<ul><li>Global warming in an unequal world : A global deal for effective action </li></ul><ul><li>Sunita Narain </li></ul>...
The crisis: the science of climate change <ul><li>Climate change is  real ; it is already dangerous; heading towards catas...
Rapid increase of carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere in last 150 years – from  280  ppm to  370  ppm.
Hockey stick science :  Since 1900, climate warmed by 0.8 ºC. Past 10 year temperature highest since records started
Is anthropogenic : caused by burning of fossil fuel; for our energy needs
The challenge: what is the least risky target?  <ul><li>If annual emissions remain at today’s level, greenhouse gas levels...
Business as usual is 5°C; even if we stabilise at current levels; increase is dangerous
Impacts : devastation or can we cope?  <ul><li>Snow cover will contract. Indian glaciers are beginning to melt fast </li><...
Insurance industry understands risk: economic losses <ul><li>Katrina:  $125 billion ; insured US$60 billion; </li></ul><ul...
3-truths: Climate change political and economic challenge <ul><li>Is related to  economic growth . No one has built a low ...
CO2 emissions linked to energy and linked to economic growth
Drastic reduction needed: For 450 ppm (2°C) reduce  85% by 2050
The gap : the challenge to re-invent what we mean by growth?
United States 21.13% Europe 16.58% Japan 4.36% Rest of the world 57.93% Sharing the  ecological  and  economic  space: CO2...
 
Historical emissions : A tonne of CO2 emitted in 1850 same value as tonne of CO2 emitted in 2005 Natural debt of nations: ...
Canada United States Brazil Guyana Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Russia Kenya South Africa Tanzania Australia Banglad...
Canada United States Brazil Guyana Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Russia Kenya South Africa Tanzania Australia Banglad...
Canada United States Brazil Guyana Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Russia Kenya South Africa Tanzania Australia Banglad...
Canada United States Brazil Guyana Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Russia Kenya South Africa Tanzania Australia Banglad...
Canada United States Brazil Guyana Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Russia Kenya South Africa Tanzania Australia Banglad...
Canada United States Brazil Guyana Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Russia Kenya South Africa Tanzania Australia Banglad...
1 US citizen = <ul><li>107  Bangladeshis </li></ul><ul><li>134  Bhutanese </li></ul><ul><li>19  Indians </li></ul><ul><li>...
2007: High on rhetoric. Low on action <ul><li>Need urgent action. We are running out of time. Need deep cuts: 50-80% over ...
 
Decreased 3% only because of decrease of economies under transition. Rich have increased
<ul><li>Only UK and Germany have cut.  </li></ul><ul><li>But beginning to increase again.  </li></ul><ul><li>Gas and reuni...
Big words and small change
No energy transition made  Little to reduce energy emissions
Transport emissions up Energy industry emissions up Manufacturing down. Exported problem?
No more kindergarten approach <ul><li>Framework for cooperation:  </li></ul><ul><li>Industrialised countries to take deep ...
The avoid-leapfrog strategy <ul><li>1996:  </li></ul><ul><li>Clean air campaign in Delhi.  </li></ul><ul><li>1996-2002 :  ...
 
Stabilised emissions: but challenges remain
Can change pathway to growth A KEY QUESTION Do we have to go through the same stages of environmental management that the ...
The car has marginalised bus, not replaced it  Can avoid pollution, congestion and emissions Can re-invent mobility Delhi ...
Options exist: re-invent growth. Avoid pollution <ul><li>We can build “clean” coal power stations  </li></ul><ul><li>Can b...
In our world; forests are  habitats  of people. Forests have economic value. Protecting forests needs paying for services;...
Options but.. <ul><li>The South will do what North has done  </li></ul><ul><li>Will first get rich; add to pollution; then...
CDM instrument to make this transition. But designed to fail  <ul><li>Aim to get cheap emission reduction has lead to proj...
High end technology will cost money
No rocket science needed <ul><li>Need framework for cooperation </li></ul><ul><li>Need framework that can push for energy ...
Finance ministers challenge <ul><li>Emissions linked to economic  growth </li></ul><ul><li>Climate change will devastate e...
Not acceptable
Politics for future <ul><li>Cannot freeze global inequity; </li></ul><ul><li>Cannot survive climate change – rich or poor;...
Challenge to Commonwealth <ul><li>Climate change is about the  wealth of commons; </li></ul><ul><li>It is about setting ru...
Leadership for our common world <ul><li>Industrialised countries to set deep and real cuts – UK,  Australia , Canada </li>...
Otherwise road to ‘common’ hell
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Climate Equity For Commonwealth 2007

12,277 views

Published on

Global warming in an unequal world: A global deal for effective action

Published in: Economy & Finance, Technology
1 Comment
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Here’s some current information that I believe will enlighten the serious minded attempting to grapple with the complexities of global warming science.

    There is no doubt that the United Nations IPCC’s version of global warming is winning the public relations battle. The proof is that our governments are now implementing public policy intended to reduce the rise of the earth’s temperature.

    For those who are paying serious attention however, it is increasingly difficult to comprehend how they can justify discounting the growing chorus of dissenting views and agreeing with VP Gore that dissenters are corrupt quacks.

    Here are two current examples:

    UN Blowback: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims
    http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=2158072e-802a-23ad-45f0-274616db87e6
    If all these guys are quacks, then Donald Duck deserves new respect.

    Then there’s this report that challenges the validity of IPCC’s climate models:
    http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/monckton.cfm

    The study’s conclusion is worthy of serious consideration:
    “Even if temperature had risen above natural variability, the recent solar Grand Maximum may have been chiefly responsible. Even if the sun were not chiefly to blame for the past half-century’s warming, the IPCC has not demonstrated that, since CO2 occupies only one-ten-thousandth part more of the atmosphere that it did in 1750, it has contributed more than a small fraction of the warming. Even if carbon dioxide were chiefly responsible for the warming that ceased in 1998 and may not resume until 2015, the distinctive, projected fingerprint of anthropogenic “greenhouse-gas” warming is entirely absent from the observed record. Even if the fingerprint were present, computer models are long proven to be inherently incapable of providing projections of the future state of the climate that are sound enough for policymaking. Even if per impossibilethe models could ever become reliable, the present paper demonstrates that it is not at all likely that the world will warm as much as the IPCC imagines. Even if the world were to warm that much, the overwhelming majority of the scientific, peer-reviewed literature does not predict that catastrophe would ensue. Even if catastrophe might ensue, even the most drastic proposals to mitigate future climate change by reducing emissions of carbon dioxide would make very little difference to the climate. Even if mitigation were likely to be effective, it would do more harm than good: already millions face starvation as the dash for biofuels takes agricultural land out of essential food production: a warning that taking precautions, “just in case”, can do untold harm unless there is a sound, scientific basis for them. Finally, even if mitigation might do more good than harm, adaptation as (and if) necessary would be far more cost-effective and less likely to be harmful.
    In short, we must get the science right, or we shall get the policy wrong. If the concluding equation in this analysis (Eqn. 30) is correct, the IPCC’s estimates of climate sensitivity must have been very much exaggerated. There may, therefore, be a good reason why, contrary to the projections of the models on which the IPCC relies, temperatures have not risen for a decade and have been falling since the phase-transition in global temperature trends that occurred in late 2001. Perhaps real-world climate sensitivity is very much below the IPCC’s estimates. Perhaps, therefore, there is no “climate crisis” at all. At present, then, in policy terms there is no case for doing anything. The correct policy approach to a non-problem is to have the courage to do nothing.”

    While the global warming alarmists have done a masterful public relations job in promoting their agenda, they are losing badly in the areas of science, logic and common sense.

    Dennis
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Views
Total views
12,277
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
33
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
509
Comments
1
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Climate Equity For Commonwealth 2007

  1. 1. <ul><li>Global warming in an unequal world : A global deal for effective action </li></ul><ul><li>Sunita Narain </li></ul><ul><li>Commonwealth Finance Ministers Meeting, Georgetown, Guyana, October 16 2007 </li></ul>
  2. 2. The crisis: the science of climate change <ul><li>Climate change is real ; it is already dangerous; heading towards catastrophe. </li></ul><ul><li>Climate change is urgent ; it needs us to act quickly and drastically; </li></ul><ul><li>But how ? Climate change is linked to economic growth. Can we re-invent growth? </li></ul>
  3. 3. Rapid increase of carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere in last 150 years – from 280 ppm to 370 ppm.
  4. 4. Hockey stick science : Since 1900, climate warmed by 0.8 ºC. Past 10 year temperature highest since records started
  5. 5. Is anthropogenic : caused by burning of fossil fuel; for our energy needs
  6. 6. The challenge: what is the least risky target? <ul><li>If annual emissions remain at today’s level, greenhouse gas levels would be close to 550 ppm by 2050 </li></ul><ul><li>This would mean temperature increase of 3-5°C </li></ul><ul><li>The difference in temperature between the last ice age (3 million years ago) and now is 5°C </li></ul><ul><li>The 2°C target is feasible; but still dangerous </li></ul>
  7. 7. Business as usual is 5°C; even if we stabilise at current levels; increase is dangerous
  8. 8. Impacts : devastation or can we cope? <ul><li>Snow cover will contract. Indian glaciers are beginning to melt fast </li></ul><ul><li>Hot extremes, heat waves, and heavy precipitation events will increase.. (floods and droughts) </li></ul><ul><li>Tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) will become more intense </li></ul><ul><li>Sea levels are expected to increase – intense debate on how high will this be; and by when. But can we wait???? </li></ul>
  9. 9. Insurance industry understands risk: economic losses <ul><li>Katrina: $125 billion ; insured US$60 billion; </li></ul><ul><li>Mumbai floods 2005: (800 mm of rain in 12 hours): US$ 5 b ; insured US$ 800 million; </li></ul><ul><li>Oman cyclone June 2007: US$ 4 b ; insured US$ 650 million; </li></ul><ul><li>UK floods June-July 2007: US$ 8 b ; insured US$ 6 b; </li></ul><ul><li>Losses cannot be measured in economic terms only. Human; Existential; Survival </li></ul>
  10. 10. 3-truths: Climate change political and economic challenge <ul><li>Is related to economic growth . No one has built a low carbon economy (as yet) </li></ul><ul><li>Is about sharing growth between nations and between people. The rich must reduce so that the poor can grow. Create ecological space. </li></ul><ul><li>Is about cooperation . If the rich emitted yesterday, the emerging rich world will do today. Cooperation demands equity and fairness. It is a pre-requisite for an effective climate agreement. </li></ul>
  11. 11. CO2 emissions linked to energy and linked to economic growth
  12. 12. Drastic reduction needed: For 450 ppm (2°C) reduce 85% by 2050
  13. 13. The gap : the challenge to re-invent what we mean by growth?
  14. 14. United States 21.13% Europe 16.58% Japan 4.36% Rest of the world 57.93% Sharing the ecological and economic space: CO2 emissions from fossil fuels in 2005
  15. 16. Historical emissions : A tonne of CO2 emitted in 1850 same value as tonne of CO2 emitted in 2005 Natural debt of nations: will it be paid or written off? At what cost?
  16. 17. Canada United States Brazil Guyana Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Russia Kenya South Africa Tanzania Australia Bangladesh China India Japan Nepal New Zealand Vanuatu 0.11 0.11 Per capita CO2: cannot freeze global inequity 19.24 20.14 1.94 2.07 10.24 16.44 9.55 11.88 0.28 9.56 20.24 0.28 4.07 1.07 9.65 9.37 0.46
  17. 18. Canada United States Brazil Guyana Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Russia Kenya South Africa Tanzania Australia Bangladesh China India Japan Nepal New Zealand Vanuatu 0.11 0.11 World average 4 tonnes per person per year Can sustain 2 tonnes per person per year 19.24 20.14 1.94 2.07 10.24 16.44 9.55 11.88 0.28 9.56 20.24 0.28 4.07 1.07 9.65 9.37 0.46 4.37 2.00
  18. 19. Canada United States Brazil Guyana Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Russia Kenya South Africa Tanzania Australia Bangladesh China India Japan Nepal New Zealand Vanuatu 0.11 0.11 Who? 19.24 20.14 1.94 2.07 10.24 16.44 9.55 11.88 0.28 9.56 20.24 0.28 4.07 1.07 9.65 9.37 0.46 4.37 2.00
  19. 20. Canada United States Brazil Guyana Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Russia Kenya South Africa Tanzania Australia Bangladesh China India Japan Nepal New Zealand Vanuatu 0.11 0.11 Who? 19.24 20.14 1.94 2.07 10.24 16.44 9.55 11.88 0.28 9.56 20.24 0.28 4.07 1.07 9.65 9.37 0.46 4.37 2.00
  20. 21. Canada United States Brazil Guyana Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Russia Kenya South Africa Tanzania Australia Bangladesh China India Japan Nepal New Zealand Vanuatu 0.11 0.11 Reduce – to converge 19.24 20.14 1.94 2.07 10.24 16.44 9.55 11.88 0.28 9.56 20.24 0.28 4.07 1.07 9.65 9.37 0.46 4.37 2.00
  21. 22. Canada United States Brazil Guyana Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Russia Kenya South Africa Tanzania Australia Bangladesh China India Japan Nepal New Zealand Vanuatu 0.11 0.11 Increase to converge Climate justice 19.24 20.14 1.94 2.07 10.24 16.44 9.55 11.88 0.28 9.56 20.24 0.28 4.07 1.07 9.65 9.37 0.46 4.37 2.00
  22. 23. 1 US citizen = <ul><li>107 Bangladeshis </li></ul><ul><li>134 Bhutanese </li></ul><ul><li>19 Indians </li></ul><ul><li>269 Nepalese </li></ul><ul><li>Unacceptable. Need to secure ecological space for growth </li></ul>
  23. 24. 2007: High on rhetoric. Low on action <ul><li>Need urgent action. We are running out of time. Need deep cuts: 50-80% over 1990 levels by 2050 </li></ul><ul><li>Kyoto agreed to small change – 7% cuts </li></ul><ul><li>Even that failed. US and Australia walked out. EU emissions increased last year </li></ul><ul><li>Pressure on China and India.. </li></ul>
  24. 26. Decreased 3% only because of decrease of economies under transition. Rich have increased
  25. 27. <ul><li>Only UK and Germany have cut. </li></ul><ul><li>But beginning to increase again. </li></ul><ul><li>Gas and reunification impact fading… </li></ul>
  26. 28. Big words and small change
  27. 29. No energy transition made Little to reduce energy emissions
  28. 30. Transport emissions up Energy industry emissions up Manufacturing down. Exported problem?
  29. 31. No more kindergarten approach <ul><li>Framework for cooperation: </li></ul><ul><li>Industrialised countries to take deep cuts (30% by 2020) minimum. US and Australia must join </li></ul><ul><li>Emerging rich and rest to participate, not by taking legally binding cuts but through a strategy to ‘ avoid ’ future emissions. </li></ul><ul><li>What is the framework for low-carbon growth strategy? </li></ul>
  30. 32. The avoid-leapfrog strategy <ul><li>1996: </li></ul><ul><li>Clean air campaign in Delhi. </li></ul><ul><li>1996-2002 : </li></ul><ul><li>a. Advanced emission norms by 8 years – went from Euro-0 to Euro-II. </li></ul><ul><li>b. Cleaned up quality of fuel (10,000 ppm to 500 ppm) </li></ul><ul><li>c. Introduced compressed natural gas – 100,000 vehicles drive in Delhi on gas </li></ul>
  31. 34. Stabilised emissions: but challenges remain
  32. 35. Can change pathway to growth A KEY QUESTION Do we have to go through the same stages of environmental management that the West went through or can we leapfrog? Pre-Euro I Poor diesel Euro I Improved diesel Euro II Natural gas Euro III Hydrogen Euro IV
  33. 36. The car has marginalised bus, not replaced it Can avoid pollution, congestion and emissions Can re-invent mobility Delhi placing order for 6,000 new buses; building bus rapid transport corridor; building metro; investing in light rail.. Finance ministers can reduce taxes on buses, increase on cars…
  34. 37. Options exist: re-invent growth. Avoid pollution <ul><li>We can build “clean” coal power stations </li></ul><ul><li>Can build distributed power grid, based on renewable… </li></ul><ul><li>18% emissions from land use changes. Can protect forests; Can plant new forests.. </li></ul>
  35. 38. In our world; forests are habitats of people. Forests have economic value. Protecting forests needs paying for services; paying local communities to protect forests; benefit from its resources Countries cannot “keep” forests without getting economic value Costs for carbon storage peanuts..
  36. 39. Options but.. <ul><li>The South will do what North has done </li></ul><ul><li>Will first get rich; add to pollution; then invest in cleaning it up </li></ul><ul><li>Will cut forests and convert to agriculture and then depress the price of food </li></ul><ul><li>A low-carbon growth strategy will cost money. The South will need to invest in efficiency, pollution control and protecting forests as forests </li></ul><ul><li>This needs change in global framework </li></ul>
  37. 40. CDM instrument to make this transition. But designed to fail <ul><li>Aim to get cheap emission reduction has lead to projects which do little. Low hanging fruits. Cannot pay for real change. </li></ul><ul><li>Designed for ineffective action – additional to policy – leads to nothing </li></ul><ul><li>Designed for mutual self-interest between private sector; not public interest; </li></ul><ul><li>Has become the ‘ Cheap ’ ‘ Convoluted ’ ‘ Corrupt ’ Development Mechanism </li></ul>
  38. 41. High end technology will cost money
  39. 42. No rocket science needed <ul><li>Need framework for cooperation </li></ul><ul><li>Need framework that can push for energy transformation </li></ul><ul><li>Best option is to create per capita emission rights; </li></ul><ul><li>Use the rights to create global create carbon market; </li></ul><ul><li>Use the market (with rules for public good) to make the transition into low carbon economies </li></ul>
  40. 43. Finance ministers challenge <ul><li>Emissions linked to economic growth </li></ul><ul><li>Climate change will devastate economies </li></ul><ul><li>Need to find solutions to pay for high-end energy transformation – reform of CDM or carbon market </li></ul><ul><li>Need to share benefits of growth equitably </li></ul>
  41. 44. Not acceptable
  42. 45. Politics for future <ul><li>Cannot freeze global inequity; </li></ul><ul><li>Cannot survive climate change – rich or poor; </li></ul><ul><li>Climate is not about the failure of the market; </li></ul><ul><li>It is about our failure to make the markets work for public and common good… </li></ul><ul><li>It is about politics.. </li></ul>
  43. 46. Challenge to Commonwealth <ul><li>Climate change is about the wealth of commons; </li></ul><ul><li>It is about setting rules for living together on one Earth </li></ul><ul><li>Commonwealth brings all together – rich and poor; emerging countries and small island nations.. </li></ul><ul><li>Can lead the next negotiations. Can provide the answers the world needs desperately </li></ul>
  44. 47. Leadership for our common world <ul><li>Industrialised countries to set deep and real cuts – UK, Australia , Canada </li></ul><ul><li>To pay for adaptation costs – Build global consensus on paying these crippling costs </li></ul><ul><li>To set framework for participation by rest of the world – built on equity and designed for real transition </li></ul>
  45. 48. Otherwise road to ‘common’ hell

×