Carbon War Room

Yet another initiative coming from Richard Branson et al. Interesting and amusing metaphor. The website has a military site look and feel. They have initiatives like this one on energy efficiency of buildings. I see a bunch of sponsors, links to other organizations and photos but nothing jumps out as an original initiative. I will comb through the site some more.

Carbon War Room

The Carbon War Room harnesses the power of entrepreneurs to implement market-driven solutions to climate change. The world needs entrepreneurial leadership to create a post-carbon economy.

The War Room’s unique approach focuses on bringing together successful entrepreneurs, business leaders, policy experts, researchers, and thought leaders to focus on market-driven solutions.

Our approach is to identify the barriers that are preventing market-based scale up of climate change solutions and thereby perpetuating the status quo. In addition to technology and policy gaps, these barriers include principal-agent problems, information gaps, and lack of common standards or metrics.

The War Room operates across 25 battles in 7 theaters and has three core functions:

* The Research & Intelligence team compiles a reliable, independent source of global research on the current carbon-industrial complex and leading market-driven innovations.
* The Communications team convenes successful entrepreneurs, experts, and leaders to ensure solutions are strategically sound, fast acting, and well presented.
* The Operations team plans the path to victory in each area using appropriate tools and partners to achieve the overwhelming force necessary. After determining partners, budgets, and leaders to execute the battle; funding is raised and milestones created; then the operation is closely monitored as each operation proceeds.

Business of Climate Change Report

Two reports that I am reading. They are two years old and things have moved forward with Copenhagen etc. but they are some of the best analyses I have read so far.

The Business of Climate Change Challenges and Opportunities (Feb 2007)

Lehman Brothers decided to take a hard look at global warming, starting with the scientific and climatological evidence, then proceeding to the economic consequences and implications for policy; and finally – with significant help from the Firm’s equity analysts – considering potential impacts on major business sectors. The result is this publication: The Business of Climate Change: Challenges and opportunities. It reaches a number of broad conclusions. Global  warming, we judge, is likely to prove one of those tectonic forces that – like globalization or the ageing of populations – gradually but powerfully changes the economic landscape in which our clients operate, and one that causes periodic sharp movements in asset prices.

And, as the title indicates, we consider that climate change poses many challenges but also presents many business opportunities. Firms that recognise the challenge early, and respond imaginatively and constructively, will create opportunities for themselves and thereby prosper. Others, slower to realise what is going on or electing to ignore it, will likely do markedly less well.

This study is far from the last word: indeed, we see it as just the starting point for adialogue with our investing and corporate clients. As the discussions with our clients and policy experts progress, we will take this work further.

Dr John Llewellyn
Senior Economic Policy Advisor
Lehman Brothers

There was followup to the previous report The Business of Climate Change II Policy is accelerating, with major implications for companies and investors (Sep 2007)

There is, in our view, a particular sense in this. Until recently, many – and in some countries most – climate change policy proposals have originated mainly outside government. Today, however, governments themselves are increasingly becoming directly involved in policy  proposal and design. Thus far, in most national administrations, responsibility has come in as far as ministries of environment, technology, energy, and industry. However, we judge that ultimately the nexus of responsibility, at least for key climate change policies, will move inwards still further – into treasuries and ministries of finance. And when these ministries take over responsibility, policymaking will acquire a harder edge: the objective of policy design will be not only to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but to reduce them at the lowest possible cost.

Thus economic considerations are poised to assume their greatest weight yet in policy debate and design. A year or two from now, of course, the debate will have moved on: client concern will likely be with analysing the consequences of actual policies, or at least of more concrete policy proposals. But that is for tomorrow.

We trust that this volume will be a constructive sequel to The Business of Climate Change: Challenges and Opportunities, for clients and others who seek clues about how policy may look, a year or two from now, and about what some of the implications may be for business.

Washpost: SEC to require disclosure of climate change risks

Yet another technical hurdle has been crossed with this SEC resolution. It will make climate change consideration a norm, a concern for the shareholders, and reduction a responsibility of the management.

Washpost: SEC to require disclosure of climate change risks

The commission, in a 3 to 2 vote, decided to require that companies disclose in their public filings the impact of climate change on their businesses -- from new regulations or legislation they may face domestically or abroad to potential changes in economic trends or physical risks to a company.

Schapiro said companies already must disclose anything that can have a significant effect on their bottom lines. But she said the SEC's action on Wednesday was intended to provide more guidance on what might be taken into account. "The commission is not making any kind of statement regarding the facts as they relate to the topic of climate change or global warming," Schapiro said.

A number of large institutional investors had been urging the SEC to put more pressure on companies to disclose more details about the effects of climate change on their businesses.

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.

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.

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."

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

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.