Toyota's Jim Lentz Predicts Peak Oil by 2020

Jim is president of Toyota USA. Jim says that their plans are based on that assumption. The interviewer asked if it was his personal opinion or it is Toyota's. Jim confirmed that it is Toyota's view. This is indeed news. Presumably GM and other car makers also take this view.

Toyota's Jim Lentz Predicts Peak Oil by 2020

Cap-n-trade battle heats up

New groups join climate lobby fray

An analysis of the latest federal records by the Center for Public Integrity shows that the overall number of businesses and groups lobbying on climate legislation has essentially held steady at about 1,160, thanks in part to a variety of interests that have left the fray. But a close look at the 140 or so interests that jumped into the debate for the first time in the third quarter shows a marked trend: Companies and organizations that feel they’ve been overlooked are fighting for a place at the table.
...
At issue are the free “allowances,” or carbon dioxide pollution permits, that the House-passed climate bill would give to manufacturers that use a lot of energy to produce internationally traded products such as steel and aluminum. Those energy-intensive industries fighting international competitors successfully lobbied for protection from loss of jobs to China and other cheap-energy countries if the United States unilaterally enacted a carbon reduction program that would make coal burning more expensive here. But the House bill’s approach means manufacturers that don’t use as much energy — like Campbell — would have to bid at auction for carbon emission allowances from the federal government.

Johnston argues that Campbell should either be exempt from that process or be provided some freebies, too. “I think it’s clear from our view that we're not being treated as fairly as carbon-intensive industries,” Johnston said. “There needs to be some recognition of the role the food industry plays in our economy.”

The report is based on an investigation by Center for Public Integrity.
They have a number of videos on youtube like this one on carbon markets lobby.

Business leaders unhappy with COP15 deal

They can do more to persuade their colleagues. It is a bit disingenuous. After all, the governments represent the commercial interests in a large part.

Business chiefs hit at climate agreement

Global energy businesses are disappointed and confused by the climate deal agreed in Copenhagen, saying it does not provide enough certainty to justify the huge investments needed to cut carbon emissions.

The deal – agreed by major economies including the US and China on Friday evening but not formally adopted by the United Nations – makes a commitment to limit the rise in global temperatures but does not specify caps on emissions to achieve that objective.

Chief executives and business groups in Europe were particularly critical of the deal. Peter Voser – the chief executive of oil and gas group Royal Dutch Shell, which has supported limiting emissions – said “much more” was needed.

The role of business will be crucial in fighting the threat of global warming, with the private sector expected to provide about 90 per cent of the $500bn a year investment needed.

Was Copenhagen's weak deal predictable?

Bruce Bueno de Mesquita predicted and the outcome is reasonably consistent with his prediction. He has a game-theoretic model built on the assumption that everybody wants to further their interests, and the outcome depends on three factors for each player - announced goal/preference for particular outcomes, power to influence the outcome, and salience/importance of the outcome. He has a model that combines them, and simulates the behavior across multiple decisions. He is still positive. His basic point is that once the big emerging countries grow richer, they will join the rest of the world. They will take the next major steps, he suggests, when the technology is ready - scalable, cheap, low carbon energy.

Recipe for Failure
Why Copenhagen will be a bust, and other prophecies from the foreign-policy world's leading predictioneer.

The trouble is, deals like Bali and Kyoto include just about every country in the world. To get everyone to agree to something potentially costly, the something they actually agree to must be neither very demanding nor very costly. If it is, many will refuse to join because for them the costs are greater than the benefits, or else they will join while free-riding on the costs paid by the few who are willing to bear them.

To get people to sign a universal agreement and not cheat, the deal must not ask them to change their behavior much from whatever they are already doing. It is a race to the bottom, to the lowest common denominator. More demanding agreements weed out prospective members or encourage lies. Kyoto's demands weeded out the United States, ensuring that it could not succeed. Maybe that is what those who signed on -- or at least some of them -- were hoping for. They can look good and then not deliver, because after all it wouldn't be fair for them to cut back when the biggest polluter, the United States, does not. Sacrificing self-interest for the greater good just doesn't happen very often. Governments don't throw themselves on hand grenades.

There is a natural division between the rich countries whose prosperity does not depend so much on toasting our planet and the poor countries that really have no affordable alternative (yet) to fossil fuels and carbon emissions. They have an incentive to do whatever it takes to improve the quality of life of the people they govern. The rich have an incentive to encourage the fast-growing poor to be greener, but the fast-growing poor have little incentive to listen as long as they are still poor. As the Indian government is fond of noting, sure, India is growing rapidly in income and in carbon dioxide emissions, but it is still a pale shadow of what rich countries like the United States have emitted over the centuries when going from poor to rich.

But when the fast-growing poor surpass the rich, the tables will turn. China, India, Brazil, and Mexico will then cry out for environmental change because that will protect their future advantaged position, while the relatively poor of one or two or three hundred years from now will resist policies that hinder their efforts to climb to the top. The rich will even fight wars to keep the rising poor from getting so rich that they threaten the old political order. (The rising poor will win those wars, by the way.)

Business models for low carbon economy

The talk about appropriate business models has started - all around decoupling the GDP/growth from resource consumption.

New Business Models for a Low Carbon Economy

1. The 'clean energy' model: Substitution of existing energy sources 
2. The ecological industry model: Optimize existing processes for lower carbon 
3. The 3rd orientation: Offer service instead of product, e.g., transport service instead of car sale
   
4. Futuristic service: Sell virtualized equivalents that achieve the same function with less resource
   

UPS Carbon neutral shipping

I expect this model to become more common - a carbon-neutral version of every product/service.

UPS carbon neutral shipping

For as little as five cents more per package, gain more control over your climate impact with UPS carbon neutral shipping, a UPS shipping service that offsets the carbon dioxide (CO2) associated with the packages it transports.

... UPS carbon neutral shipping empowers you to take action to offset the impact of carbon emissions that results from your shipping.

Additionally, UPS will match the carbon offsets purchased for the first $1 million through 2010. It's a deeper commitment toward managing our climate impact.

...you can use verified carbon neutral shipping to offset the climate impact.

Want to do more? Check out other ways that UPS helps individuals and businesses become greener, from reducing paper and greening up packaging to making supply chains more efficient.

...you can use verified carbon neutral shipping to offset the climate impact.

Want to do more? Check out other ways that UPS helps individuals and businesses become greener, from reducing paper and greening up packaging to making supply chains more efficient.

...We purchase high quality Gold Standard, Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS), and Climate Action Reserve (CAR) verified offsets, as well as European Union Allowances and Certified Emission Reduction offsets.

When you choose UPS, you are selecting a company that has already made great strides to reduce its own impact. Check out our comprehensive commitment to sustainability.

AP review of CRU emails: Science not faked, but not pretty

It seems that scientific process got a little messy because of the politics and money associated with the results of science. This is not dissimilar to experiences in science associated with cloning and stem cells, breast cancer, nutrition, psychology, genetic engineering etc.

Scientists should be formally trained to handle politics and social dynamics.

AP IMPACT: Science not faked, but not pretty

E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don't support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.

The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the world they were certain about climate change. However, the exchanges don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.

The scientists were keenly aware of how their work would be viewed and used, and, just like politicians, went to great pains to shape their message. Sometimes, they sounded more like schoolyard taunts than scientific tenets.

The scientists were so convinced by their own science and so driven by a cause "that unless you're with them, you're against them," said Mark Frankel, director of scientific freedom, responsibility and law at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He also reviewed the communications.

Frankel saw "no evidence of falsification or fabrication of data, although concerns could be raised about some instances of very 'generous interpretations.'"
...
"This is normal science politics, but on the extreme end, though still within bounds," said Dan Sarewitz, a science policy professor at Arizona State University. "We talk about science as this pure ideal and the scientific method as if it is something out of a cookbook, but research is a social and human activity full of all the failings of society and humans, and this reality gets totally magnified by the high political stakes here."

Dow jones index for climate change

Ah! Another potential milestone in the journey. We now have a proposal/system for a single digit summary of state of the earth's environment. There would naturally be some differences between this and traditional Dow Jones Index for stock market. We may be care about first and second derivatives more than the actual number. Unlike Dow Jones Index in which "control loop" (Fed/Treasury response) is real time, the "control loop" for the climate change index will be long drawn out, may be even years. The new "control loop" may be in terms of new regulations, carbon pricing etc. Changes in the index may be help set medium and long term investment direction more than short term.

Its value may be primarily psychological in terms of making the climate concerns a norm and a dinner table conversation.

Dow Jones Index for Climate Change

Some people still question whether Earth's climate is changing as rapidly and profoundly as the majority of climate scientists suggest. But, what if the complexity of the Earth's climate were distilled down to one number, in the same way that the Dow Jones Index condenses volumes of data into a single figure? What, then, would be the general trend?

The IGBP Climate-Change Index is a first attempt to do just that. It brings together key indicators of global change: carbon dioxide, temperature, sea level and sea ice. The index gives an annual snapshot of how the planet's complex systems -- the ice, the oceans, the land surface and the atmosphere -- are responding to the changing climate. The index rises steadily from 1980 -- the earliest date the index has been calculated. The change is unequivocal, it is global, and, significantly, it is in one direction. The reason for concern becomes clear: in just 30 years we are witnessing major planetary-scale changes.
...
The idea came about when several IGBP scientists including Steven Running, IGBP executive director Sybil Seitzinger, former IGBP director Kevin Noone, Kathy Hibbard, Mark Stafford Smith, Peter Cox, Suzi Kerr and Pierre Friedlingsten realised that the way various global datasets are reported throughout the year may be confusing. It is uncoordinated, there are a variety of unfamiliar units, and natural variability sometimes masks a trend.

Professor Seitzinger says, "We felt people outside global-change research are not clear about the scale of the changes scientists are witnessing. The index is a response to these concerns."

Inside COP15 video

From WWF

Tonight's live show from Copenhagen with guests Klaus Bondam, Mayor of the Copenhagen Environmental Administration, Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, Environmental Scientist and Dawa Stephen Sherpa, Mountaineer.

Cop15 progress

Have been busy last few days. catching up.

There is a detailed report on the progress here from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin:


Fifteenth Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and Fifth Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (COP 15 and COP/MOP 5)

IN THE CORRIDORS
Much of the talk in the corridors on Thursday afternoon and evening was focused on the suspension of both the COP and COP/MOP, pending consultations on whether to establish contact groups to consider proposed new protocols under the Convention and proposed amendments to the Kyoto Protocol. As on Wednesday when the COP was suspended, Tuvalu led a group of African, Latin American and AOSIS parties in urging a formal contact group to consider the proposed Protocol amendments, and resisted proposals to move the procedural question to an informal setting with a review of progress in plenary on Saturday.

Many noted that these disputes were closely related to the question concerning the legal form of the outcome: “We have still not resolved the critical question of the legal outcome of these negotiations,” noted one old hand in the process. “Developing countries want to preserve and strengthen Kyoto, while most Annex I countries are seeking a comprehensive legal framework that also engages the US and developing countries in mitigation efforts.” Differences were also detected among developing countries as to whether the outcome from the AWG-LCA should be legally-binding.

The wisdom of suspending work under COP and COP/MOP and its implications were also being discussed around the Bella Center. Some viewed the request to also suspend the COP/MOP as a good strategic move, while others feared it could delay work on other issues. “It hasn’t slowed the informals under the AWG-LCA,” said one NGO who was supportive of AOSIS’ stand. “I’m just not sure how they’ll break the deadlock,” she added.

Meanwhile, delegates were also reacting to the leak of a proposed outcome document – the “Copenhagen Accord” – by French newspaper Le Monde. The text, which was said to have been developed by China, India, Brazil, and South Africa, had apparently been distributed among G-77/China parties earlier in the week before the leak on Thursday. While the initial response to the text was cautious, some developed country delegates seemed positively surprised by what they characterized as a relatively “realistic” text. For their part, some of those connected with the text were playing down its significance at this stage, with delegates noting that it has “limited status” and is “just a working draft.”

People were also commenting on the increasing number of people at the Bella Center on Thursday, as more ministers arrived and delegations continued to grow. Lines to get into the building were noticeably longer than in previous days, and there was talk of limits on observer numbers next week. “The place is already packed and there’ll be thousands more next week,” noted one insider. Rumors were also circulating about large-scale protests planned for Saturday.

EPA: Greenhouse Gases Threaten Public Health and the Environment

Breaking news...


EPA: Greenhouse Gases Threaten Public Health and the Environment / Science overwhelmingly shows greenhouse gas concentrations at unprecedented levels due to human activity

After a thorough examination of the scientific evidence and careful consideration of public comments, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today that greenhouse gases (GHGs) threaten the public health and welfare of the American people. EPA also finds that GHG emissions from on-road vehicles contribute to that threat.

The actual finding
Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under the Clean Air Act

On December 7, 2009, the Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act:

* Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed greenhouse gases--carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)--in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations.
* Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution which threatens public health and welfare.

These findings do not themselves impose any requirements on industry or other entities. However, this action is a prerequisite to finalizing the EPA’s proposed greenhouse gas emission standards for light-duty vehicles, which were jointly proposed by EPA and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Safety Administration on September 15, 2009.

Cop15 - Day 0 Photos

Coordinated frontpage climate stories across the world

Guardian shows leadership! This is amazing effort that will put climate change in front of millions of people - literally on the front page. They summarize their thinking in a related article (quoted below). Hat tip.

More than 50 papers join in front-page leader article on climate change

The Guardian has teamed up with more 50 papers worldwide to run the same front-page leader article calling for action at the climate summit in Copenhagen, which begins tomorrow.

This unprecedented project is the result of months of negotiations between the papers to agree on a final text, in a process that mirrors the kind of diplomatic wrangling among the world's governments that is likely to precede any potential deal on climate change.

Fifty-six papers in 45 countries published in 20 different languages have joined the initiative, and will feature the leader in some form on their front pages.

How the climate change global editorial project came about

Climate change poses a particular challenge to journalists. It is almost incontrovertibly the biggest story we cover; perhaps the only one with genuinely existential implications. Otherwise measured scientists discuss it in apocalyptic terms. Campaigners and politicians talk about a crossroads in human history. But how do we reflect the scale and urgency of the issue in the normal register of journalism?

How can it make sense to find a story about the disappearance of arctic sea ice on page 17 of a newspaper, sandwiched between an unexceptional murder trial and the latest bickering over MPs expenses? Or even on the front page, when the same slot the previous day was occupied by a story about plans to trim civil service jobs?

At the Guardian, we have tried to answer the challenge by covering the story in ever greater depth, devoting more space and resources – six specialist reporters – as well as a dedicated environment website. But this approach has its dangers too: bombarded with a seemingly endless stream of dire predictions and diplomatic setbacks, which of us has not been tempted to climb back into bed and pull up the duvet over our heads? So intense has been the blizzard of climate change coverage in the months leading up to the Copenhagen summit that at times even the most shocking stories have barely cut through the white noise.

Hence today's Guardian-led initiative in which 56 major newspapers in 45 countries speak with a single voice (albeit in 20 different languages) through a shared editorial. As Guardian editor-in-chief Alan Rusbridger put it: "Newspapers have never done anything like this before - but they have never had to cover a story like this before."

Green tinge at the LA Autoshow (photos)

I went to the LA Autoshow yesterday with the aim of documenting the progress on the electrification of transport. I spoke to a few people as well. Some notes:

1. Fuel efficiency was prominent but the emphasis is on the aesthetics, comfort etc.
2. Every major manufacturer had a hybrid and/or electric on display.
3. Atleast one automaker (Hyundai) thought that talking about Carbon offsets will attract customers. (even though their vehicles themselves were not as green as I expected. They had no PHEV on display that I remember).
4. The Mitsubishi vehicle is designed to act as a generator to feed back energy to home other appliances. Their staff didnt know whether they had done surveys before adding that feature.
5. There were a couple of Natural gas vehicles but they were clearly deemphasized.

I test drove Ford Fusion Hybrid Electric vehicle. It felt as comfortable as other vehicles. It was quiet and smooth. I drove 1.5 miles at 36 mi/gallon efficiency, worked completely from the battery with no consumption of fuel. There was nice animation on the dashboard where you see green leaves increasing as the drive becomes more efficient. One of the staff described it as a "game" where you nudge the user driving behavior in such a way that it reduces CO2.

Obama ups the ante

Just for context, O's Nobel Prize Lecture is on Dec 10.

BREAKING: In last-minute stunner, Obama changes plans to attend final day of Copenhagen talks

A couple of hours ago, the Obama administration announced a startling shift in plans: rather than stop by the Copenhagen climate talks on Dec. 9, Obama will be going on the 18th, the final day of the meeting—a notable increase in commitment (and political exposure) from the administration.

The first week of every COP meeting consists of posturing, speeches, protests, and NGO reports. Everything of significance to the treaty is announced late in the meetings, often on the last day, after a flurry of last-minute negotiations. Coming to Copenhagen at the climax of the talks, specifically to push negotiations “over the top,” as the White House statement says, is a risky move for Obama. He’s got skin in the game now; he’ll look foolish if he rides in at the last minute and fails to broker an agreement.

If he’s willing to stick his neck out like this, Obama must be pretty confident that he can get a deal. There have been signs of momentum for weeks now. The much-discussed deal with China was just one in a raft of commitments from the developing countries, including India and Brazil. Movement from the developing world has undercut one of U.S. conservatives’ principal arguments for inaction. Over 65 world leaders have pledged to attend.

Meanwhile, the U.S. EPA is expected to finalize its endangerment ruling on CO2 on Monday—the kickoff day of Copenhagen—making regulations on CO2 legally mandated and all but inevitable. That’s likely to help motivate the Senate, where Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) are busy working out a compromise bill that can get 60 votes. Kerry released the Foreign Relations Committee’s contribution to the bill today, which would authorize programs, including adaptation funding and technology transfer, that the U.S. is expected to offer as part of a deal in Copenhagen.

Cop15 Links

Official
Cop15.dk
Calendar
Program/Schedule
Side events
Exhibits
Live/On-demand Webcast
Cop15 Climate Thinkers Blog

News (Cop15 Coverage)
Gaurdian (newspaper)
BBC (TV)
Cop15 Post
Google News
AP

Business
Business Week
earth2tech
Vattenfall

Video:
Youtube: Climate Conference
Cop15 Youtube Channel
Youtube search
Metacafe
WWF Video Blog

Facebook:
UNFCCC
Facebook Channel

Blog:
Students Reporting Live
Hugh Barling's Analysis

Twitter
UN Climate Talks
cop15 News
#cop15
#climate
#copenhagen

Flickr
Cop15

Activism
Arts for Cop15
Seal the Deal!

World's highest cabinet meeting

Drama has its place in politics. First we had the cabinet meeting under water, now we have one on a mountain.

Cabinet meeting at Mt. Everest

On Friday, to highlight the danger that global warming poses to glaciers, Nepal's government held a Cabinet meeting at Mt. Everest - a stunt the government billed as the world's highest Cabinet meeting. The ministers posed for pictures, signed a commitment to tighten environmental regulations and expand the nation's protected areas, and then quickly flew away.

"The Everest declaration was a message to the world to minimize the negative impact of climate change on Mount Everest and other Himalayan mountains," Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal later said.

The Prime Minister, his two deputy prime ministers and the 20 Cabinet ministers were examined by doctors before boarding helicopters to Kalapathar, a flat area at an altitude of 17,192 feet (5,250 meters) next to Everest base camp, the jumping point for climbers seeking to scale the peak.

Family planning offsets?

Sir Attenborough may be fine gentlemen but he should to be sensitive to how it appears from the other side of the pond.

I am not sure the rest of the world needs or desires another form or round of 19th and 20th century liberal paternalism and possibly even imperialism, to put it mildly. People do not forget history.

I do believe that family planning is necessary in developing countries for their own reasons and not CO2. And they are working on it. Economist recently had an article on rapidly falling fertility rates in developing countries. It will fall more rapidly as prosperity increases.

As Goerge Monbiot suggests towards the end, the problem is not the number but the level of consumption. With a GDP of 1100$ per-capita GDP, a Kenyan kid is not going to consume a lot of energy or produce CO2. What he needs is education, governance, infrastructure and ofcourse green technology. Kenyan/indian/chinese mothers and fathers are rational enough to make decisions about children. They definitely need partners, but not carbon offsets based on their lives.

I dont expect this idea to go anywhere but it can increase distrust and create hurdles in the negotiations.

Rich nations to offset emissions with birth control

Radical plan to cut CO2 argues that paying for family planning is developing world is the best bet

Consumers in the developed world are to be offered a radical method of offsetting their carbon emissions in an ambitious attempt to tackle climate change - by paying for contraception measures in poorer countries to curb the rapidly growing global population.

The scheme - set up by an organisation backed by Sir David Attenborough, the former diplomat Sir Crispin Tickell and green figureheads such as Jonathon Porritt and James Lovelock - argues that family planning is the most effective way to reduce the likelihood of catastrophic global warming.

Optimum Population Trust (Opt) stresses that birth control will be provided only to those who have no access to it, and only unwanted births would be avoided. Opt estimates that 80 million pregnancies each year are unwanted.

The cost-benefit analysis commissioned by the trust claims that family planning is the cheapest way to reduce carbon emissions. Every £4 spent on contraception, it says, saves one tonne of CO2 being added to global warming, but a similar reduction in emissions would require an £8 investment in tree planting, £15 in wind power, £31 in solar energy and £56 in hybrid vehicle technology.

Calculations based on the trust's figures show the 10 tonnes emitted by a return flight from London to Sydney would be offset by enabling the avoidance of one unwanted birth in a country such as Kenya. Such action not only cuts emissions but reduces the number of people who will fall victim to climate change, it says.

"The scheme, called PopOffsets, understands the connection [between population increase and climate change]," says the trust director Roger Martin. "It offers a practical and sensible response. For the first time ever individuals, companies and organisations will have the opportunity to offset their carbon voluntarily by supporting projects to provide family planning services where there is currently unmet demand."

India commits to 24% reduction in Carbon intensity

India is talking about intensities and not absolute targets compared to BAU. I also hope by carbon sinks, they dont mean the untested carbon sequestration approach. I hope they mean forestry, algae, and such. There was a recent conference in Delhi on second generation bio-fuels and expo.

India to reduce carbon intensity by 24% by 2020
Environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, expected to formally announce the targets in parliament tomorrow

India could reduce its carbon intensity by 24% by 2020 compared with 2005 levels, government sources revealed today.

The leaked figures, which emerged ahead of the Copenhagen climate change summit next Monday, follow Beijing's announcement last week that China would move to cut carbon intensity - the amount of carbon dioxide emitted per unit of economic growth - by more than 40% by 2020.

The EU has already pledged a 20% cut in carbon emissions by 2020 - set to rise to 30% if other developed countries match the European target - while the US last month proposed cuts of 17%.

Sources told the Indian media that the reduction in carbon intensity could go up to 37% by 2030, compared to 2005. India's environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, is expected to make a statement in parliament tomorrow to announce the targets, Reuters reported.

To reduce emissions, India's national action plan on climate change sees increasing solar power generation, improving energy efficiency and enhancing carbon sinks as a route to "greener growth". In August, India laid out an ambitious plan to generate 20GW of solar power by 2020, which could equate to 75% of the world's solar energy.

Aviation Industry at COP15

Posted on twitter by enviroaero

This is similar to the shipping industry's response. I think there is merit to the idea that industries that cross national boundaries should be managed by a neutral third party, possibly a new UN organization or subgroup that works with the Aviation industry.

The global aviation sector:
united behind common goals and a global solution
A global approach for a global industry tackling a global problem

Recommendations for including aviation in a global climate change framework
The global aviation sector believes:
1. Aircraft CO2 emissions should be addressed in any post-Kyoto global framework, through the International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO).
2. Emissions from aviation should be addressed through ICAO adopting a global sectoral approach that does not
distort competition amongst airlines, treats aviation as one indivisible sector rather than by country and takes a
global approach to emissions reduction.
3. Aviation emissions should only be accounted for (and paid for) once.
4. The aviation industry can achieve carbon-neutral growth from 2020 and work towards reducing aviation net
carbon emissions by 50% in 2050, compared to 2005 levels. These ambitious targets require assistance from
governments through:
• the necessary investments to modernise air traffic management
• investment in aerodynamic and operations technology research and development through academic and
industry partners
• investment in the development and commercialisation of sustainable, second-generation biofuels for use in
aviation

Munich Re: Ambitious climate targets needed

This is interesting coming from the insurance industry who will see payouts if bad things happen. The fact that payouts will increase does not necessarily mean that insurance industry cares. It could easily mean brisk business. We need to dig a little deeper to understand their economics and response. But at the surface, it makes the right noises.

Ambitious climate protection targets are needed –
or the cost of climate change will keep rising

Munich Re’s NatCatSERVICE database shows that, globally, the average number of major weather-related catastrophes such as windstorms, floods or droughts is now three times as high as at the beginning of the 1980s. Losses have risen even more, with average increases of 11% per year since 1980. To what extent the increased losses are due to climate change is not yet clear. Preliminary analyses suggest that it accounts for a low single-digit percentage of
annual overall losses.

Although this increase appears low, the amounts involved are enormous. This is illustrated by total natural catastrophes losses in the period 1980–2008. According to studies by Munich Re, overall losses due to weather-related events came to around US$ 1.6tn in original values, with insured losses amounting to approximately US$ 465bn. In the period from 2000–2008 alone, overall losses totalled over US$ 750bn, whilst insured losses came to around US$ 280bn.

“Even conservative estimates show that we are talking here about climate change costs already running into billions per year. The insurance industry is able to adapt but, in the end, each individual has to bear the cost”, said Peter Höppe, Head of Munich Re’s Geo Risks Research. “It is therefore very important and makes economic sense to lay cornerstones for a new agreement, with ambitious targets, in Copenhagen. After all, the climate reacts slowly. Even now, climate change can no longer be halted, it can only be attenuated. And it is time this was done.”

According to Höppe, in Copenhagen a binding commitment will have to be defined that limits global warming to 2°C above pre-industrial levels. This can be done only if global carbon emissions are cut to 50% of 1990 levels by 2050. Höppe: “That means the industrial countries will have to achieve 80%, and that globally there will have to be a real fall in emissions within the next few years.” Furthermore, to rapidly find a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, all the principal carbon emitters would have to accept binding reduction targets.

Children’s Climate Forum

Continuing with the theme of youth involvement. This is a very interesting effort from the Danish government and schools. They may be young but they are aware.

Children’s Climate Forum kicks off in Copenhagen

The forum is a collaboration between UNICEF, the City of Copenhagen and 22 Danish school classes acting as hosts for the visiting children.

Many of the child delegations represent ‘at risk’ countries, particularly vulnerable to climate change, such as Konduani Joe Banda from Zambia, a country struggling with droughts and heavy rain falls.

“The effects of climate change have been taking place gradually over the last five years in Zambia. If the sea levels rise in other countries, we see floods in Zambia, resulting in the spread of disease. Rain falls are also happening at the wrong time, and the country suffers under deforestation,” explains Mr. Banda.

After the forum, the children are to educate other children in their home countries on climate change issues.

And what is the message from the children to the adults at COP15, so far?

“Children are the grass roots of all nations, so if our opinion is taken into consideration it can affect the world at large. My message to the negotiators is less talk, more action. We want to see that the conference actually has an impact,” concludes Mr. Banda.

Carbon-free Kids

Pretty interesting initiative from a high school student, Ruthie Gopin. Their carbonfreekids.net website seems be down and facebook page sparse but they have a nice video of the founder summarizing her thoughts.

Ruthie Gopin, the Founder of Carbon-Free Kids

Book: Hope for a Heated Planet

I had an opportunity to listen to an old hand in environmental movement, Robert Musil, former Executive Director and CEO of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR), on changing alignments in the climate change battle. Please see the links below for the book and the talk.

He wrote to a book to document the grassroots efforts in the US such as

1. 10000+ students' lobbying efforts at congress
2. 1000s of church gatherings
3. Hundreds of cities going carbon neutral
4. 30+ governors committing to Kyoto targets
5. Companies being forced to leave US chamber

He talks about ground-level changes compared to Kyoto:

1. Change in attitudes that is bringing/forcing politicians on board
2. Splintered business community now vs. solid opposition
3. Buildup of public opinion first before a deal is struck vs. Al Gore's last minute parachuting to sign the deal without public backing
4. Military as a new bedfellow arguing the national security side of the issue
5. High quantity and quality of engagement from youth across the world

Overall he is cautiously optimistic. Listening to him gave me a perspective on how far things have come.

Hope for a Heated Planet: How Americans Are Fighting Global Warming and Building a Better Future (also from Rutgers University Press)

Rejecting cries of gloom and doom, Hope for a Heated Planet shows how the fight against global warming can be won by the grassroots efforts of individuals. Robert K. Musil, who led the Nobel Peace Prize–winning organization Physicians for Social Responsibility, explains that a growing new climate movement can produce unprecedented change—in the economy, public health, and home—while saving the planet.

Musil draws on personal experience and compelling data in this practical and rigorous analysis of the causes and cures for global warming. The book presents all the players in the most pressing challenge facing society today, from the massive fossil fuel lobby to the enlightened corporations that are joining the movement to “go green.” Musil thoroughly explains the tremendous potential of renewable energy sources—wind, solar, and biofuel—and the startling conclusions of experts who say society can do away entirely with fossil fuels. He tells readers about the engaged politicians, activists, religious groups, and students who are already working together against climate change.

But the future depends, Musil insists, on what changes ordinary citizens make. Through personal choices and political engagement, he shows how readers can cut carbon emissions and create green communities where they live. With practical and realistic solutions, Hope for a Heated Planet inspires readers to be accountable and enables them to usher in an age of sustainability for future generations.

Podcast: Our Role in Combating Climate Change - Talk at the World Affairs Council of Northern California

Members of civil society do not have a seat at the upcoming climate treaty negotiations in Copenhagen, yet the issue of climate change affects us all. Looking at the causes and potential cures for global warming, Robert Musil sees hope in the role of the individual. He argues that it is efforts of a growing grassroots movement of engaged citizens that will ultimately decide the course of the climate challenge. Through personal choices and political engagement, he explores how we can cut carbon emissions and produce unprecedented change across sectors. Musil was the Executive Director and CEO of Nobel Peace Prize–winning organization Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) and helped launch PSR’s environmental program in the early 1990s.

Links for Nov 28, 2009

Harper to face pressure on climate at Commonwealth meet. Yep, this is the same Canada the lectures the world about rights, whales and corruption. There is proposal to exclude Canada from the Commonwealth

Copenhagen conference: India, China plan joint exit. This is tragic. The mistrust is legitimate but they need the deal more than others.


'The World Wants a Real Deal' - Global Day of Action from TckTckTck campaign.

Turmoil in the Australian Parliament questions climate legislation. Novel.

Climate Thoughts

Thoughts on climate activism

Solve Climate has a fascinating article detailing the growing activism across the world. This is similar and related to activism on fair trade, wildlife protection, iraq, water privatization etc. There are several important things to notice here about this kind of activism:

1. It is global. The level of coordination in terms of scale is high. Roughly 9M people signed up to tcktcktck campaign.
2. It is relentless. Everyday and hour there is something or other somewhere.
3. It is strategic in terms of methods and timing.
4. It is in visible. It is in your face and you cant miss it. Roughly 20K people are gathering in Copenhagen, and there are four parallel events happening.
5. It understands money. While they work the politics, they are working on altering the economics as well.
6. It understands communication. They are bringing the best of strategic communication to the table which make it hard to fight.

The challenge to global political and economic decision makers has never been higher, I think. People have talked about information and knowledge societies for a long time now. We are beginning to what it looks like and can see power structures being altered in real time.

I think at the core is a desire in people for change, and people are using their knowledge and skills to shared problems outside the government and business context. They see too much of wars, greed, destruction of life and property, concentration of power, rights violations etc. They are participating whenever there is an opportunity. I myself worked on a campaign to get Coke to control its water usage and education in India. I was surprised by my own 'reach' in the system.

Climate Activism Soars Planetwide

At Ambrose's office on Wednesday, another group of protesters was drawing attention to the tar sands industry's contribution to global climate change, Kinder said. A youth-produced video out of Canada this week, The Tar Sands Blow, also urges Harper to stop the expansion of the tar sands, or oil sands, which it calls "the greatest mistake we've made."

In Australia, 200 climate protesters blocked the entrance of parliament, calling for deep cuts from the Rudd government before 130 of them were arrested by police and taken away.

In Indonesia, protesters from Greenpeace chained themselves to four cranes at a paper mill on the island of Sumatra. Their goal was to highlight the role that deforestation plays in global warming.

The Washington, D.C.-based 1Sky campaign is organizing what its calling a "creative action" on Dec. 4 in front of the White House with images reflecting the urgency of the climate challenge.

How Climate Change is Changing Lobbying

This blog is fundamentally about tracking events in the journey to low carbon economy. This is, I think, a significant event.

This article from October but is talking about how this act of leaving a large and influential lobby group like US Chamber of Commerce is unprecedented. Companies are reading the future differently, and some like Apple are betting on a carbon-scarce future. This is indicative of two things: first, it has become unacceptable to be seen as global warming denier, and second, the business coalition for status quo is weakening every day. There will probably be a tipping point down the line - watch for it.

Exit Through Lobby by James Surowiecki, Newyorker Magazine

Last Monday, Apple announced that it would be quitting the U.S. Chamber of Commerce because of the Chamber’s opposition to global-warming legislation. And that was just the latest in a series of defections: in the past few weeks, the public-utility companies Pacific Gas & Electric, PNM Resources, and Exelon all announced that they’d be leaving the Chamber, while Nike quit the organization’s board of directors. Historically speaking, this is a positive exodus.

...

Why the difference? Partly, it may be a matter of self-interest; Exelon, for instance, has big investments in renewable energy. But it may reflect a calculation that global warming is simply too big an issue to get wrong, both economically—few companies are really going to benefit from the melting of the polar ice caps—and from a public-relations point of view.

It concludes with a strong statement

global warming isn’t just bad for the planet; it’s bad for business.

Mercury News, among others, has reported on this:

"Apple is committed to protecting the environment and the communities in which we operate around the world," Catherine Novelli, Apple's vice president of worldwide government affairs, said in a letter to Thomas Donahue, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce president and CEO. "We strongly object to the Chamber's recent comments opposing the EPA's effort to limit greenhouse gases."

The move comes amid efforts by Apple to burnish its green image. The Cupertino-based company revealed its carbon footprint — or total greenhouse-gas emissions — for the first time last month, announcing on its Web site that 53 percent of the 10.2 million tons of annual carbon emissions it takes responsibility for comes from consumer use of its products.

The company has taken a broad view of greenhouse gas emissions, using a "life-cycle analysis" to calculate greenhouse gas emissions for each product, from production to transportation, consumer use and recycling.

"We believe it has resulted in the broadest possible measure of the carbon footprint for each of our new products," Apple said in response to a lengthy questionnaire by the Carbon Disclosure Project, which publishes emissions data for the world's largest corporations. "No other electronics company reports this information at the product level, but we think they should."

Shipping industry gets moving

I came across this interesting two-month old posting by David Hone, Shell on how shipping industry is reacting. Realizing that their emissions will be included in the discussion, they are moving to stave off tougher regulations/mandates. They are setting up a private trading system exclusively for shipping-related emissions. I am not a strong believer in industry self-governance but it is an interesting question as to what makes shipping-related carbon market different from others? Should each industry be allowed to setup its own system?


David Hone
Climate Change Advisor for Shell

Hello and welcome to my blog. There's lots said about why climate change now confronts us, and what it means, but the real issue is what to do about it. Plenty is said about that too, but there's not enough discussion on the practical aspects of implementation. Focusing on energy, that's what my blog sets out to achieve

Shipping makes a move

The announcement comes in the form of a discussion document released by the British, Australian, Belgian, Norwegian and Swedish ship owners associations. The document clearly outlines the issue and challenges, spells out the advantages of a trading approach and then outlines two different constructions for a possible system. At this stage the document doesn’t discuss the scale of reductions, but I don’t think that is important right at this moment. Rather, the industry is taking a major step into the policy arena with a view to charting its own course foward (pun intended, sorry).

Guide to Copenhagen Negotiations

I was looking for some explanatory kind of document that will give me insight into the negotiations at Copenhagen - the process, what makes it hard, what are the politics and personalities etc.

Comprehending Copenhagen: a guide to the international climate change negotiations from the Lowy Insitute, Australia.

From 7-18 December, the world’s attention will be focused on Copenhagen, where representatives of 192 nations will gather in an attempt to strike a new international agreement to respond to the urgent challenge of global climate change. In this Lowy Institute Analysis, Dr Greg Picker and Fergus Green aim to demystify the negotiations and deepen public understanding of this important process. From the expansion of international carbon markets to proposals for curbing tropical deforestation, the paper elucidates the key issues to be negotiated in Copenhagen and outlines the positions of the various countries and groups to each issue. The paper also explains the Conference’s processes, weighs the likely outcomes and considers its potential implications for Australia and beyond.

It might be easier to listen to the presentation by the authors instead.

Just as an example, this is the timetable of the negotiation:

Broadly, negotiations at Copenhagen will likely follow a pattern familiar from previous COPs. The keysteps in the process will likely be as follows:

• Several days before the negotiations formally commence there will be both formal meetings on specific issues between parties and closed meetings of negotiating blocs to fine-tune positions and respond to the latest intelligence.
  
• The first two days will contain a mix of ceremonial fanfare (formally launching the conference), administrative discussions (agreeing the agenda and organising the work schedule) and substantive grandstanding (introductory statements by countries in large plenary meetings with several thousand participants).
• Typically, by the second day, the subsidiary bodies will have their opening plenaries – with up to 1500 people present – involving a similar mix of ceremony, process and substance of an introductory nature. In Copenhagen, however, this step may be skipped or truncated. The current agreement is that the permanent subsidiary bodies will meet in the first week, and adhoc working groups will meet until midway through the second week. It is also possible that a 'Committee of the Whole' may be formed through which all issues are addressed.
• Regardless of the structure of meetings for the subsidiary bodies, by Wednesday 9 December, small group negotiations will commence. Typically, these will be closed meetings. Dozens of different types of these groups will be formed (including 'contact groups', 'informals', 'informal informals', 'friends of the chair' and 'friends of the president') resulting in literally hundreds of negotiating meetings (not counting the truly informal negotiations that happen over a quiet cup of coffee or glass of wine). Small group negotiations will continue until no later than Tuesday 15 December.
• On Monday 14 and Tuesday 15 December, large plenary meetings will be held to agree formally to any issue that has been tentatively agreed in small group negotiations.
• Typically, ministers arrive and become engaged on the Tuesday or Wednesday of the second week (15 to 16 December). However, given the importance of the Copenhagen meeting, the current expectation is that ministers will arrive and begin working on the weekend of 12 and 13 December. The ministerial segment will not conclude until the COP ends. While there will be public statements by countries, the real work of the negotiations will happen in increasingly small ministerial meetings as the week draws to a close. Unusually, a large number of prominent political leaders and heads of state will be attending the negotiations in Copenhagen. They will likely arrive after ministers and can be expected to be engaged in even higher level negotiations as the conference comes to an end.
• While the COP is scheduled to conclude on Friday 18 December, it is virtually inconceivable that it will do so. Negotiations in Bali and Kyoto did not conclude until well into the weekend.
• Copenhagen will conclude when there is a closing plenary that has formally endorsed all elements of the agreement and countries have had an opportunity to express their views on the proceedings. Closing plenaries tend to be long, fraught affairs and are, even at the best of times, the source of much drama. With so much at stake, the closing plenary at Copenhagen will be one to remember.

Changing Business Attitudes towards Climate Change

I have been studying the changing business attitude towards climate change. Initially there was resistance, then acceptance, cooperation, and now increasing excitement. It is discussed in U.S. Business Strategies and Climate Change paper from Wilson Center. The paper talks about the role of science, concerns about reputation, and the potential of new markets. I would add shareholders have become sensitive of all these as well. In Risking Shareholder Value? ExxonMobil and Climate Change, the shareholders of Exxon accuse the company of risking reputation and missing opportunities. Organizations such as Investor Network on Climate Risk are driving changes at the systemic level.

McKinsey Quarterly report from 2008:

First, there will be efforts to optimize the carbon efficiency of existing
assets and products: infrastructure (buildings, power stations, data centers,
factories), supply chains, and finished goods (automobiles, flat-screen
TVs, PCs). This optimization will involve measures to improve energy effi-
ciency, as well as a shift to less carbon-intensive sources of power, such
as nuclear, wind, solar, and geothermal.
Second, demand is growing for new low-carbon solutions that can meet
the need for sustained, drastic emission reductions. Value chains that disrupt
existing industries and create new ones will spring up—industries based,
for instance, on the large-scale supply of biomass to power plants and on
second-generation biofuels. New business models that reward suppliers
and end users in the power and transport sectors for consuming less energy
will be as important as new technologies.
Third, public policy and the widespread belief that higher energy prices
are here to stay are driving both of these developments. The coming economy-
wide discontinuity may be the first one driven largely by regulation.

Messaging and Branding around Climate Change

I have been thinking about the use of language and emotions to discuss the issues around climate change. I was looking around to see if there are efforts and organizations in this space. I found some cutting edge thinking in terms of messaging and branding in this space. Check them out:

Futerra has some cool new thought pieces in this space:.

Born out of a desire to help communications professionals get their green messaging right, the guide identifies the top ten signs of Greenwash, reveals how Greenwashing has grown over the last years, addresses the question of why Greenwash matters and what you can do about it. Versions of the report are also available for the USA and in french.

10 Tips for Sustainability Communications
10 RulesThis is Futerra's bible. A postcard reminder of how to sell sustainability. Widely used and adopted by the UN's Environment Programme and elsewhere.

Rules of the Game

Futerra and The UK Department for Environment published the Rules of the Game on 7 March 2005. The game is communicating climate change; the Rules will help us win it. The document was created as part of the UK Climate Change Communications Strategy.

New Rules New Game

New rules: new game coverThe same type of concise document as the previous Rules - but this time for changing climate behaviours.

Communicating Sustainability

Communicating Sustainability coverFuterra, in partnership with the UN Environment Programme, published Communicating Sustainability: How to produce effective public campaigns in September 2005.

The guide showcases innovative campaigns from every continent which have succeeded in making people think or behave differently towards the environment. It has now been downloaded over 700,000 times from the UNEP website!

Words that Sell

Words that sell coverThis guide to the language of sustainability asks some hard questions. Based on valuable focus group research, Words That Sell identifies the good, the bad, and the ugly of green and ethical terminology.

The Compass Network

is a global exchange for knowledge and creativity in sustainability communications. It's a place to share, to learn and to meet like-minded people working towards the same goal.

They have an interesting document called Clean technology: tomorrow's brands:

Cleantech has been called the next Industrial Revolution and, if commentators are believed, will save the planet AND the economy. It could also produce the C21st's biggest and most recognisable brands. The report argues that developing a strong brand, as well as great technology, can help cleantech companies succeed, grow and win

Obama goes to Copenhagen!

Woohoo!

Obama Announces 2020 Emissions Target, Dec. 9 Copenhagen Visit

President Obama today unveiled key details of the U.S. negotiation position headed into next month's global warming talks in Copenhagen, including a provisional greenhouse gas emissions target for 2020 "in the range of 17 percent below 2005 levels" and a new itinerary that includes a personal appearance during the opening days of the U.N. conference.

The White House said Obama will put the 2020 target on the bargaining table "in the context of an overall deal in Copenhagen that includes robust mitigation contributions from China and the other emerging economies." Obama's emission goals closely parallel action on Capitol Hill, including the House-passed climate bill and a Senate measure that Democratic leaders hope can reach the floor with enough votes by next spring.
...
"This could be one hell of a global game changer with big reverberations here at home," said Senate Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.). "For the first time, an American administration has proposed an emissions reduction target, and when President Obama lands in Copenhagen, it will emphasize that the United States is in it to win it. This announcement matches words with action."

Kerry, the Democrats' lead legislator on the Senate global warming bill, stressed that Obama's provision target is "contingent on the support of Congress" but still outlines a politically important path for both developed and developing nations to follow as they outline their own plans for reducing emissions.

"It lays the groundwork for a broad political consensus at Copenhagen that will strip climate obstructionists here at home of their most persistent charge, that the United States shouldn't act if other countries won't join with us," Kerry said. "It is an enormous shot in the arm for those of us working overtime to get a comprehensive bill passed in the Senate. And the fact that the president will attend the Copenhagen talks underscores that the administration is putting its money where its mouth is, putting the president's prestige on the line."

Worldwide views on Global Warming

The detailed survey results are here World Citizens Demand Action at COP15.

Overview news report:
World first: global climate poll

Held in September, the 44 meetings of everyday citizens in 38 countries gave more than 4,400 randomly selected participants the chance to express their views on the upcoming United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen (COP15).

Ninety per cent of these participants thought reaching a global climate deal at the conference was a matter of urgency, and 89 per cent thought countries such as the USA, Australia and EU nations should commit to short-term emissions targets of 25 to 40 per cent or higher.

This shows a discrepancy between what the citizens want and what policy makers are prepared to deliver. In the lead up to COP15, Australia is currently proposing reductions of 14 per cent (by 2020 according to 1990 levels), the US is proposing a 2 per cent reduction, and the EU is proposing a 20-30 per cent reduction."[The survey] has given politicians a unique insight into the views of ordinary citizens from all corners of the world on the climate crisis," said Danish Minister of Climate Change and Energy and World Wide Views ambassador, Connie Hedegaard.

"It is a powerful signal to the politicians when citizens all over the world agree that action is urgent."

The consultation findings reflect a global consensus on six key issues: the need for strong policy, technology sharing between nations, an international climate change council, increased environmental awareness and education, improvements to climate change technology and the development of consumer incentives to encourage less carbon emissions.

Australian participants were most concerned with committing confidently at COP15 to limit global warming to two degrees Celsius through a legally binding global agreement. It seems likely that such a global accord will hinge on whether global leaders can forsake self-interest and agree to co-operate and share the economic burdens.

Of the 38 countries, China's citizens were least willing to introduce emissions cuts for fast-growing economies.

The Worldwide Views on Global Warming Experts Blogs has more detailed analysis. Not all is well:

The results showed a very strong expression of concern about global warming. There was an overwhelming sense of urgency for achieving a strong climate agreement. In addition there was a pungent message that national politicians heed the deal made in Copenhagen this December.
In my first glance at the data, perhaps the strongest result was that 89% participants affirmed that short term reductions of carbon emissions in developing countries be reduced by 25-40%. This will come as a shock to world leaders who are aiming at targets much lower than that in the immediate future.
At the same time within the aggregate results, there were some moderately worrisome themes.

1. Some 43% of participants world wide seemed to say that a rise of 2 degrees Centigrade or higher is actually permissible. Reading the same figures, it’s also true that 89% of participants overall said that no more than 2 degrees increase would be acceptable. [Is the glass half empty or half full?] From what I’ve read, even 2 degrees increase would spell disaster. Are people becoming acclimated (so to speak) to prospects for dreary future?

2. Another cloud on the horizon was that among some national groups, raising the price of fossil fuels was not uniformly popular. Some 32% of U.S. participants said no price rise was desirable. Evidently Americans want the Age of Happy Motoring to continue forever. A substantial number people in the groups from Austria, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Russia, Spain, and UK were also opposed to fuel price hikes.

3. Finally, I was interested in the data from question 2.4 about whether punitive sanctions should be applied. In the combined groups from the U.S.A., 29% said there should be no sanctions or only symbolic ones. This may be a residual expression of the feeling that rules and penalties made in international treaties don’t really apply to America.

I have my own concerns. Understanding the meaning of 2C increase is hard for scientists, forget common man. So not sure how asking people is going to help. Also politics gets mixed in. Chinese are legimately fearful that the west does not want it to prosper - thanks to 100 years of international conflicts and deals. At a recent LSE talk, Ed Miliband, UK Secretary for Energy and Climate Change, talks about the politics of climate change and how to frame it in terms of common good.

Update: Their policy report has a summary of results:

• Make a deal at COP15
• Keep the temperature increase below 2 degrees
• Annex 1 countries should reduce emissions with 25-40 % or more by 2020
• Fast-growing economies should also reduce emissions by 2020
• Low-income developing countries should limit emissions
• Give high priority to an international financial mechanism
• Punish non-complying countries
• Make technology available to everyone
• Strengthen or supplement international institutions

US about to make a deal at COP15?

One more piece of puzzle falling in place keeping the hopes of a deal alive.

May be Obama concluded a private deal with India (Prime minister Manmohan Singh is on state visit).

US to present emissions target before Copenhagen

The United States will announce a target for reducing its greenhouse gas emissions before the UN climate conference in Copenhagen, removing a major obstacle to a deal, officials have said.

"Countries will need to put on the table what they are willing to do on emissions," a senior administration official told journalists. "We expect that a decision will be made in the coming days."

The official refused to be drawn on specific numbers but indicated the US target would not differ much from levels mentioned in legislation before Congress.

A US House of Representatives bill, passed in June, calls for cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and by 83 percent by 2050.

A slightly more ambitious bill before the Senate, but not due to be debated again until early next year, talks of a 20-percent reduction from 2005 levels by 2020.

The senior administration official said Obama could make a last-minute decision to attend the conference if "negotiations have proceeded sufficiently that going to Copenhagen would give a final impetus, a push, to the process."

Business coalition calls for firm CO2 treaty

Continuing the momentum thread, this is from yet another business coalition. There is a consistency in what multiple of the business coalitions are asking for - clarity, commitment, and low uncertainty. They have accepted that carbon price and legislation is coming. They are trying to influence the course now.
Business coalition calls for firm CO2 treaty

The private sector investment needed to tackle climate change will not be made without a binding international deal on carbon emissions, according to the head of a big business coalition.

Lars Josefsson, chairman of Combat Climate Change, a group including BP, General Electric, Unilever and more than 60 other large companies, said business was ready to act but would not do so without a clear regulatory framework.

“The necessary investments will only be made when you have a binding treaty and legislation,” he said in an interview.

“Of the money required to implement a deal, the vast majority – about 80 per cent – will come from the private sector. That can only come when there is a stable legal framework.”

This coalition calls itself the 3C Initiative

Combat Climate Change (3C) is business leaders’ initiative endorsed and actively promoted by the top executives of 66 of the world’s largest corporations.

The main objective of 3C is to support the UNFCCC-led negotiation process to establish a new global agreement on climate change, and to mobilize companies and business leaders across the world to contribute knowledge, resources and leadership to this common goal.
...
At present 66 global companies including General Electric, Unilever, Citigroup, BP, Siemens, DTEK, Rusal, Reuters, Duke Energy, Gazprom, China Oil & Offshore Company, Volvo, Tata Power, HP and Vattenfall have joined our initiative!

UK Low Carbon Transition Plan

I see this as a good sign of rubber hitting the road. It can help with reducing uncertainty and helping other countries draft similar plans.

I had an opportunity to listen (via podcast) to Ed Miliband, UK Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change at LSE. He talks about this transition plan, his vision, and politics. Way to go.

The UK Low Carbon Transition Plan

The UK Low Carbon Transition Plan plots how the UK will meet the 34 percent cut in emissions on 1990 levels by 2020, set out in the budget. We have already reduced emissions by 21 percent – equivalent to cutting emissions entirely from four cities the size of London.

Transforming the country into a cleaner, greener and more prosperous place to live is at the heart of our economic plans for 'building Britain’s future' and ensuring the UK is ready to take advantage of the opportunities ahead.

By 2020:
* More than 1.2 million people will be in green jobs.
* 7 million homes will have benefited from whole house makeovers, and more than 1.5 million households will be supported to produce their own clean energy.
* Around 40 percent of electricity will be from low-carbon sources, from renewables, nuclear and clean coal.
* We will be importing half the amount of gas that we otherwise would.
* The average new car will emit 40 percent less carbon than now.

Momentum building for Climate Risk Disclosure at SEC

I talked about investors asking SEC to develop and implement disclosure rules on the climate front (Climate change disclosure & SEC).

That momentum is building.

Big investors push SEC to make companies disclose climate risks

Institutional investors managing more than $1 trillion in assets have asked the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to spell out the climate-related financial risks corporations should disclose on their financial forms.

U.S. and Canadian fund managers signing onto the petition included the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS); top state financial officers in Oregon, North Carolina, Connecticut, Maryland, New York and Florida; British Columbia Investment Management Corp.; the Laborers' International Union of North America; and Pax World Management Corp.

Their chief complaint is that the SEC requires public companies to disclose "material risks" to investors, but the agency has offered no guidance for reporting financial risks tied to global warming. The investor groups say there is a panoply of climate-related issues affecting long-term corporate finances, including a pending batch of greenhouse gas reporting requirements from U.S. EPA, worsening environmental conditions and the prospect that Congress will mandate reductions in carbon dioxide emissions.

"Many companies haven't examined these risks," said CalPERS CEO Anne Stausboll in a statement. "The SEC should strengthen and enforce its current requirements so investors' decisions fully account for climate change's financial effects."

Whether or not SEC moves, states are moving forward.

Companies and the SEC have faced increasing pressure from shareholder groups, regulators and state attorneys general asking for more public disclosure of climate-related risks. On Thursday, the office of New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (D) announced a settlement with AES Corp. that requires the utility giant to tell investors more about risks posed by climate change. Arlington, Va.-based AES owns 34 power plants in North America and is one of the biggest electricity companies in the world.

Under that agreement, AES must disclose in its 10-K SEC filings risks from "present and probable" climate-related regulations and legislation, litigation and the physical impact global warming could have on utility assets. The state reached similar settlements with power provider Dynegy Inc. and Xcel Energy last fall.

60 heads of state to attend Copenhagen

Promising but a mixed bag.

Copenhagen climate summit: 60 heads of state to attend

Hopes for the Copenhagen climate summit in December have been boosted after it emerged that more than 60 presidents and prime ministers plan to attend.

There had been concern that no strong agreement would emerge from the talks in Copenhagen.

But observers say the presence of so many heads of state will radically increase expectations.

Copenhagen conference attracts world leaders

So far 65 heads of state and government have accepted Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen's invitation to attend December's UN climate change conference in the Danish capital.

Attending: Australia, Brazil, France, Germany, Indonesia, Japan, Spain and the United Kingdom

Not attending: US, China, India

It is 60 or 65 depending on the source but the point is China and India are not attending. I understand the politics involved in such negotiations but the optics does not look good. The impact of climate change is the highest in these countries with the Himalayas receding. They also represent about 40% of the humanity.

Architects Call for Copenhagen Commitment

Yet another stakeholder sees merit in the low carbon economy: Architects.

I strongly believe that design has a big role to play in process of adaptation and final state of the low carbon economy. Good design will help improve productivity and has financial benefits.

My own research work has been influenced by work of Christopher Alexander's Timeless Way of Building and The Nature of Order.

Architects Around the World Join Forces to Call for Copenhagen Commitment

The Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), Australian Institute of Architects, Architecture Canada and the Commonwealth Association of Architects joined forces to deliver a 15 point "Call for Action" at next month's United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Copenhagen (COP15, 7-18 December 2009) in an effort to lobby world leaders to deliver an ambitious and effective international response to climate change.

They identify a set of principles that should be familiar to people following climate change issues:

- Recognition of the fundamental importance of the built environment as central to the international climate change mitigation and adaptation agenda.

- Binding emissions targets and a carbon price to drive market change - a price on carbon reflecting the true consequences of its use and complementary government policies and incentives facilitating the competiveness of sustainable design.

- Credible and verified measurement of built environment emissions, being an international standard of accounting for carbon emissions.

- Innovative and pre-emptive design and adaptation of the built environment in response to unavoidable impacts of climate change.

- Partnerships between developing and developed economies to share information regarding sustainable design and technologies.

- Enabling policy - whether market mechanisms, government policy, private sector initiatives or voluntary action.

- Incentives to drive innovation and reward greater sustainability in the built environment.

- Investment in pilot projects to trial and demonstrate innovative approaches to built environment models.

- Risk management in the face of climate uncertainties - future scenarios, including the threat of peak oil and sea level rise, should be factored into the way built environments are conceived and planned.

- A concerted program to improve existing building stock to encourage positive change, including energy efficient refurbishment and retrofitting, as well sustainable design for new buildings.

Climate change and Middle East

Triggered by the news of Deutsche Bahn's contract in Qatar to build urban mass transit system, I looked around for information on whats happening in the middle east on the climate change front. A couple of pieces of information:

Impact of climate change on Middle East and North African region (MENA) from the World Bank:
Adaptation to Climate Change in the Middle East and North Africa Region

According to the latest IPCC assessment, the climate is predicted to become even hotter and drier in most of the MENA region. Higher temperatures and reduced precipitation will increase the occurrence of droughts, an effect that is already materializing in the Maghreb. It is further estimated that an additional 80–100 million people will be exposed by 2025 to water stress, which is likely to result in increased pressure on groundwater resources, which are currently being extracted in most areas beyond the aquifers’ recharge potential. In addition, agriculture yields, especially in rainfed areas, are expected to fluctuate more widely, ultimately falling to a significantly lower long-term average. In urban areas in North Africa, a temperature increase of 1-3 degrees could expose 6–25 million people to coastal flooding. In addition, heat waves, an increased “heat island effect,” water scarcity, decreasing water quality, worsening air quality, and ground ozone formation are likely to affect public health, and more generally lead to challenging living conditions.

Global models predict sea levels rising from about 0.1 to 0.3 meters by the year 2050, and from about 0.1 to 0.9 meters by 2100. For MENA, the social, economic, and ecological impacts are expected to be relatively higher compared to the rest of the world. Low-lying coastal areas in Tunisia, Qatar, Libya, UAE, Kuwait, and particularly Egypt are at particular risk.

News from Cop15
Global warming to have heavy impact on Arab states

The effects include depletion of agricultural land, spread of disease and endangerment of many plant and animal species, the 2009 Report of the Arab Forum for Environment and Development forecasts.

Global warming will have a severe impact on Arab states where water is already scarce, a regional report warned Thursday ahead of next month's Copenhagen environment summit.

Some of the most feared effects include depletion of agricultural land, spread of disease and endangerment of many plant and animal species, the 2009 Report of the Arab Forum for Environment and Development said.

The AFED report, released in Beirut, said sea level rise will mostly threaten Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Tunisia, affecting "one to three percent of land in these countries."

In Egypt, the Arab world's most populous nation, more than 12 percent of the country's best agricultural land in the Nile Delta is at risk from sea level rise, or SLR.

AFED Report Presented in Abu Dhabi

The report, compiled by independent experts, estimated that in the Arab region as a whole, the cost of environmental degradation is estimated at 5 % of gross domestic product (GDP). The report also highlights that the governments of the region have failed in addressing these mounting economic costs with clear and effective policies.

However, the report commended the environmental work carried out in Abu Dhabi, describing the Abu Dhabi Emirate Environment Strategy 2009-2013, adopted by the Emirate, as a "model" and called on Arab countries to follow this model and praised the clean energy initiative ‘Masdar,' which was launched by Abu Dhabi Government.

More about AFED:

The Arab Forum for Environment and Development (AFED)

The Arab Forum for Environment and Development (AFED) is a not-for-profit regional non-governmental organization, grouping experts together with the civil society, business community and media, to promote prudent environmental policies and programmes across the Arab region. While it maintains its character as a non-governmental organization, AFED admits, in the capacity of observers, national, regional and international bodies working in the fields of environment and sustainable development.

CO2 Reduction Commitments at Copenhagen

Flow of pledges drives up UN expectations
Apart from the US, all industrialized countries have given targets for their greenhouse gas emission reductions. This promises a successful conference in Copenhagen next month, according to UN’s top official on climate change.

Some of the announced commitments:

Country/Region	Commitment
Russia	25% drop from 1990 level
South Korea	30% drop from expected emissions in 2020 (~4% below 2005)
Brazil	Freeze at 2005 levels (no growth)
EU	30 percent reduction target from 1990 levels by 2020
US	House 17% and Senate 20% reduction from 2005 levels by 2020

Green Hajj

The journey to low carbon economy has just gotten a boost. Just imagine the symbolic value of holiest city in Islam, Mecca, going enviro-green - that too in the heart of the oil kingdom. Remember that the Saudi Arabian king's official title is The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques. Idea is in proposal stage but it is a very bold proposal.

ISLAM’S GREEN INITIATIVE

Under the newfound coalition toward eco-commitment and a Muslim Seven Year Plan, Medina, Islam’s second most important city after Mecca, is to serve as a model green city. This move is critical since Saudi Arabia is essentially, for better or worse, presently the pillar of the Arab nations.
Medina, "The City of the Prophet", is a strategic start pointing that has the capacity to really launch a green campaign in neighboring territories.
The Seven Year Plan was presented by the Sheikh Ali Goma'a, Egypt’s Grand Mufti, who has already introduced the plan into his own city of Dar Al Iftaa. Some key initiatives of the Seven Year Plan include:

* Develop and implement a "Green Hajj". With 2-3 million people visiting Mecca during Hajj alone, transforming the experience into an environmentally-friendly pilgrimage will reap immediate benefits.

* Construct a "green mosque" and introduce this model for other Islamic buildings worldwide.

* In the first phase, develop 2-3 green model cities; in the second phase, adapt ten other Muslim cities to implement the model.

* Integrate eco-awareness into Islamic education.

* Publish "green Qurans", printed on paper procured from sustainable wood.

* Create a specialized TV channel focused on Islam and the environment.

* Create award and prize systems for excellence in this field.

The ultimate goal here, as with other faith groups, is to radically redefine faith-based relationships with the environment. While the "greenie" movement is still seen as a secular front by a number of conservative groups, the world’s oldest religions with a following in the billions will be able to bring much needed attention and authority to an issue that has predated our recognition of it.

Alliance of Religions and Conservation (ARC) is driving the initiative.