological fix for the carbon problem of coal-fired power plants, one that many coal facilities around the world hope to emulate.

Coal accounts for roughly 50 percent of the electricity generated in the U.S. and as much as 75 percent of the electricity generated by American Electric Power, says Nick Akins, executive vice president of generation at the utility, which owns Mountaineer. The plant can pump out 1,300 megawatts of electricity, making it one of the single largest coal-fired power plants in the U.S. and a leading source of CO2 emissions. (The top emitters of global warming pollution—China and the U.S.—burn nearly four billion tons of the dirty black rock a year.)

As a result, everyone from coal companies to environmental groups have identified carbon capture and storage, or CCS, as critical in enabling significant and rapid cuts in greenhouse gases. But there have been only a handful of demonstrations of the technology to capture the gas and, outside of using CO2 to pump more oil out of the ground, even fewer attempts to store it.

To capture CO2 from its smokestacks, Mountaineer will employ so-called chilled ammonia technology, which relies on ammonium carbonate chemistry to pull CO2 out of the exhaust gases. (The other two basic capture technologies either burn coal in pure oxygen to produce a CO2-rich emissions stream or siphon off the CO2 made during the gasification of coal.) Mountaineer takes the captured CO2 and compresses it to at least 2,000 pounds per square inch, liquefying it and pumping it roughly 8,000 feet down into the ground. That deep, the liquid CO2 flows through the porous rock formations, adhering to the tiny spaces, slowly spreading out over time and, ultimately, chemically reacting with rock or brine. “We’re not going into a salt cavern; we’re not going into an underground river. We’re going into microscopic holes,” explains geologist Susan Hovorka of the University of Texas at Austin, referring to CCS in general. “Add it up, and it’s a large volume.”

In fact, the Department of Energy estimates that the U.S. has the geologic room for 3.9 trillion tons of CO2 underground, more than enough for the 3.2 billion tons emitted every year by large industrial sources.

The two geologic formations below Mountaineer are the Rose Run Sandstone and Copper Ridge Dolomite, which run underneath layers of relatively impermeable rock that will keep the CO2 trapped. “Part of our project is to kind of take those through their paces and get an idea of their acceptance of CO2,” says Gary Spitznogle, a CCS engineering manager at American
Electric Power. After all, a similar effort in Ohio revealed that formations there stored less CO2 than expected. The company will monitor the CO2 via three specially drilled wells, in addition to the two wells for pumping the CO2 down in the first place.

The process of capturing and storing carbon dioxide may be simple chemistry and geology, but it has significant industrial costs. American Electric Power alone will pay $73 million for just the capture technology at Mountaineer and has asked for $334 million in federal stimulus—half the total cost, the company says—to scale up the project to nab roughly 20 percent of the plant’s emissions in future years.

Despite the steep price of CCS, Mountaineer is not alone. In the U.S., utilities are planning multibillion-dollar power plants that will incorporate CCS; by 2011 Alabama Power may outsequester Mountaineer and bury 150,000 tons of CO2 from its Plant Barry in the Citronelle Oil Field. Abroad, China has several test facilities funded in part by Australia, and in Iceland an international consortium of researchers will pump CO2 into underground basalt where it will react to form a carbonate mineral.

But even if CO2 is permanently locked away in rock, other environmental problems surrounding coal remain. The technology does nothing to remedy the impacts of coal mining, particularly mountaintop removal, or residual toxic fly ash, among other issues. Moreover, although the Environmental Protection Agency has begun to craft rules to regulate the CO2-injection wells, it is still unclear who owns the pore space resource as well as who assumes liability in the event of an accident, such as a sudden, geyserlike release of the gas.

Nevertheless, given looming regulation on emissions, utilities are anticipating extensive CCS installation in just the next few decades. “Our first full scale would be around 2015, and by 2025 we would have a pretty considerable amount constructed on large coal units,” Spitznogle says.

That means one thing: higher electricity prices. In May 2007 the Department of Energy estimated that capturing 90 percent of the CO2 with amine scrubbers would make electricity at a cost of more than $114 per megawatt-hour, compared with just $63 per megawatt-hour without CO2 capture. For the consumer, the extra cost would amount to about $0.04 per kilowatt-hour— a necessary price, perhaps, for less of the warming gas in the atmosphere.

Read more!

Storing CO2 in soil should be on U.N. agenda: Gore

Timothy Gardner, Reuters 22 Sep 09;

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Developing emissions markets to encourage farmers in poor countries to store more carbon dioxide in soil should be a key topic on the U.N. climate talks agenda, global warming activist Al Gore said.

"I think that soil carbon conservation and recarbonizing of soil must be the next stage in this negotiating process," former U.S. Vice President Gore told reporters on the sidelines of a climate conference at the United Nations.

Agriculturists can store more carbon in soil through techniques such as no-till farming that leaves crop residue on the ground instead of plowing it up and releasing the carbon into the atmosphere, or through crop rotations.

Gore said that if a clear signal on carbon storage in soil emerged from the 190-nation U.N. climate talks in Copenhagen in December, it would serve as a "very important measure" to help get developing nations to participate in helping to slow climate change.

Rich and poor countries aim to hammer out a new global deal at the Copenhagen meeting on how to slow global warming and deal with its consequences, but talks have stalled on how to share the burden.

In sub-Saharan Africa, soil carbon has been so depleted that it harms food production and is expected to worsen as a consequence of global warming, Gore said.

Soils can hold carbon for thousands of years when dead leaves, crop residue and other vegetation combine chemically with existing soil particles instead of rotting fully. More carbon is held in this way than in trees and other vegetation.

But agricultural techniques such as heavy plowing, the use of too much fertilizer, and the discarding of the practice of rotating crops have led to the depletion of soils and the carbon in them in many countries.

Gore said polluters and investors in rich countries could potentially help invest in projects promoting new and improved agricultural methods that retain carbon, such as no-till farming, in developing countries through carbon credits.

Similar offsets resulting from storing carbon in forests and soils are already available in voluntary carbon markets, including ones for domestic projects on the Chicago Climate Exchange.

Opponents of such programs say the science is still young on measuring how much carbon is stored in this way. As a result, the price for soil sequestration offsets has traditionally trailed the price of other offsets projects such as solar energy farms.

Others say measurements are improving and that the offsets are a huge potential market that could reward farmers and make the soil yield more and better food.

Gore said improving the soil in many poor countries through such offsets could help fight against hunger and malnutrition.

(Editing by Philip Barbara)

Read more!

Lord Stern suggests new way out of Copenhagen deadlock

Lord Stern, the former World Bank economist, outlines his plan to break the deadlock over climate change negotiations ahead of a key United Nations summit in Copenhagen.
Nicholas Stern, The Telegraph 22 Sep 09;

In the short time remaining before Copenhagen, governments around the world must come together to agree the structure of a global deal on climate change. The agreement must lay the foundations for a future era of dynamic low-carbon growth that succeeds in both cutting emissions and sustaining the growth in developing countries which is necessary to reduce poverty.

I believe that an ambitious and comprehensive deal is possible, but only if crucial steps are taken over the remaining weeks and months to break the deadlock we appear to be in.

That deadlock consists of an approach by rich countries which collectively involves inadequate emissions reductions and unwillingness to make financial commitments without being able to approve the plans for developing countries to move to low-carbon growth. And on the part of developing countries, an unwillingness to make commitments on reductions without a clear indication of financial support from the rich countries, together with an unwillingness to have their own plans for low-carbon development determined by, or subject to the approval of, the rich countries. The developing countries also find the level of commitment by rich countries to domestic reductions in the next two decades both too small and unconvincing.

First, we must recognise what we have to achieve in terms of global emissions. In order to have a reasonable chance of avoiding an increase in global average temperature that exceeds 2˚C, we need to reduce annual worldwide emissions from the present level of about 50 gigatonnes of carbon-dioxide-equivalent to no more than 20 gigatonnes by 2050. There are a number of possible trajectories which could meet this target and control total annual emissions over the period to the level necessary, but none of them would allow any more than 35 gigatonnes by the mid-point of 2030. These are the key figures, 35 gigatonnes of carbon-dioxide-equivalent by 2030 and 20 gigatonnes by 2050, that must guide any agreement on national targets for emissions reductions. By focusing on these totals for global annual emissions, and not percentages relative to earlier levels, we can focus where the science takes us, on the overall path of annual emissions over the next few decades. In other words, we must focus on whether the planned national emissions targets are consistent with the constraints of the global emissions totals.”

Second, the need for national targets both to add up and to be equitable means that rich countries, including the European Union, Japan and the United States, need to achieve emissions reductions of at least 80 per cent by 2050, compared with 1990. Developing countries, including China and India, also need to limit and decrease their emissions, but in ways that are consistent with their ambitions for continued economic growth and the reduction of poverty.

Third, if we assume that annual global emissions will peak within the next five years and will reduce at a substantial but realistic rate thereafter to give a reasonable chance of avoiding a temperature increase of more than 2˚C, global annual emissions must be cut to between 44 and 48 gigatonnes of carbon-dioxide-equivalent by 2020. If we only reach the upper end of this range, much bigger annual reductions in emissions would be required in subsequent years, and cuts of more than 50 per cent by 2050 compared with 1990 to prevent a rise of more than 2˚C. Thus, it would be safer to aim for the lower end of the range for 2020. An analysis of the current policies and commitments among the most important rich and developing countries in terms of emissions indicates that we would be close to the top of that range in 2020, so we must find ways of making further cuts in the next two decades to reach a reasonable trajectory.

Finally, rich countries should give their strong backing to climate change policies, including those that are designed to halt deforestation, and low-carbon growth plans in developing countries in a variety of ways, including through additional financial support, beyond official development assistance, of US$100 billion per year for mitigation and US$100 billion per year for adaptation by the 2020s.

If we can get to grips with these issues, then we can achieve an agreement that is effective, efficient and equitable. It will allow us to avoid the profound risks of climate change, to overcome poverty worldwide and to usher in an exciting new era of prosperity based on sustainable low-carbon growth. Through innovation and investment in new greener and more energy efficient technologies in the next two or three decades, we can create the most dynamic period of growth in economic history. And what is more, a low-carbon world will also be quieter, cleaner, more energy-secure and more biologically diverse. Let us not allow mistrust, pessimism and lack of ambition to prevent us from achieving these aims. Instead let us have real vision and leadership in both developing and developed countries which seize the opportunities offered by Copenhagen, for us, our children and future generations.

Read more!

Q+A: A primer on climate change at the U.N. and G20

Jeff Mason, Reuters 22 Sep 09;

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Worldwide efforts to fight climate change face potentially crucial milestones this week during United Nations and G20 meetings that activists hope will bring momentum to stalled talks on a new global warming treaty.

Below is a list of questions and answers about the meetings, what is at stake, and what outcomes may or may not result.

WHO IS MEETING AND WHEN?

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon holds a one-day summit on climate change for world leaders at U.N. headquarters on Tuesday. The meeting is not a negotiating session, but Ban hopes it will encourage heads of state and government to prod their governments over outstanding issues that have prevented official talks from moving forward.

U.S. President Barack Obama hosts a meeting of G20 leaders on Thursday and Friday in Pittsburgh, where they are expected to discuss how industrial nations should provide financial support for developing countries dealing with climate change.

WHAT IS THE STATUS OF CLIMATE TALKS?

U.N. talks among 190 nations are scheduled to take place in Copenhagen in December to forge a deal on a climate treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which runs out at the end of 2012.

Progress ahead of Copenhagen has been limited. Industrial and developing nations are at odds over how to spread out greenhouse gas emission curbs and how much rich nations should pay to help poorer nations cope with the effects of rising temperatures.

WHAT CAN THIS WEEK'S MEETINGS DO TO ADVANCE TALKS?

It's all about momentum.

Renewed commitment from world leaders at the U.N. summit could reinvigorate the process, trickling down to negotiating rounds set to take place in the coming months.

There are two people to watch in particular on Tuesday: Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao.

The Chinese leader is expected to unveil new plans that his country intends to take to tackle global warming -- a move that could help to break the international deadlock.

Obama's speech at the summit will be scrutinized for signs that he is stepping up to take the leadership role he promised the United States would take on this issue.

WHAT IS OBAMA EXPECTED TO SAY?

The U.S. president is likely to stress the progress Washington has already made in his short tenure as president on fighting global warming, including putting billions of dollars toward renewable energy in the economic stimulus bill and laying out tough new standards for auto emissions.

But activists -- and other nations -- want more than just a review of what has been done.

"He has to show the rest of the world that he is serious about a global agreement, that it's not just rhetoric," said Nick Mabey, head of E3G, an environmental group in London.

"Obama's speech will tell us about how far the forces that are talking about delay and lowering expectations are winning and how much he is still focused on winning this battle. That will massively affect the negotiations."

WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE U.S. CLIMATE BILL?

U.S. progress on a law limiting greenhouse gas emissions is seen as crucial to the advancement of the Copenhagen talks.

Earlier this year the House of Representatives narrowly passed legislation calling for industrial greenhouse gas emissions to be reduced 17 percent by 2020, from 2005 levels, and 83 percent by 2050.

The U.S. Senate is considering similar legislation, but a bill has not yet been introduced.

Both Congress and the White House are focusing their energy almost exclusively on the debate over healthcare, so delay on the climate bill is seen as possible if not likely.

U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid indicated last week the climate bill could be pushed back to 2010, which could hamper the U.S. position in Copenhagen and discourage other nations from committing to carbon curbs.

WHAT'S NEXT AFTER THE U.N. SUMMIT?

The G20 meeting on Thursday and Friday comes next, though U.S. and other G20 officials have played down expectations of any substantial breakthrough on the financing issue.

Further climate negotiating sessions are scheduled to take place in Bangkok at the end of September and Barcelona in early November. The Copenhagen talks begin on December 7. (Additional reporting by Alister Doyle; Editing by Eric Beech)

Read more!

We are sinking, say Maldive islanders, but there is still time to save the world

James Bone and Robin Pagnamenta, Times Online 22 Sep 09;

The President of the Maldives, the Indian Ocean islands threatened with extinction by rising sea levels, told the United Nations climate-change summit yesterday that the country’s appeals for help had fallen on deaf ears for 20 years.

“Once or twice a year we are invited to attend an important climate change event such as this one — often as a keynote speaker,” Mohammed Nasheed told world leaders at the UN headquarters in New York.

“On cue, we stand here and tell you just how bad things are. We warn you that unless you act quickly and decisively, our homeland and others like it will disappear before the rising sea, before the end of this century.

“We in the Maldives desperately want to believe that one day our words will have an effect, and so we continue to shout them even though, deep down, we know that you are not really listening,” he said.

Mr Nasheed had again been invited to address a UN climate summit, in the approach to the Copenhagen conference this December at which world leaders hope to “seal the deal” on reducing gas emissions. His speech was sandwiched between those by the two leaders best equipped to save his island nation: President Hu of China and President Obama of the US, representing world’s No 1 and No 2 greenhouse gas emitters respectively.

But Mr Nasheed argued that developing nations must be ready to accept binding targets even if rich countries do not act. “We ask world leaders to discard those habits that have led to 20 years of complacency and broken promises on climate change, and instead seize the historic opportunity that sits at the end of the road to Copenhagen,” he said.

Ban Ki Moon, the UN Secretary-General, said: “Success in Copenhagen will have positive ripple effects for global co-operation on trade, energy, security and health. Failure to reach broad agreement would be morally inexcusable, economically shortsighted and politically unwise.”

Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said that without counter-measures global temperatures would rise by up to 6.4C by 2100. The dangers include the disappearance of sea ice and more frequent cyclones, heat waves and heavy rains. Water would become scarce in semi-arid areas such as the western US, the Mediterranean Basin, Southern Africa and northeastern Brazil. The Greenland ice sheet might also disappear, leading to a seven metre (23ft) rise in sea level.

“The impacts would be disproportionately severe on some of the poorest communities of the world,” Mr Pachauri said. “At least 12 countries are likely to tend towards becoming failed states and communities in other states would show potential for serious conflict due to scarcity of food, water, stress and soil degradation.”

Mr Pachauri called for steps to ensure that global emissions peaked no later than 2015.

Among the most far-reaching pledges from developed nations, Japan’s new Prime Minister, Yukio Hatoyama, to reduce the emissions to a level 25 per cent below the 1990 level by 2020; the previous Japanese Government’s target was 8 per cent. That move, combined with the Chinese offer to slow its emissions, and a recent offer by India to set numerical targets for cutting its greenhouse gas emissions, added to pressure on President Obama to act. too.

Al Gore, the former Vice-President, said that he hoped that the US Senate would pass climate change legislation by December, as the House of Representatives had done, so that Mr Obama would be able to make a firm offer.

However, activists criticised Mr Obama’s speech, in which he offered little except a recognition that the US had a duty to play a leading role.

Asad Rehman, of Friends of the Earth, said: “Barack Obama’s speech was deeply disappointing — it was a huge missed opportunity which does nothing to break the logjam in international climate negotiations.”

James Cameron, of Climate Change Capital, said of the Chinese initiative: “The Chinese move will help create the world’s largest market for the technology and the knowhow needed to combat climate change, which represents great business opportunities that have a public good at their core. China is moving rapidly to create the incentives for low-carbon investments.”

Gordon Brown arrived in New York last night and was seeking support from advanced nations to back a $100 billion fund to support developing nations as they switch to green technologies. Britain is committed to a European Union target to reduce its carbon emissions by 20 per cent from 1990 levels by 2020.

A British official described the proposal by President Hu of China as “definitely encouraging”.

“We obviously need to see numbers from China but we need to see numbers from everybody before December,” the official said.

Read more!

Climate change - where the centre leads

Jose Maria Figueres, Juan Mayr and Marina Silva
BBC Green Room 22 Sep 09;

This week sees a series of meetings that could create the right conditions for achieving a new global treaty on climate change. In the Green Room this week, three senior political figures from Latin America - Jose Maria Figueres, Juan Mayr and Marina Silva - argue that middle-income nations such as theirs are leading the way.

On 22 September, world leaders meet at the UN in New York for high-level talks on climate change - a summit followed two days later by a discussion at the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh on the global financial situation.

Moving out of the current financial crisis and addressing the problem of climate change can be jointly achieved by shifting the world towards a low carbon economy.

Analysis by Lord Stern and many others has shown that the economic case for taking measures now to mitigate and adapt to climate change is overwhelming.

The meetings this month in New York and Pittsburgh should focus on this.

The importance of these meetings can hardly be overstated. Success at December's UN climate meeting in Copenhagen, where leaders will gather with the hope of reaching a new global agreement, will be determined in no small part on the progress made now.

Transition elements

The scientific evidence is clear: the world cannot support the continuation of "business as usual".

There is a growing consensus in the scientific community that the upper boundary of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels safe for our planet is 350 parts per million (ppm).

Today, as a direct result of human activities, it stands at 386 ppm. It is therefore essential that each nation shifts its economic development towards a low carbon model, one that can sustain the economy and the ecology of the planet.

Transition to a low-carbon economic system will only happen if all countries co-operate; commitment from every developed and developing country is required.

Industrialised nations, as the primary carbon emitters, will have to act urgently. Of equal importance is the need for developing nations to embark on a path of economic growth which "leap-frogs" carbon-intensive industrialisation.

New maturity

The dilemma of how to foster economic growth without worsening our climate is not a new problem.

And it is not one that is limited to the developing world. Indeed, with the exception of a few, mostly European, countries, the industrialised world has failed to cut its own emissions sufficiently to grant either moral authority or practical advantage in this discussion.

While some nations are in fact taking action - Denmark for example has raised its GDP while lowering carbon emissions and energy consumption - there are many that are only prepared to make weak commitments, which are well below the levels required.

December's UN climate summit presents a real opportunity for the negotiators from 192 nations to act in the global interest.

But if such changes prove challenging for the world's wealthiest countries, imagine the difficulty they pose for economies still reaching maturity.

In this light, it is important to note that nations such as our own are also taking action, and our determination is unshakable.

Plans have been put in place to lower emissions, forgo unsustainable practices and make a transition to new clean energy technologies.

For example, Costa Rica's climate change plan calls for a transition to carbon neutrality by 2021 - an ambitious but achievable programme.

Brazil plans to decrease emissions from deforestation - its main source of greenhouse gas emissions - by 80% before 2020, and plans to establish a target to reduce all emissions in the coming months.

Other examples include the "Long-Term Mitigation Scenario" published by South Africa in 2008, and plans by the Maldives and other island nations to achieve carbon neutrality in the mid-term.

South Korea is investing approximately 80% of its fiscal stimulus package in climate-related measures.

Those commitments are significantly higher than most of what is being proposed by developed nations.

Four elements

The challenge is straightforward: how to curb greenhouse gas emissions and sustain economic prosperity at the same time.

To secure a practical pathway to a clean energy economy - one that is measured in both higher incomes and a more stable climate - we must strike a new partnership between developed and developing countries.

There are four elements to emphasise:

* Climate change is a moral, economic and environmental imperative that cannot be evaded. Leaders who pay lip service to the science of climate change - who tacitly recognise its devastating implications and then do nothing to halt its advance - are trafficking in hypocrisy, and should be held accountable for doing so
* The developing world is not uniform - it is as diverse as the major industrialised economies. Those who have set ambitious programmes should be recognised and should benefit from additional incentives. Those who have not must be led to see that additional action will result in additional investment and opportunity
* It's time to talk dollars and cents. The developed world must follow the call of those like UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown in helping to finance that process of transition. His proposal for $100 billion annually in new investments is the minimum that we should expect to secure at the G20
* Most importantly, the overwhelming scientific and economic case for striking such a partnership must be well communicated to all people in all countries. Leaders must speak to this and civil society must add its voice loudly.

And here's what needs to be said.

A new partnership supported by substantial investments and political leadership is the only way to marshal the political consensus required to make genuine progress on climate change.

It's fair for developed countries to require more clarity of commitment from developing nations - even if they are voluntary commitments.

However, partnerships run both ways, and it is equally fair for developing countries to expect developed nations to make more ambitious commitments than they have so far been prepared to do.

For the developed world, the transition to a new clean energy economy will create jobs and growth, mitigating the current recession and laying the pathway for economic and environmental recovery.

For the developing world, it is an opportunity to progress towards a sustainable economic model, avoiding climate-damaging industrialisation in the process. This will create further prospects for expansion and job growth.

The time has come for a fair, binding and ambitious climate change agreement and concrete action by all nations.

That's why this week meetings are so important. And that's the prism through which their success should be evaluated.

Jose Maria Figueres is a former President of Costa Rica, Juan Mayr is a former Environment Minister of Colombia and Marina Silva is a former Environment Minister of Brazil

The Green Room is a series of opinion articles on environmental topics running weekly on the BBC News website

Read more!

Analysis: Miles to go on long road to climate deal

Charles J. Hanley, Associated Press Yahoo News 23 Sep 09;

UNITED NATIONS – It happened in Rio, in 1992: The world officially woke up to the fact it was getting warmer outside. Seventeen years later in New York, the U.N. gathered presidents and premiers to talk about serious steps to turn down the heat. But the political climate may still be too cool for conclusive action.

In inviting President Barack Obama and other world leaders to Tuesday's summit on climate change, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged them to "act as global leaders rather than national leaders," to push climate negotiations forward.

With a mere 76 days to go before a pivotal diplomatic conference, it appeared an interim agreement might be the most that can be expected this December, leaving difficult details for later talks.

Ban's bid to build momentum for a new climate accord was the latest effort in a long, cumbersome process dating back to the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro.

Leaders converging on the Brazilian city signed on to something unprecedented, a treaty committing them to work "to protect the climate system for present and future generations."

Scientists had produced persuasive evidence the carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases that industry, transport and farming were pouring into the atmosphere were trapping heat and raising global temperatures, with potentially damaging effects — droughts, floods, rising sea levels — from a changing climate.

Then-President George H.W. Bush called on fellow summiteers to "join in a prompt start on the convention's implementation."

Not promptly, but five years later the world's nations agreed to add the Kyoto Protocol to the treaty, with its first, modest reductions in emissions by industrialized countries.

The U.S. Senate repudiated the pact, however, and the process entered an eight-year slowdown as a second Bush administration, of President George W., resisted global pressure for deeper concerted action.

The U.S. opponents complained emissions reductions would crimp the American economy, and objected to Kyoto's excusing of China, India and other poorer countries from having to reduce their energy use.

As the diplomacy decelerated, climate change accelerated.

Average global temperatures had risen 0.74 degrees C (1 degree F) over the past century. Sea-level rise, from heat expansion and melting land ice, increased in the late 20th century.

Just last week, scientists reported that one of recorded history's greatest losses of Arctic sea ice to summer melt occurred this year, surpassed only by 2007 and 2008. Scientific forecasts are growing ever more bleak.

While waiting for change in Washington, diplomats in 2007 set a two-year timetable for replacing the Kyoto pact, which expires in 2012, aiming at a comprehensive deal at the annual U.N. climate conference this December in Copenhagen, Denmark. The election of Obama, who pledged U.S. action, put new life in the process. But time was working against success.

The House of Representatives did pass the first U.S. legislation to cap carbon emissions. The Senate, however, embroiled in the U.S. health care debate, delayed addressing the issue. Without U.S. domestic action, the rest of the world isn't likely to commit to an overall, detailed post-Kyoto accord.

"The negotiations are going far too slow. We are close to deadlock," Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt of Sweden, which currently heads the European Union, acknowledged in the opening public session of Tuesday's summit. "As leaders we have a job to do. Our job is to break the deadlock."

But, as France's President Nicolas Sarkozy pointed out, "time is not our ally here." Time, in fact, was even in short supply on Tuesday, as some 100 national leaders and other envoys had a theoretical five minutes each to present their views in closed U.N. meetings.

It appeared increasingly that Copenhagen, at best, may produce a framework for further talks, while pieces fall into place in Washington and elsewhere, and Kyoto's formulas are perhaps extended.

Such a Copenhagen plan might set an aggregate goal for emissions reductions by richer countries, with 2020 and 2050 targets, and envision "policy-based" commitments by China and other poorer countries — for example, not reducing emissions directly, but reducing "carbon intensity," or fossil-fuel use per unit of economic growth.

Depending on how well the world is rebounding from the current economic slump, richer nations might also declare their readiness to boost financial support for developing countries to switch to clean energy technologies, and to adapt to climate change's impact on their crops, their shorelines and their economic lives.

At Tuesday's summit and earlier, China, India, Brazil and other developing nations indicated they're prepared to take such steps. The Europeans and Japan's new government, meanwhile, say they'll deepen their emissions cuts. And the Americans, 17 years after Rio, may be prepared to adopt their own reductions.

Concluding the unusual session Tuesday, a determinedly upbeat Secretary-General Ban said, "This summit has put fresh wind in our sails."

But December looks too close, and the issues look too complex, for it to happen in Copenhagen in 2009.

___

EDITOR'S NOTE — Charles J. Hanley has reported on climate change since the Kyoto conference of 1997.

Read more!

Sustainable Investment Seen Gaining Momentum

Natsuko Waki, PlanetArk 23 Sep 09;

LONDON - Investing in socially and environmentally responsible companies or sectors which tackle climate change or resource scarcity is gaining momentum as it offers a unique diversifying opportunity, fund manager RCM says. Sustainability investment is an approach designed to pick companies which manage environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks.

It also involves firms which focus on environmental and social trends, such as demographics or climate change -- a growing investment theme for government-owned institutions such as Norway's $400-billion-plus sovereign wealth fund.

Illustrating the level of interest in sustainability investment, nearly 600 asset owners, investment managers and professional service partners representing a total of $18 billion have signed up to the Principles for Responsible Investment, a United Nations-led framework.

Contrary to criticism that sustainable investment restricts the investment universe and underperforms a broader market, RCM -- an equity managing arm of Allianz Global Investors -- says that historical performance data showed no relative loss and in certain times offer extra returns.

"It's not about XYZ companies are bad but it's more about what may be good. If a company meets certain criteria, potentially that may bring better performance. Companies acting in a responsible way will be perhaps more sustainable in the future," Barbara Evans, sustainability research analyst at RCM, told a briefing on Tuesday.

The Dow Jones Sustainability World Index has risen 29 percent since the start of the year, compared with 28 percent in the benchmark MSCI world equity index.

Dutch firm Philips Electronics, which makes energy-efficient light bulbs and medical equipment, is one of the firms RCM's sustainability investment fund likes as it satisfies demographic and climate change themes.

SOVEREIGN INTEREST

RCM's 1.5 billion pound sustainability investment fund has France's ERAFP civil servants pension scheme among its clients.

The driver of sustainable investment among government-owned institutions is Norway's sovereign wealth fund which follows ethical guidelines set by the government and is seeking to play a "green activist" role.

They rule out holding investments in certain firms, for instance those that produce nuclear arms or cluster munitions, or that damage the environment or abuse human rights.

The world's second largest wealth fund said in July it had expelled Israel's Elbit Systems for supplying surveillance equipment for the West Bank separation barrier.

"It certainly makes people think. Norway is absolutely radical. They think (sustainable investment) will be outperforming... in the 50-year time frame," Evans said.

One of the priorities for Norway's fund is dealing with water management given the limited availability of water resources, a key input or production factor for companies in the fund's current portfolio.

(Editing by Stephen Nisbet)

Read more!

Best of our wild blogs: 22 Sep 09

29 Sep (Tue): Prof Peter Ng on "Climate Change and Marine Biodiversity - Lessons from a Small Red Dot" from wild shores of singapore

Our mystery conch identified!
from wild shores of singapore and Psychedelic Nature

Another encounter with Banded Leaf Monkeys
from Urban Forest

They are cute, but they need a better home too
from Psychedelic Nature

Kusu Island - Gymnodoris on a desolate beach
from Singapore Nature and wild shores of singapore

St John's Island Guided walk
from wonderful creation

Yellow-vented Bulbuls’ rain dance
from Bird Ecology Study Group

Gold-whiskered Barbet feeding on morinda
from Bird Ecology Study Group

Going Cuckoo Over A Cuckoo
from Life's Indulgences

Orange-bellied Flowerpecker and pulasan
from Bird Ecology Study Group

Read more!

Fresh calls for release of whale shark in Dubai hotel aquarium

Vesela Todorova, The National 20 Sep 09;

DUBAI: A juvenile whale shark caught in August last year has now spent more than 12 months in a Dubai hotel aquarium, triggering renewed calls for its release.

The world’s largest living species of fish, whale sharks are listed as vulnerable to extinction in the Red List of Threatened Species, a publication of the International Union for Conservation of Nature. It is a free-roaming ocean fish, travelling vast distances each year and known to dive to depths as great as 1,000 metres.

The animal was caught on August 27 last year in what the Atlantis hotel and resort described as a rescue – a move that was heavily criticised by conservationists asking how an aquarium could accommodate the whale shark’s needs. It was even given a name – Sammy.

However, the controversy died down after a few months and the whale shark has continued living at the Ambassador Lagoon, an 11-million-litre fish tank at the resort where it pulls in large crowds of tourists and UAE residents alike.

Nevertheless, wildlife experts still insist that the animal, which measured four metres at the time of the capture, would be better off at sea where she could enjoy a longer life and reproduce.

Many argue that a day close to the first anniversary of her capture would be an ideal time for release.

“Whale sharks do not survive in captivity; even in the very best aquaria they die, as it is difficult to replicate the diet and environment that a pelagic [open sea] filter-feeding shark requires,” said Dr David Rowat, the chairman of the Marine Conservation Society in the Seychelles.

A study of 16 whale sharks kept at the Okinawa Churaumi Aquarium in Japan, one of the few facilities where the rare fish are exhibited, showed their average life expectancy was less than two years.

In the wild, whale sharks are known to grow to up to 20 metres during a life that can last 60 years.

“If the animal is healthy it should have no problem surviving in the wild,” said Dr Rowat, who has spent years studying whale sharks.

“I have recently put satellite tags on two sharks that were captured off China and kept in captivity in sea-pens for a year; both are apparently doing fine some 10 weeks after release, according to the satellite transmissions.”

The Dubai whale shark’s future, however, remains obscure. Despite repeated attempts by The National over the past seven days, officials at Atlantis, The Palm, could not be reached for comment. While it remains uncertain that the captive will ever be freed, Dr Rowat said there were factors that favoured it happening around the anniversary of its capture.

“The release should be during the season when whale sharks frequent the area. As this is a year later, it is likely that this is the season when the sharks are found here and so is the optimal time.”

Another group that has been campaigning for the shark’s release is the Emirates Wildlife Society in association with the World Wide Fund for Nature (EWS-WWF), which sent an open letter to Atlantis decision-makers in February this year.

“The Atlantis confirmed during an interview with the Business Breakfast on September 24 2008 that they would release the whale shark in due course, but has not yet acted upon its promise,” said Lisa Perry, the programme manager at EWS-WWF.

“We will keep urging the Atlantis to reconsider their rationale for keeping the whale shark and release it back into its natural habitat as soon as possible. Keeping the whale shark at a hotel, which is not an educational or scientific institution, does not increase the potential for conservation of the wild population.”

Jonathan Ali Khan, a filmmaker who is preparing a documentary on Arabia’s shark populations, listed additional reasons in favour of release.

“Releasing her from a tank such as Atlantis is nothing but a good thing. Animals such as whale sharks and sharks in general are genetically imprinted with amazing instincts that have enabled them to survive for over 400 million years,” said Mr Khan, who is the founder and director of the Dubai-based Ocean World Production. “It wouldn’t take long for her to revert to her normal patterns and behaviour.

“She may need a deworming treatment before being released as it is not sure what she might have picked up while in the tank. Certainly her tail fin has deteriorated since [it was] injured during her capture. The biggest problem she is facing now is from the overcrowding in the tank. The number of fish that have sustained collision or bite injuries is noticeable.”

Apart from welfare considerations, the animal should be released as it would eventually be capable of reproducing, added Mr Khan, who is currently organising the UAE’s first whale shark conference and workshop in December.

“Each pregnancy can result in her pupping over 300 babies at a time. We don’t know how many times females bear young, but we do know that each time she does makes the whole species a little more secure from becoming extinct.

“There are far too many unanswered questions to risk the fate of a young female endangered animal by keeping her in captivity without any specific scientific basis of research. Questions such as where are the breeding grounds? Are our waters a principle nursery for the entire Indian Ocean population?

“For that purpose alone, Sammy needs to be released immediately,” said Mr Khan.

“And to make it all worthwhile, Atlantis should release her with a satellite tag and fund the basis of a research project”.

While the hotel management would not comment, many visitors to the aquarium seemed unaware of the whale shark’s plight.

“This aquarium is really nice and it has a lot of variety. I like it more than the one at the Dubai Mall. I like the sting rays and the sharks,” said Kirti, 25, a resident of Ajman.

But Rasourl, a businessman from Iran, said: “This aquarium is too small for the whale shark.”

Read more!