Arctic Sea Ice : Forum

AGW in general => Policy and solutions => Topic started by: Sigmetnow on October 15, 2014, 06:04:55 PM

Title: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 15, 2014, 06:04:55 PM
Might be helpful to start amassing the "will they, or won't they, sign a significant treaty in Paris" comments under one thread.

Here's the latest proposal:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States wants to broker a global agreement on climate change that would contain some legal elements but would stop short of being legally binding on an international level, the country's top diplomat on climate change issues said.

Todd Stern, the State Department climate change special envoy, addressed one of the thorniest issues in ongoing talks to secure a global plan to curb greenhouse gas emissions – its legal form.

Stern said a recent proposal by New Zealand for countries to submit a "schedule" for reducing emissions that would be legally binding and subject to mandatory accounting, reporting and review offers an approach that could get the buy-in of countries like the United States that are wary of ratifying an internationally binding treaty.

The content of the schedule itself and the actions each country pledges would not be legally binding at an international level.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0I409X20141015 (http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0I409X20141015)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 16, 2014, 05:34:51 PM
Armchair travellers:  Here is the Information for Participants for the December 1-12 UN Climate conference in Lima, Peru.  I particularly enjoyed the establishment of the "Blogger's Loft" and the repeated requests to not print anything unless absolutely necessary, using both sides of the paper, and most importantly no colored paper!

http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/lima_dec_2014/application/pdf/information_for_participants_cop20.pdf (http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/lima_dec_2014/application/pdf/information_for_participants_cop20.pdf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 22, 2014, 05:55:11 PM
A new study:  what if China and the US actually worked together to address climate change?
If the US and China were to adopt global best practice in their domestic climate policies, together, the world’s two largest emitters could close the 2020 emissions gap by 23%, according to new research.
...
Bill Hare of Climate Analytics, said:

"The US and China produce 35% of global emissions and have been making efforts to work with each other on climate change. If they scaled up action to adopt the most ambitious policies from across the world, they would both be on the right pathway to keep warming below 2ºC."
...
The research comes as countries, including the US and China meet in Bonn for the latest round of the UN climate change negotiations, to set out the elements of the next global climate agreement, to be agreed in Paris in 2015.
...
According to the IEA,  the US must decarbonise by 80% by 2030 , China by 60-70%. Yet current policies in both countries are inadequate to meet the necessary limit; the US has pledged to reduce coal by about 20% and China is stabilising coal use by 2030.

http://tcktcktck.org/2014/10/study-us-china-co-operation-help-close-emissions-gap/64897 (http://tcktcktck.org/2014/10/study-us-china-co-operation-help-close-emissions-gap/64897)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on October 22, 2014, 06:20:13 PM
Armchair travellers:  Here is the Information for Participants for the December 1-12 UN Climate conference in Lima, Peru.  I particularly enjoyed the establishment of the "Blogger's Loft" and the repeated requests to not print anything unless absolutely necessary, using both sides of the paper, and most importantly no colored paper!

I'm sorry I cannot share your enthusiasm, there. Instead of saving printer paper in Lima, Peru, all the participants should go to their local hometown coffee bar and participate digitally in the so–called Climate conference. The plane trip to Lima, Peru vastly outweighs the climate footprint of printing important information, I'm afraid. (And as we all know, these conferences are already meaningless, pointless exercises that mostly serve to passivate the home population through the appearance of 'action'.)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 24, 2014, 09:34:13 PM
EU agrees to 40% cut in emissions by 2030.  Poland and other coal-centric countries had threatened to veto any agreement, but will now be helped financially. 

"Europe's leaders have been under heavy pressure not to impose much higher energy costs, especially when the economy is struggling."

"The EU is already on target to cut its CO2 emissions by 20% by 2020, compared with 1990 emission levels."

Others' descriptions of the new target ranged from "very modest" to "desperately ineffective."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-29751064 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-29751064)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 24, 2014, 09:47:20 PM
European Commission:  "We have set the example and others should follow. Europe accounts for only 11% of global emissions, so we need all others to step up to the plate."
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-719_en.htm (http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-719_en.htm)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on October 25, 2014, 01:34:58 AM
http://www.resilience.org/stories/2014-10-23/letter-to-the-pm-outlining-how-2-c-demands-an-80-cut-in-eu-emissions-by-2030 (http://www.resilience.org/stories/2014-10-23/letter-to-the-pm-outlining-how-2-c-demands-an-80-cut-in-eu-emissions-by-2030)

Letter to the PM outlining how 2°C demands an 80% cut in EU emissions by 2030

Kevin Anderson
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 25, 2014, 02:43:29 AM
TEXT-Key elements of EU climate deal
BRUSSELS | Thu Oct 23, 2014 8:17pm EDT
BRUSSELS, Oct 24 (Reuters) - Following are key elements of the deal to curb global warming struck by European Union leaders early on Friday, as given by European Council President Herman Van Rompuy:

- A reduction of at least 40 percent of greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. This figure, which refers to the classic 1990 baseline, is binding. About half of the effort takes place within the EU-wide ETS (Emissions Trading System); the other half takes place in the non-ETS sectors, with national, yet tradeable targets.

- Clean energy. We commit to at least 27 percent of renewables in 2030. Here we are talking about a share of total energy consumed and the target is binding at EU level. Currently, the share of renewables stands at about 14 percent.

- Energy savings. We commit to an increase of at least 27 percent in energy efficiency. This figure is indicative and compares to 2030 projections based on current consumption and technology. It will be reviewed by 2020, having in mind an EU level of 30 percent. Energy savings are about changing behaviour and about innovation. Saving energy also is the surest way of reducing our energy dependency.

- Energy linkage. The objective is to have electricity interconnection worth 15 percent by 2030. This means that for each 100 megawatts (MW) it produces, a member state should have the infrastructure to be able to import or export 15 MW. (Reporting by Alastair Macdonald)

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSL6N0SJ00B20141024 (http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSL6N0SJ00B20141024)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 25, 2014, 02:46:34 PM
Poland, which relies on coal for 90 percent of its electricity, successfully put the brakes on the EU's climate policy. This shows some of the weaknesses of the EU's structures. With regard to energy and climate policy, not only the overall framework, but every single proposal by the EU Commission has to be agreed on unanimously by the Council of Ministers. That meant Poland could threaten to veto any decision and derail ambitious proposals from Germany and others.

Yet Poland has had plenty of time to realize coal is bad for the climate and has to be replaced. And the country's insistence on limiting energy efficiency goals is completely illogical. Better insulation and other energy-saving measures are good for the climate - and the economy, no matter what source of energy is used.

http://www.dw.de/opinion-eu-abandons-stance-as-climate-leader/a-18019656 (http://www.dw.de/opinion-eu-abandons-stance-as-climate-leader/a-18019656)

Disappointing, to say the least.  Can other, bigger-emitting countries do any better?
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 27, 2014, 04:49:58 PM
Brings to mind the Top Gear disclaimer:  "Ambitious but rubbish."

"@StollmeyerEU: Great page with links to pre- & post EU Summit coverage, quotes & reactions to the #EU2030 deal"

http://t.co/rjGhYKa4bR (http://t.co/rjGhYKa4bR)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 02, 2014, 02:53:37 PM
The IPCC Synthesis Report and the three underlying Working Group Reports are now available for download at http://www.ipcc.ch/ (http://www.ipcc.ch/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 02, 2014, 02:57:34 PM
Statement from 350.org:
COPENHAGEN — One month after unprecedented numbers of people took to the streets to demand climate action as part of the Peoples’ Climate Mobilisation, the world’s scientists have issued their clearest call yet for bold action to address the climate crisis.

May Boeve, Executive Director of 350.org, issued the following statement:

“The scientists have done their job, now it’s the politicians’ turn. World leaders have everything they need to act: clear scientific evidence, a strong economic case, and huge public support. The only thing they lack is the will.”

The report states, with a high degree of confidence, “Substantial reductions in emissions would require large changes in investment patterns.” That conclusion will add momentum to the growing fossil fuel divestment campaign, according to Boeve:

“The report strengthens the case for fossil fuel divestment. It clearly states that the vast majority of coal, oil and gas must remain underground and that investments in the sector must fall by tens of billions of dollars a year. The fossil fuel industry’s business plan and a liveable planet are simply incompatible.”

The report will also help in the fight against the Keystone XL pipeline, a 1,700 mile project that would take tar sands oil from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. Boeve added:

“This report is another nail in Keystone XL’s coffin. The US played a leading role in shaping this report, which says we must stop developing unconventional fossil fuel reserves like tar sands. It would be deeply hypocritical to turn around and approve a carbon bomb like Keystone XL.”

http://350.org/press-release/ipcc-report-strengthens-case-against-fossil-fuel-industry-350-org-says/ (http://350.org/press-release/ipcc-report-strengthens-case-against-fossil-fuel-industry-350-org-says/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: crandles on November 02, 2014, 03:04:56 PM
Does there seem a bit of a disconnect between

The unrestricted use of fossil fuels should be phased out by 2100

per BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29855884 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29855884)

Current CO2eq at something like 478, and

and IPCC
Mitigation scenarios in which it is likely that the temperature change caused by anthropogenic GHG emissions can be kept to less than 2 °C relative to pre-industrial levels are characterized by atmospheric concentrations in 2100 of about 450 ppm CO2eq (high confidence).


Even allowing as likely as not in place of likely only puts the allowable CO2eq level up to 500 but that is more like 11 years away rather than 86 years. Maybe 530 is allowable as a temporary overshoot.


Is the explanation a substantial hope? / trust? / faith? in CCS?
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 03, 2014, 01:41:42 PM
Is the explanation a substantial hope? / trust? / faith? in CCS?

Or, lots and lots of trees.... 
And a desperate hope that the oceans don't start emitting carbon instead of absorbing it.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 03, 2014, 01:48:12 PM
Ban Ki-moon: World leaders are ready to sign climate deal

Scientists and governments have worked intensively over the last week to prepare the report, meeting once again in Copenhagen.

The location has been a bitter reminder for some of the 2009 conference, branded at the time as “No Hopenhagen” thanks to its failure to secure a deal committing governments to meaningful action on climate change.

A recent round of talks in Bonn ended in stalemate, with countries unable to agree on what their contributions to a proposed 2015 climate deal could look like.

But also speaking at the IPCC launch, Manuel Pulgar Vidal, environment minister of Peru and president of this year’s set of main UN negotiations in Lima said he felt hopeful about the prospects of success.

“We are in a completely different process in contrast to what we have in Copenhagen five years ago. We are closer to the science, with more actors like business and civil society.”

http://www.rtcc.org/2014/11/02/ban-ki-moon-world-leaders-are-ready-to-sign-climate-deal (http://www.rtcc.org/2014/11/02/ban-ki-moon-world-leaders-are-ready-to-sign-climate-deal)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 03, 2014, 01:57:05 PM
G20: Australia makes token concession on climate change after US lobbying
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/02/g20-australia-makes-token-concession-on-climate-change-after-us-lobbying (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/02/g20-australia-makes-token-concession-on-climate-change-after-us-lobbying)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 04, 2014, 06:16:06 PM
John Ibbitson says the next climate deal is doomed.  But there's another way to proceed.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-next-climate-deal-is-doomed-but-our-planet-isnt-doomed-yet/article21300990/ (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-next-climate-deal-is-doomed-but-our-planet-isnt-doomed-yet/article21300990/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: P-maker on November 05, 2014, 12:07:21 AM
CCS Tax on fossil fuels

According to information presented during an IEA CCS workshop in Sydney, Australia in February 2012, the following approximate cost estimates for planned new Carbon Capture and Storage plants World-wide were provided:

CCS based on coal (a few R&D demo sites) was estimated to cost about 40 USD per ton of CO2, when fully developed.

CCS based on natural gas (a few operational sites) was roughly estimated to cost about 20 USD per ton of CO2.

CCS based on oil (no real experiments apart from a few EOR sites in North America) could be set at a cost somewhere in between (30 USD per ton of CO2).

Coincidentally, these preliminary cost estimates are fairly well aligned with the relative CO2 emissions from the various fuel types. These cost estimates are also roughly equivalent to the sulphur content of these fuels. And to some extent also the environmental burdens attached to these fuels (water and energy used in extraction processes, and air pollution and aerosols during combustion).

Contacts with major shipping companies have made it clear that a global CCS tax on bunker fuel would be preferable to a patchwork of regional Carbon trading schemes. Considering the environmental problems with this type of fuel (sulphur, NOx and particle pollution), the CCS tax should not be set lower than 50 USD per ton of CO2 emitted. As an example, in order to secure a transparent and non-bureaucratic system, the tax should be collected by a limited number of bunker fuel traders world-wide under strict IMO control.

New fuels have become prominent players on the markets in recent years. First of all, the fracking technology has led to methane production and associated emissions, mainly from US sources. It is estimated that CO2-equivalent emissions from producing and burning of this type of gas is approximately twice as high as conventional natural gas (thus a CCS cost around 40 USD per ton CO2 would bring it on par with coal).

In Germany and other European countries, the phase-out of nuclear power plants has led to re-opening of lignite (brown coal) open cast mining. Also Indonesia, Russia, India and China have traditionally exploited this type of fossil fuel. In October 2014 Canada announced the opening of the World’s first commercial CCS plant, which is based on local brown coal resources and local EOR projects. The plant has received CAD 240 million in public support  out of a total construction budget of 1.5 billion CAD.
( see http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/01/canada-switches-on-worldsfirst-carbon-capture-power-plant (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/01/canada-switches-on-worldsfirst-carbon-capture-power-plant) ).  No production figures have yet been released from this plant. Brown coal is – both from an environmental point of view and regarding greenhouse gas emissions – considered a worse pollutant than traditional coal. Assuming a 50 % higher burden on the atmosphere, the CCS cost (or subsidy) could thus be set at 60 USD per ton of CO2.

Finally, the extraction of liquid petroleum products from tar sands primarily in Canada is generally considered one of the most in-efficient and dirtiest ways of producing liquid fossil fuels. It has recently been estimated that total CO2 emissions from the traded oil products are 3-4 times higher than from conventional oil products. This would imply that the CCS tax on this particular product should be higher than above 100 USD per ton of CO2 emitted.

It is thus suggested to create a level playing field between fossil fuel types, which take into account both environmental and climate change impacts. The CCS Tax system should be transparent and easy to implement.  It should set clear targets for the cost of energy in 2020 to help businesses, consumers and governments in their investment planning. The following tentative  tax levels are suggested to take effect in 2020. The system could start already in 2016 at a 50 % level, increasing the tax by 10 % points each year until 2020.

Fuel Type                    CCS Tax                       Global emissions          Estimated revenue
                                 (USD/t CO2)                 (Gt CO2)                      (Billion USD)

Tar Sand                      100                                  1                                 1
Brown coal                     60                                  3                                 2 
Bunker Fuel                    50                                 2                                  1
Coal & fracked gas          40                                12                                48
Oil                                 30                                12                                36
Natural Gas                    20                                  6                                12

Total  (annual)                                                   36                               100*

*Which is close to the estimated Green Fund pledges made at COP15 ~ 100 Billion USD annually by 2020.

Summary

A gradually implemented global CCS tax along these lines could be negotiated up to and agreed during COP 21 in Paris next year. Not to say that the revenue should be used for CCS projects alone. Other ways of spending the dividend from such a scheme could be negotiated in a parallel negotiation process. But, in order to create a level playing field for competing fossil fuel technologies in a transparent and predictable global system, global policy-makers should design such a scheme to help governments and energy-intensive industries decide on future investments now.

To some extent it is expected, that the revenue will be used to fund time-bound support schemes to implement new renewable energy and energy efficient technologies. These investments will go hand in hand with adaptation measures World-wide. All these measures will make our societies more resilient and contribute to global disaster risk reduction over the next few decades.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: SATire on November 12, 2014, 10:07:14 AM
This morning news on the radio in Germany: "The world largest climate killers USA and China very surprisingly agreed on goals for CO2 emissions". Those goals seems to be not very ambigious and scheduled for 2025 or 2030 but it was concluded, that this agreement could result in some hope, that Paris 2015 is not dead from beginning as everybody is thinking here after all the other failed conferences...   

Some German on-line media: http://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2014-11/klimaschutz-usa-china (http://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2014-11/klimaschutz-usa-china)
http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/klimawandel-china-und-usa-einigen-sich-auf-klimaziele-a-1002398.html (http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/klimawandel-china-und-usa-einigen-sich-auf-klimaziele-a-1002398.html)

So - there may be some hope for the first time after 1995.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 12, 2014, 02:41:48 PM
The U.S. and China just announced a significant climate agreement! 
This sees two of the biggest global emitters acting on climate -- even if the Paris 2015 deal underwhelms -- and provides impetus for other countries to step up as well.

Beijing (CNN) -- At the end of the APEC trade summit in China, U.S. President Barack Obama announced a climate change agreement with Chinese President Xi Jinping that would cut both countries' greenhouse gas emissions by close to a third over the next two decades.

Under the deal, the United States would cut its carbon emissions between 26-28% -- from levels established in 2005 -- by 2025. China would peak its carbon emissions no later than 2030 and would also increase the use of non-fossil fuels to 20% by 2030.

"As the world's two largest economies, energy consumers and emitters of greenhouse gases, we have a special responsibility to lead the global effort against climate change," Obama said Wednesday in a joint press conference with Xi.

Obama said he hopes the announcement will spur other nations to tackle climate change.

http://m.motherjones.com/environment/2014/11/obama-just-announced-historic-climate-deal-china (http://m.motherjones.com/environment/2014/11/obama-just-announced-historic-climate-deal-china)

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/climate-rules-obama-112792.html (http://www.politico.com/story/2014/11/climate-rules-obama-112792.html)

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/11/politics/us-china-climate-change-agreement/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/11/politics/us-china-climate-change-agreement/index.html)

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/12/world/asia/china-us-xi-obama-apec.html?emc=edit_na_20141111&nlid=38021197&_r=2 (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/12/world/asia/china-us-xi-obama-apec.html?emc=edit_na_20141111&nlid=38021197&_r=2)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 13, 2014, 12:16:30 AM
And another good article by Ben Adler of Grist:

According to a statement from the White House press office, the U.S. will reduce emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, with “best efforts” to hit the higher end of that range. China will have its CO2 emissions peak around 2030, “make best efforts to peak early,” and increase the share of non-fossil fuels in its energy portfolio to “around” 20 percent by 2030. You might notice a lot of wiggle room in that language. There’s more. The White House release refers to these goals as statements of “intent.” They don’t promise or even “agree” to hit these targets, they merely “intend” to.

That may sound a little weak, but it’s necessary. Remember, foreign treaties require approval from a two-thirds supermajority of the U.S. Senate before they can be ratified. There’s no way Senate Republicans would vote for an emission-reduction treaty. But by merely jointly announcing with China their intentions, the Obama administration avoids signing an actual treaty. So the Senate can’t formally stop this agreement.
 
http://grist.org/climate-energy/new-u-s-china-climate-deal-is-a-game-changer/ (http://grist.org/climate-energy/new-u-s-china-climate-deal-is-a-game-changer/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 13, 2014, 01:51:00 AM
More on the China-U.S. agreement:

@EricHolthaus: China Tries to Save Earth; Republicans Furious http://t.co/Fxng3K4g31 (http://t.co/Fxng3K4g31)

@EricHolthaus: If China follows through with new climate pledge (and if everyone else joins in), world now on pace for 2.5ºC vs 4ºC http://t.co/5Aexr2gsg7 (http://t.co/5Aexr2gsg7)

@EricHolthaus: China's 'airpocalypse' may turn out to be one of the best things to ever happen in the fight against climate change. http://t.co/gjgc3OQPSA (http://t.co/gjgc3OQPSA)

Slate:
@EricHolthaus: Slate on climate deal
http://t.co/5Aexr2gsg7 (http://t.co/5Aexr2gsg7)
Airpocalypse
http://t.co/gjgc3OQPSA (http://t.co/gjgc3OQPSA)
Coal
http://t.co/4FDDWQ5KZ2 (http://t.co/4FDDWQ5KZ2)
Politics
http://t.co/cbGmrwdP2d (http://t.co/cbGmrwdP2d)

ThinkProgress:
@re_ari: US-China deal in 4 stories: http://t.co/984he8gvkF (http://t.co/984he8gvkF)
Energy http://t.co/vg91tPSqOh (http://t.co/vg91tPSqOh)
Science http://t.co/4o5MNbgYvF (http://t.co/4o5MNbgYvF)
Coal http://t.co/PKMG1DBDUi (http://t.co/PKMG1DBDUi)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 13, 2014, 01:53:25 AM
Carbon Tracker on how the China and U.S. pledges differ from previous statements:
http://climateactiontracker.org/assets/publications/briefing_papers/CAT_release_20141112Final.pdf (http://climateactiontracker.org/assets/publications/briefing_papers/CAT_release_20141112Final.pdf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on November 13, 2014, 07:31:09 AM
This morning news on the radio in Germany: "The world largest climate killers USA and China very surprisingly agreed on goals for CO2 emissions". Those goals seems to be not very ambigious and scheduled for 2025 or 2030 but it was concluded, that this agreement could result in some hope, that Paris 2015 is not dead from beginning as everybody is thinking here after all the other failed conferences...

First you agree that something needs to be done.

Then you agree that you will each do something.

Then, over time, you ratchet up what each will do.  Change starts slow and then accelerates....
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: SATire on November 13, 2014, 10:15:08 AM
Bob,

I think I understood well, that this announcement is a big step for USA and it is one of the very limited possibilities USA could do at all against climate change today, since there is hardly any tradition in agreements due to the usual policital fights and blockings. So I really appreciate that there is a now goal at all. So at least it is looking like there could be some will on your side.

But it is a bit annoying to read this pathetic background music from the parallel universe of silly Hollywood movies. E.g. if we would take words like this
 
"As the world's two largest economies, energy consumers and emitters of greenhouse gases, we have a special responsibility to lead the global effort against climate change," Obama said Wednesday in a joint press conference with Xi.

Obama said he hopes the announcement will spur other nations to tackle climate change.
litterally, then we should stopp all efforts in EU until 2030 to give USA a small chance to lead the efforts against climate change by that time.
Of course that will not happen and we should try to ignore that diplomatic bullshit words and keep on trying harder. That roadmap is anyway well outside any track towards a 2°C goal. So there is some hope now. But finaly any hope will die because reality will be different.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 13, 2014, 04:03:01 PM
...
But it is a bit annoying to read this pathetic background music from the parallel universe of silly Hollywood movies. E.g. if we would take words like this
 
"As the world's two largest economies, energy consumers and emitters of greenhouse gases, we have a special responsibility to lead the global effort against climate change," Obama said Wednesday in a joint press conference with Xi.

Obama said he hopes the announcement will spur other nations to tackle climate change.
litterally, then we should stopp all efforts in EU until 2030 to give USA a small chance to lead the efforts against climate change by that time.
...
I can understand how those words would be annoying to folks in other countries and cities that are way ahead of the U.S. in their clean energy efforts!  I think Obama's words were meant more as encouragement to Americans: let's stop lagging behind; let's catch up to, and encourage, everyone else -- and stop being a model of inaction for those countries still not engaged.  Other countries are moving; why aren't we?
  Given the lethargy of many Americans on this subject, he's likely trying to harken back to the proud old days of the space race and a once powerful economy.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: SATire on November 13, 2014, 05:40:05 PM
Sigmetnow,

I did understand very well from your words, that Obama has some reasons to use annoying words to please someone at home. It is as easy for poeple here to see the things from US perspective as the other way around - so it is not a big deal.

Nevertheless, it is annoying to realize, that annoying words are necessary just to please the US poeple...  That is not a good sign if such tricks are performed in foreign affairs at a place in Asia to prepare a world conference. If even the US diplomatic poeple can not see that difficulties I think they should be substituted by normal poeple with average empathy. Usually it is not helpful to demonstrate hubris in foreign affairs.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on November 13, 2014, 09:34:20 PM
Whether Europe likes it or not, the US is seen as "the leader". 

(BTW, we get a bit tired of being put in that position all the time.  How about someone else jump in and lead the fight against ISIS?  Why was there a call for the US to come straighten out the European mess in Bosnia/Serbia/wherever?  Why do we have to send our military to Africa to fight Ebola?  End of rant....)

The US is seen as the leader in many areas.  That's just the way it is.

China and India have been seen as the big roadblocks.  Or the big "gonna make it fail" countries because if they weren't willing to fight climate change the rest of the world probably couldn't carry their share for them.

Now PBO has announced that he's going to speed up GHG reductions in the US (we're down 10% already).  Now China has committed to peaking and dropping.  Those are corners turned.  Appreciate them.  Put them in perspective.

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: SATire on November 15, 2014, 01:26:24 PM
  Those are corners turned.  Appreciate them.  Put them in perspective.

Bob, I did appreciate, that Obama turned the corners - please read my first post on this topic. It is very good, that Obama quit fighting against an agreement on CO2 emission as USA did since the Kyoto conference. If USA stops being the biggest roadblock that opens the door for other countries also to join an agreement. China is a candidate for this since some time - they allways said that they would join an agreement if USA would do so, too.

However - to call that announcment a sign of leadership is very strange. From here it is even not clear if Obama leads USA in this question. Does he or USA really lead the world in CO2 reduction from your point of view? Is reallity looking so different on both sides of the Atlantic?

No doubt USA is today the most powerfull nation in the world. That is also seen in Europe. But leadership is more than power - it needs some goal or strategy and it needs some will, to motivate others to follow by choice. Such things are not visible here. If you think I am wrong please explain.

And please do not argue with US leadership in near-east. If there is any strategy involved I would be glad to hear about it. Since the overthrough of Mossadegh (the only democracy next to Israel in that region that time) USA was busy fighting its previous friends against former enemies. Is there a strategy in Syria? After fighting Assad last year and ISIS this year maybe PKK next year? You also mentioned Yugoslavia in the 90ies - it was a good thing that USA helped EU with their long term goal to attract more countries and to fight the murder. But today - after the US "fuck the EU" diplomacy and the friendly-fire spying, the "strategy" could also be just to offend Russia. I hope that is not true but I can not know. So I would be gratefull for any explanations to understand which kind of leadership we should appreciate.

Finally, I would be glad if nobody would jump in to take over the leadership in the world. A modern participative leadership would try to save the world with China, India, Russia, USA, Europe and as many others as possible together with equal responsibility, duty and rights. You may blame this boring "old European words" - but the to-do is to prepare the last international climate conference with a minimal chance for all of us. So please do not polarize against that fragile challenge.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 15, 2014, 03:02:08 PM
SATire,
Perhaps the words in this video are closer to what you wish to hear.  This is a speech President Obama just gave to students at the University of Queensland, and so is addressed to a non-U.S. audience.

He speaks of an American presence in the Pacific -- but for assistance, not for conquest.  And of cooperation and support for human rights, the rule of law, the freedom of religion, and why today a problem in one country may affect the whole world.  The several-minute section on climate change (which receives the most applause of any subject in the speech) starts about 25 minutes in.  (In his introduction, he gives a shout out about the Australian 97% climate change consensus study.)

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=52ZPlDSmEj4 (http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=52ZPlDSmEj4)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on November 15, 2014, 06:54:39 PM
Does (PBO) or USA really lead the world in CO2 reduction from your point of view?

No, not at all.  I doubt anyone in the US who has been paying attention would make that claim. 

I'm not sure what head of government stands out as a leader in the fight against climate change.  While Germany, Denmark and other countries have installed a lot of renewables I don't see their presidents/prime ministers standing out from the crowd and encouraging the world to move faster.

In terms of a country, Spain did a lot for a while.  Germany has had a good run but might be slowing.  Australia did great but now may be going backwards.  Things seem to run in starts and stops.

I don't expect to see a dominate "leader".  It's more a case of all countries changing directions, some faster than others.  Some spurting ahead and then encountering a problem that slows their progress. 

What I expect is that with each passing year there will be an evolution of the zeitgeist that moves everyone more toward reducing our climatic problems and we'll all move in that direction as an immense disorganized group.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on November 15, 2014, 07:02:58 PM
I'm passing on the political discussion.  I, personally, can't sort out the Palestinian/Israeli problem.  I'm at the point of saying to hell with both sides.  These idiots have had far, far too much time to sort out their issues.

I recognize the disruptive role the US has played in the Middle East.  We're going to continue to pay a price for putting oil ahead of principals.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: TeaPotty on November 15, 2014, 10:15:14 PM
DeSmogBlog has posted the most balanced (imho) assessment of the US-China Climate deal and its larger context: the good, the bad, and the ugly. (Posted in 2 threads)



China-U.S. Climate Deal Is Historic, But On Its Own Is Not Enough
http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/11/14/u-s-china-climate-deal-historic-its-own-not-enough (http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/11/14/u-s-china-climate-deal-historic-its-own-not-enough)


Quotes
it is historic. For the first time ever, China has agreed to put a cap on the emissions produced by its rapid, voracious economic expansion. While it's certainly not true that the U.S. taking responsibility for its share of global warming pollution wouldn't have had a meaningful impact anyway, it also can't be ignored that averting runaway climate change would be nearly impossible if China's emissions keep growing unabated

...is not the same thing as saying that the deal President Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping struck is enough to get the job done... the emissions targets themselves, which come nowhere near what climate scientists say are needed to prevent catastrophic warming. We must lower global warming pollution 80% below 1990 levels by mid-century, yet the US is still using 2005 as its baseline, and has only committed to lowering emissions 26-28% by 2025. China, meanwhile, needs to see its emissions peak by 2020, climate scientists say, but has only committed to doing so by 2030.

“The net result is not victory,” writes Peter Lee in Counterpunch (http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/11/13/the-uschina-climate-pact-a-requiem-for-the-kyoto-treaty/), “it’s probably the recipe for a global temperature rise of 4 degrees which is much higher than the 2 degree rise that everybody said would be very, very bad.”

There's some fuzzy logic at work in how emissions will be tracked, too, according to DeSmog research fellow Steve Horn (http://www.accuracy.org/release/u-s-china-climate-deal-what-the-cheering-overlooks/): “As the saying goes, read the fine print: nuclear energy will be accounted for as ‘zero emission’ and it looks like carbon capture and storage (CCS) will too, aka ‘clean coal,’ or ’21st Century Coal’ as the U.S. has preferred to call it in terms of its wheeling and dealing with China.”

Meanwhile, a major push to export the U.S.'s fracking boom to China (http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/china-us-fracking-shale-gas) is underway, which further complicates the matter. China is looking to exploit its vast shale gas resources as a means of lowering its reliance on coal and addressing its smog problem, at a time when the U.S. is only beginning to grapple with the true extent of emissions from its own fracking boom (http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2014/10/17/policy-politics/natural-gas-not-answer-emissions).

Another cause for concern: even the emissions reduction commitments in the deal, weak as they may be, are non-binding, so there are no legal or other mechanisms stipulated to actually hold both countries accountable. As Bill McKibben says (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-mckibben/the-big-climate-deal-what_b_6145026.html), “In effect President Obama is writing an IOU to be cashed by future presidents and Congresses (and Xi is doing the same for future Politburos). If they take the actions to meet the targets, then it's meaningful, but for now it's a paper promise. And since physics is uninterested in spin, all the hard work lies ahead.”



Naomi Klein points out (http://thischangeseverything.org/some-very-initial-thoughts-on-the-us-china-deal/) that, “by tying the emission reduction targets of both countries together in a bilateral deal, the President is making sure that his successor will have to weigh any desire to break these commitments against the risks of alienating America most important trading partner.”

The signal it sends to the international community could well be the most important aspect. It has already put pressure on the world's third-largest emitter, India (http://www.newsweek.com/after-us-china-climate-deal-focus-india-follow-suit-284362), to develop its own strategy for lowering emissions... Another good sign is China's commitment to getting 20% of its energy from zero-emission sources by 2030... because they've revolutionized the production of solar energy, driving down the cost of panels by 90 percent or more in the last decade. Who knows how much cheaper this commitment will drive solar prices.


Naomi Klein's new book This Changes Everything makes the case that globalization based on neoliberal economic policies is essentially the antithesis of climate action, and she reiterated that point in her response to the China-U.S. deal:

As I argue in the book, free trade deals and World Trade Organization rules are increasingly being used to undercut important climate policies, by blocking subsidies for renewable energy and other supports for the clean energy sector. The mindless expansion of cross-border trade also fuels carbon-intensive consumption and emissions growth, and NAFTA-style pacts bestow corporations with outrageous powers to challenge national policies at international tribunals. Climate objectives could yet be undermined by the US-China deal on high-tech goods, which still has to be approved by the WTO, or by a massive new regional trade agreement like the Trans-Pacific Partnership.


Republicans have already said they're gunning for the emissions standards in the Clean Power Plan (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/11/09/3590628/gop-senate-epa-rule-shutdown/), and have shown their willingness to shut down the entire federal government to get their way in the past.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 19, 2014, 08:19:54 PM
Really hard to see how Australia's PM Abbott can keep up his strident support for coal and adversity to climate action.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/17/canada-breaks-with-australia-contribute-green-climate-fund?CMP=share_btn_tw (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/nov/17/canada-breaks-with-australia-contribute-green-climate-fund?CMP=share_btn_tw)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/19/us-australia-france-climatechange-idUSKCN0J307K20141119 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/19/us-australia-france-climatechange-idUSKCN0J307K20141119)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 21, 2014, 06:57:36 PM
Arguments against the pushback on the UK pledge to the Green Climate Fund.

"People recognise that we live in a global economy where when something happens in another part of the world it can impact on our lives here. The idea we should be isolationist Little Englanders is absolute nonsense."

'No magic drawbridge'

Mr Davey said there would be a UK member on the board of the Green Climate Fund to ensure the money is spent on helping the poorest countries adapt to climate change and industrialise in a low carbon way.

And Lord Stern, a former government adviser on the economics of climate change, said: "To suggest that we must choose between investing in flood defences in the UK or helping international efforts to tackle the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing sea levels to rise along British coasts and leading the heavier rainfall is to misunderstand both the phenomenon itself and the basics of policy.

"Reducing risk and managing the effects of climate change must go hand in hand. To suggest otherwise is foolish."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-30126953 (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-30126953)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 23, 2014, 02:05:33 PM
Really hard to see how Australia's PM Abbott can keep up his strident support for coal and adversity to climate action.

This writer feels much the same way:
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/nov/21/tony-abbott-keeps-digging-himself-in-deeper-and-it-makes-no-sense (http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/nov/21/tony-abbott-keeps-digging-himself-in-deeper-and-it-makes-no-sense)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 24, 2014, 02:04:50 AM
Los Angeles, California, will host a summit for Chinese and U.S. cities to launch carbon emissions cuts.
http://www.latimes.com/local/cityhall/la-me-garcetti-china-20141122-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/local/cityhall/la-me-garcetti-china-20141122-story.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 25, 2014, 01:17:23 PM
The world's fossil fuels will "obviously" have to stay in the ground in order to solve global warming, Barack Obama's climate change envoy said on Monday.

In the clearest sign to date the administration sees no long-range future for fossil fuel, the state department climate change envoy, Todd Stern, said the world would have no choice but to forgo developing reserves of oil, coal and gas.

http://m.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2383277/obama-s-climate-change-envoy-fossil-fuels-will-have-to-stay-in-the-ground (http://m.businessgreen.com/bg/news/2383277/obama-s-climate-change-envoy-fossil-fuels-will-have-to-stay-in-the-ground)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 26, 2014, 05:47:24 PM
Negotiators weigh in on what it will take to make the numbers add up.
Franz Perrez, Switzerland:

We see the process as following the four C’s.

The first C would be “clarification”, so that we understand what the specific mitigation targets are, and commitments or intended contributions on mitigation, and understanding with regard to emissions: how much emissions can we expect afterwards? Also with regard to the effort that is behind these numbers.

The second C would be to “compile”, or aggregate these different mitigation targets.

The third C would be to “compare” it with what is needed to be on track with a 2C objective.

The fourth C would be a process of “cooperation”, to close the remaining gap through international cooperation. This means for us it is also important that these intended nationally determined mitigation contributions are unconditional, that these are contributions that parties are willing to take independently of support they’re receiving, because support will then be the cooperative tool to close the remaining gap.

http://www.rtcc.org/2014/11/25/un-climate-negotiators-outline-priorities-for-lima/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2014/11/25/un-climate-negotiators-outline-priorities-for-lima/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 29, 2014, 06:43:18 PM
US-China pact has shifted the dynamics of climate talks
India is looking for new allies, Peru wants to bring Latin Americans together and Europe needs to get its mojo back.

http://www.rtcc.org/2014/11/28/us-china-pact-has-shifted-the-dynamics-of-climate-talks/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2014/11/28/us-china-pact-has-shifted-the-dynamics-of-climate-talks/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 30, 2014, 07:12:33 PM
One year to save the planet from climate change disaster, UK energy and climate change secretary Ed Davey warns

Agreeing global deal to cut carbon emissions next year is only way to protect "way of life we take for granted", energy secretary says, ahead of UN climate change summit in Lima
...
"If each of the important ministers leaves Lima feeling confident that all the others are committed to making a new deal in Paris that will enable the 2C target to be met, then the prospects of making that deal will be significantly higher.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/11262835/One-year-to-save-the-planet-from-climate-change-disaster-Ed-Davey-warns.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/11262835/One-year-to-save-the-planet-from-climate-change-disaster-Ed-Davey-warns.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 01, 2014, 12:21:12 AM
That seems to be hyperbole to me.

We could continue as we are doing right now for a few more years and then work that much harder the following years in order to hit 2030, 2050 and 2100 targets.

Obviously the smart thing would be to not delay.  And the smarter thing would have been to start many years earlier.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 02, 2014, 03:26:32 PM
Global Climate Talks Open with Push for Human Rights
The U.N. climate negotiations are no longer just about emissions limits but also social justice.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/global-climate-talks-open-with-push-for-human-rights/ (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/global-climate-talks-open-with-push-for-human-rights/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on December 02, 2014, 06:10:46 PM
Global Climate Talks Open with Push for Human Rights
The U.N. climate negotiations are no longer just about emissions limits but also social justice.

Right.... Pair every last sock first, then we can start thinking about this climate thing later.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on December 02, 2014, 06:20:30 PM
OMG, it's the Empathy Crowd.

"When we started off talking about climate change, it was climate scientists talking about tons of carbon, and degrees of warming, and inches of sea level rise," said Tara Shine, head of research and development for the Mary Robinson Foundation – Climate Justice. "That is all perfectly correct, but people have more empathy and are more concerned when you talk about climate in terms of people right from the start."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 02, 2014, 08:45:24 PM
The U.S. is backing a plan that lets each country decide the emissions cuts it will make to curb global warming.
Despite more than 20 years of international discussions about addressing climate change, the world's emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases are higher than ever. Efforts have stumbled, in part, over the stringency and feasibility of emissions cuts. In the past, big polluters such as the United States were mandated by a U.N. accord to make deep cuts, a top-down approach that Congress rejected.

This time, the U.S. is backing a bottom-up plan that lets each country determine the emissions cuts it will make, Stern said. Still, countries would have to accept other binding conditions, such as a schedule for announcing planned cuts, and uniform and transparent reporting standards. Further, countries would have to agree to no backsliding: Emissions targets set every five or 10 years would have to be increasingly more ambitious.

http://www.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-us-climate-20141202-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-us-climate-20141202-story.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on December 02, 2014, 09:04:27 PM
Yup. It's like saying people can bring their six–pack plastic and cans and garbage back from the forest if they feel like it, but if they would rather leave their litter out in the free nature, that is also their free choice as human beings, the 'wise ape'.

The conclusion is that this 'climate thing' is something insignificant, something people can do in their spare time if and only if they are so inclined, but no bad thing will happen to them if they simply don't care (this time around either).

The 'carbon limiting process' till now is impossible to separate from no negotiating process at all. We could just as well in blissful ignorance all just have tried to pollute as much as we could, the difference for the atmosphere would certainly be minuscule.

Oh, well. I guess all it boils down to is: Don't Believe The Hype.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 03, 2014, 01:29:30 AM
Pollution forced China into climate change action.  Will India be next?
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/03/upshot/the-next-big-climate-question-will-india-follow-china.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/03/upshot/the-next-big-climate-question-will-india-follow-china.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 06, 2014, 04:51:15 PM
As negotiators gather in Peru for a critical round of climate talks, U.S. delegates are straining to explain what they call a “counterintuitive” reality: For next year’s global climate agreement to be effective, commitments made under it must not be legally binding.

Still, there are plenty of signs that there’s room for a global accord to emerge, with every faction — from the poorest to the richest — finding a comfort zone thanks to the 24-year-old clause in the original climate treaty laying out nations’ “common but differentiated responsibilities” (here’s a great explainer from McGill’s Center for International Sustainable Development Law).

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/05/the-soft-path-to-a-climate-agreement-from-lima-to-paris/ (http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/05/the-soft-path-to-a-climate-agreement-from-lima-to-paris/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 06, 2014, 05:37:14 PM
New approaches at the Lima talks.
Zero Emissions

Talk of limiting warming of the planet to 2 degrees Celsius is giving way to talk of reducing greenhouse gases emissions to zero this century. It's the same goal, just put more bluntly: total decarbonization of the world's energy economy within a generation.

All eyes are on this revolutionary prize.

Unless the world attains zero emissions, it will miss the 2-degree goal. On the present course, the planet is likely to warm considerably more than that.

So it's not that negotiators are giving up on the temperature target. But it is seen as too abstract, requiring complex math to translate into concrete policies. Depending on how sensitive the climate system is to carbon dioxide pollution, the 2-degree goal probably requires keeping CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere below 450 parts per million. That means staying within a fixed "carbon budget"—one that the world will bust in just a few decades unless emissions are reined in severely. ...

All those numbers are hard to fathom. So climate hawks have started to use a much starker and comprehensible number: zero.

http://insideclimatenews.org/carbon-copy/20141202/biggest-hurdles-plaguing-global-climate-accord-explained (http://insideclimatenews.org/carbon-copy/20141202/biggest-hurdles-plaguing-global-climate-accord-explained)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 07, 2014, 07:38:57 PM
China offered new details on its commitment to rein in greenhouse gases and called on rich nations to speed up delivery of the $100 billion in annual climate-related aid they’ve promised by 2020.

China will work to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases emitted for every dollar of gross domestic product and to boost its stock of forests that absorb emissions, Su Wei, China’s lead climate negotiator, said today. The comments are among the most significant from a Chinese official since President Xi Jinping pledged last month to begin to reduce carbon-dioxide pollution around 2030 and expand supplies of renewable power.

Addressing carbon intensity is key as China emits almost twice as much pollution to achieve the same amount of growth as the U.S., according to data from the International Energy Agency. China’s carbon intensity is on par with the U.S. level in 1985.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-12-04/china-broadens-pollution-pledge-in-call-for-more-climate-funding (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-12-04/china-broadens-pollution-pledge-in-call-for-more-climate-funding)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 07, 2014, 07:48:01 PM
Canada to U.S.: your game, but my rules.
On Friday, the minister announced that Ottawa will enact new regulations to control hydrofluorocarbons, which are used in air conditioning and heating. The powerful short-term greenhouse gases account for only 1 per cent of Canada’s overall emissions. But she reiterated that Ottawa will not move to regulate emissions from the oil sands until the United States is ready to address its oil industry – a decision that, according to many analysts, makes it virtually impossible for Canada to hit its 2020 target.

While the United States, China and the European Union have announced new emissions targets, the Canadian government faces mounting skepticism about its commitment to meet 2020 targets, and is a long way from announcing its goals for 2025 or 2030.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-sticks-to-its-line-on-the-oil-sands-at-un-climate-summit/article21979592/ (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-sticks-to-its-line-on-the-oil-sands-at-un-climate-summit/article21979592/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 07, 2014, 07:56:28 PM
That stance from Canada is going to go a long way in helping PBO to make a decision on the Keystone pipeline.    ;D
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 08, 2014, 03:36:33 PM
Do as I say, but not as I do?

Australia’s insistence on legally binding emissions targets is an ‘impossible requirement’ that would drive away the US and China, experts say, suggesting the Abbott government is trying to set up the climate change talks for failure.
“A legally binding agreement is of no value anyway, as, while it may be legally binding, such an agreement is not enforceable. Look at Canada’s walking away from its legally binding Kyoto commitments … and there is no evidence that countries are more likely to deliver on notionally legally binding than on domestic political commitments.
...
“Australia is going in the opposite direction. Its Direct Action policy contains no binding limits on emissions. This discussion about the need for legally binding international commitments is just a distraction and would be the worst possible thing for a successful global climate agreement.”

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/dec/08/abbott-government-accused-of-trying-to-set-up-climate-change-talks-for-failure (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/dec/08/abbott-government-accused-of-trying-to-set-up-climate-change-talks-for-failure)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 08, 2014, 09:21:20 PM
Philippines Official On Typhoon Hagupit: ‘The Impacts Of Climate Change Are Beyond Our Capacity’
...Mary Ann Lucille Sering, commissioner of the Philippines’ Climate Change Commission and lead climate official for the Philippines at the conference, said that Hagupit and the other typhoons that have hit the Philippines in recent years show that “the impacts of climate change are beyond our capacity already.”

“Our country’s experience makes our work here (in Lima) so much more meaningful, as this is no longer just a job for us but a fight for our survival and the future of our nation,” she said. “We hope that the Philippine experience, no matter how difficult, can help unite all nations to take more concrete actions on climate change.”

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/12/08/3600673/philippines-typhoon-hagupit-climate-impacts/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/12/08/3600673/philippines-typhoon-hagupit-climate-impacts/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 09, 2014, 03:01:16 AM
Fossil fuel giants like Chevron and Shell tried to host a panel at the UN climate talks, but activists (and media) overpowered the event demanding the truth be told.

https://storify.com/350dotorg/get-the-fossil-fuels-out-of-climate-talks (https://storify.com/350dotorg/get-the-fossil-fuels-out-of-climate-talks)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jamie-henn/a-fossil-fuel-scandal-at-_b_6278018.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jamie-henn/a-fossil-fuel-scandal-at-_b_6278018.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 09, 2014, 02:20:18 PM
Increasing calls for "zero emissions by 2050”
World Bank chief calls for “zero net emissions” climate goal

Jim Kim joins growing momentum behind drive to ensure 2015 climate deal will wipe out fossil fuel use

http://www.rtcc.org/2014/12/09/world-bank-chief-calls-for-zero-net-emissions-climate-goal/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2014/12/09/world-bank-chief-calls-for-zero-net-emissions-climate-goal/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 09, 2014, 07:45:41 PM
Increasing calls for "zero emissions by 2050”


We can do that.

2050 is 35 years away.  Jacobson and Delucchi (2009) laid out the road map to get their in only 20 years.  Since their paper we've improved our technology, making the job easier.



http://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/sad1109Jaco5p.indd.pdf (http://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/sad1109Jaco5p.indd.pdf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 09, 2014, 10:13:04 PM
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry to attend Lima climate conference.
LIMA, Peru — In a sign of the importance that the Obama administration has placed on the outcome of United Nations climate change negotiations taking place here this week, Secretary of State John Kerry will arrive on Thursday to strongly urge negotiators to reach a deal, according to sources familiar with Mr. Kerry’s plans but unauthorized to speak to the media. Typically, the secretary of state would not join diplomatic negotiations at this level, but Mr. Kerry has made climate change a priority of his tenure.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/09/us/politics/kerry-plans-to-attend-climate-talks.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/09/us/politics/kerry-plans-to-attend-climate-talks.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 09, 2014, 11:28:05 PM
India considers emissions peak 2035-50
Since the US-China joint declaration that the US will reduce emissions by 2025 and China’s will peak by 2030, the Indian government has been under increasing international pressure to make a similar commitment.  China is now the world’s top GHG emitter, the US second and India third.

According to senior officials in the Ministry of External Affairs and the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, this pressure was ratcheted up last week, just before New Delhi announced that US president Barack Obama would be the chief guest at India’s Republic Day parade on January 26.

Speaking on the condition of anonymity, these officials told indiaclimatedialogue.net that the US administration had made a joint declaration on the lines of the US-China declaration almost a condition before Obama accepted the invitation.
...
A veteran American climate negotiator told indiaclimatedialogue.net: “Diplomats do not use words such as ‘conditions’, but the White House has made its wishes clear.” He added that he was hopeful that a joint declaration would be made during the Obama visit.
...
Asked what the peaking year could be, the official said: “All options between 2035 and 2050 are on the table. We have commissioned some studies by independent think tanks to gauge the effect of the peaking year on the Indian economy.

http://www.rtcc.org/2014/12/03/india-considers-emissions-peak-2035-50/#.dpuf (http://www.rtcc.org/2014/12/03/india-considers-emissions-peak-2035-50/#.dpuf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 09, 2014, 11:38:13 PM
Sounds like most of the world has decided that's it's time to get to work and cut carbon.

Santa will be delivering a sock full of coal to Abbott.  With some luck Santa will knock some sense into Tony's thick skull.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 09, 2014, 11:43:54 PM
Shell makes climate pitch as UN targets zero carbon planet
Indeed, analysts at Climate Action Tracker calculated the latest commitments from the European Union, US and China put likely warming at 2.9-3.1C.

CCS expert Heleen de Coninck, from Radbound University, warned against placing too much faith in the technology.
...
Even if it does take off, there are limits on the volume of storage sites, she added. CCS on energy intensive industry like steel and cement, for which there are few alternatives to fossil fuels, should take priority.

“It is very important to never see CCS as an alternative to demand reduction and renewable energy.”

At a separate press conference, IPCC contributing author Malte Meinhausen stressed the need to phase out emissions.

“At some point emissions have to go to zero, no matter what,” he said. “Even at higher or lower temp levels there is no way around zero CO2 levels.”

International climate policy expert Farhana Yamin told RTCC countries were unlikely to oppose a 2050 zero emissions target for fear of being labelled “science deniers”. [my emphasis]

Sweden, Norway, Costa Rica, Bhutan and the Marshall islands have been among the most vocal advocates for such a goal.

French president Francois Holland, who will host next year’s climate conference, and UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon have also called for long term ambition.

http://www.rtcc.org/2014/12/09/shell-makes-climate-pitch-as-un-targets-zero-carbon-planet/#.dpuf (http://www.rtcc.org/2014/12/09/shell-makes-climate-pitch-as-un-targets-zero-carbon-planet/#.dpuf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: crandles on December 10, 2014, 02:06:35 AM
India considers emissions peak 2035-50

countries were unlikely to oppose a 2050 zero emissions target for fear of being labelled “science deniers”.

An Indian emission peak by 2050 at the same time as world zero emissions. Hmmm.  ???  :o ;)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 10, 2014, 03:22:53 AM
Is there now a reliable study/set of studies that demonstrates that we must be a zero CO2 by 2050?
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: crandles on December 10, 2014, 11:23:56 AM
I think that is the trillion tons of carbon emissions stuff:

This cumulative carbon measure has the added benefit that it strips away a lot of the uncertainties surrounding complicated scenarios for cutting emissions, says IPCC climate modeler Myles Allen of Oxford University. "Policy targets based on limiting cumulative emissions of carbon are likely to be more scientifically robust than [those from] emissions rates or concentration targets," he says.

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/the_trillion-ton_cap_allocating_the_worlds_carbon_emissions/2703/ (http://e360.yale.edu/feature/the_trillion-ton_cap_allocating_the_worlds_carbon_emissions/2703/)

'Likely to be more scientifically robust' may well be different to your 'demonstrates that we must'.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 11, 2014, 08:14:10 PM
Goal to end fossil fuels by 2050 surfaces in Lima UN climate documents
Campaigners in Lima are eyeing an ‘inevitable’ end to the fossil fuel industry by mid-century

In an early evening briefing, climate scientist Dr Malte Meinshausen explained the 2050 decarbonisation date was derived from statements in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports.

He said that from 2011, the world could afford to emit no more than 1000bn tonnes (Gt) of CO2 to have a good chance of staying below 2C of global warming (some poorer countries and low-lying states say the aim should be 1.5C). Meinshausen said:

At current rates we churn through 33Gt a year – 1000Gt divided by 33 means we have about 30 years left from 2011 onwards. Then the carbon budget will be exhausted.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2014/dec/08/goal-to-end-fossil-fuels-by-2050-surfaces-in-lima-un-climate-documents (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2014/dec/08/goal-to-end-fossil-fuels-by-2050-surfaces-in-lima-un-climate-documents)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 11, 2014, 09:28:07 PM
The 1 Gigaton Coalition: saving gigatons of CO2 emissions each year via energy efficiency and renewables.
UNEP-Coordinated Coalition Aims to Support Climate Change Fight through Measuring Emission Reductions from Energy Efficiency, Renewable Energy Projects

Lima, Peru, 10 December 2014 - A coalition launched today at the climate talks in Lima aims to boost efforts to save billions of dollars and billions of tonnes of CO2 emissions each year by measuring and reporting reductions of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from projects and programmes that promote renewable energy and energy efficiency in developing countries.

The 1 Gigaton Coalition, initiated by the Government of Norway and coordinated by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), has been formed in light of the understanding that many countries have a wide range of renewable energy and energy efficiency projects and initiatives in place.

However, most do not measure or report the reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that result. The Coalition believes that, if measured, these reductions would amount to about one gigaton a year by 2020 - showing the savings that can be made and thus encouraging the uptake of energy efficiency policies and renewable energy technologies.

http://www.unep.org/newscentre/Default.aspx?DocumentID=2814&ArticleID=11106&l=en (http://www.unep.org/newscentre/Default.aspx?DocumentID=2814&ArticleID=11106&l=en)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on December 11, 2014, 10:04:42 PM
" saving gigatons of CO2 emissions each year via energy efficiency..."

Two words for you: Jevons paradox.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 11, 2014, 10:27:50 PM
Two words for you -

Improper application.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 12, 2014, 02:28:17 AM
Catholic Bishops from every continent denounce fossil fuel use and capitalism, "which is a human creation."
A group of Catholic Bishops called on the world’s governments to end fossil fuel use on Wednesday, citing climate change’s threat to the global poor as the lodestar of their concern.

According to the BBC, the statement is the first time senior officials in the Church from every continent have issued such a call. The statement also drops in the middle of ongoing international climate talks in Lima, Peru, as countries continue to hash out what to do about climate change in the run-up to a summit in 2015, where observers and activists hope a new international agreement will be finalized.

“We express an answer to what is considered God’s appeal to take action on the urgent and damaging situation of global climate warming,” the bishops wrote.

Striking a similar note to Naomi Klein’s recent book, “This Changes Everything,” the bishops’ statement also argued that global capitalism and its economic systems, as currently designed, are incompatible with long-term ecological sustainability: “The main responsibility for this situation lies with the dominant global economic system, which is a human creation. In viewing objectively the destructive effects of a financial and economic order based on the primacy of the market and profit, which has failed to put the human being and the common good at the heart of the economy, one must recognize the systemic failures of this order and the need for a new financial and economic order.”

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/12/11/3602596/bishops-end-fossil-fuels/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/12/11/3602596/bishops-end-fossil-fuels/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 12, 2014, 03:58:45 AM
" saving gigatons of CO2 emissions each year via energy efficiency..."

Two words for you: Jevons paradox.

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox[/url] ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox[/url])


One word for you: Outdated.

More words:   :)

Some also argue that making energy cheaper by reducing demand just leads consumers to use more, a phenomenon called the rebound effect. Steven Nadel, executive director of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, said the effect was real but relatively modest, with about 20 percent of saved energy in developed countries being used as a result.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/01/business/energy-environment/energy-efficiency-may-be-the-key-to-saving-trillions.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/01/business/energy-environment/energy-efficiency-may-be-the-key-to-saving-trillions.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 12, 2014, 04:17:43 AM
There is likely some avoided electricity use due to cost but freeing up more electricity via efficiency is not likely to cause people to turn on a second TV in their living room or fire up two ovens to heat their left over meat loaf.   

Efficiency, if anything, will lead to lower price increases rather than price drops.  In general we are shutting down cheaper supply (dirty coal plants) and replacing them with supply that is about the same price or a bit more expensive.

(Except for those very expensive reactors coming on line in the SE.  Some day.  Maybe.)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on December 13, 2014, 03:56:12 AM
Lima: Recipe for Failure (http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=49597#.VIunP2TF9K8) (and civilization collapse)

12 December 2014 – Addressing the Congress of Peru today, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said that despite impressive development achievements, big challenges remain – to address inequality and insecurity, deepen democracy, improve the quality of education, and protect the rights of all people regardless of gender, ethnicity, culture, religion or sexual orientation.

Being UN–focused: UN Czar Ban Ki-moon trying very hard to fail.

(http://static.un.org/News/dh/photos/large/2014/December/616634Ban_Peru.jpg)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 13, 2014, 06:02:02 PM
Australia:  Abbott begins to turn around on climate change.

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/abbott-sniffs-the-wind-on-climate-change-20141212-12660c.html (http://www.smh.com.au/comment/abbott-sniffs-the-wind-on-climate-change-20141212-12660c.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 13, 2014, 06:39:25 PM
Australia:  Abbott begins to turn around on climate change.

[url]http://www.smh.com.au/comment/abbott-sniffs-the-wind-on-climate-change-20141212-12660c.html[/url] ([url]http://www.smh.com.au/comment/abbott-sniffs-the-wind-on-climate-change-20141212-12660c.html[/url])


"Depend upon it, sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully."

Samuel Johnson:  Boswell's Life of Johnson
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 13, 2014, 09:48:53 PM
10-minute video: Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore speaks to the Lima conference.
"We are drawing the design for the global Paris agreement."
http://unfccc6.meta-fusion.com/cop20/events/2014-12-11-15-38-lima-climate-action-high-level-meeting/mr-al-gore-former-vice-president-of-the-united-states-of-america (http://unfccc6.meta-fusion.com/cop20/events/2014-12-11-15-38-lima-climate-action-high-level-meeting/mr-al-gore-former-vice-president-of-the-united-states-of-america)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 13, 2014, 10:31:41 PM
Greenpeace disrespects one of the ancient Peruvian Nasca lines (mentioned in Al Gore's speech, above).
http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/12/travel/greenpeace-nazca-lines-damage/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/12/travel/greenpeace-nazca-lines-damage/index.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 14, 2014, 03:57:05 AM
Many countries disagree with the proposed text.  Discussions continue.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on December 14, 2014, 05:15:53 AM
 ;D

'Absorbing the effects of climate change' will cost a lot more than $200 billion annually by 2050. I'd be surprised if a good old billion could buy you anything worth having in 2050.

Rich countries insisted the pledges focus on efforts to control emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases and were resisting demands that they include promises of financing to help poor countries absorb the effects of climate change, which the U.N. environment agency last week estimated will amount to at least $200 billion annually by 2050.

UN climate talks in Peru deadlocked as wealthy nations resist scope of demands (http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/lifestyle/2014/12/13/un-climate-talks-in-peru-deadlocked-as-wealthy-nations-resist-scope-demands/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Lennart van der Linde on December 14, 2014, 12:35:54 PM
The Lima Call to Climate Action + Annex:
http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/lima_dec_2014/application/pdf/auv_cop20_lima_call_for_climate_action.pdf (http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/lima_dec_2014/application/pdf/auv_cop20_lima_call_for_climate_action.pdf)

“Noting with grave concern the significant gap between the aggregate effect of Parties’ mitigation pledges in terms of global annual emissions of greenhouse gases by 2020 and aggregate emission pathways consistent with having a likely chance of holding the increase in global average temperature below 2 °C or 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels”

Some options in the Annex:
“A global emission budget to be divided among all Parties, in accordance with the principles and provisions of the Convention, in order to limit global warming this century to below 1.5 °C according to the IPCC assessment. The distribution of the global emission budget should be undertaken in accordance with historical responsibilities, ecological footprint, capabilities and state of development.”

“Consistent with carbon neutrality / net zero emissions by 2050, or full decarbonization by 2050 and/or negative emissions by 2100″

“Consistent with emissions peaking for developed countries in 2015, with an aim of zero net emissions by 2050; in the context of equitable access to sustainable development”

“Stabilization of the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at or below 350 ppm of CO2 equivalent in the context of equitable access to sustainable development”
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 14, 2014, 01:42:31 PM
Lima: Recipe for Failure (and civilization collapse)
...
Being UN–focused: UN Czar Ban Ki-moon trying very hard to fail.

Nowhere does the article say anything about civilization collapse.  Or failure of the talks.

Your impressive achievements have moved the world closer to meeting the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs),” Mr. Ban said, commending the Latin American nation for advances in poverty reduction, universal education, and water supply and sanitation.

“This week, Lima became the centre of global efforts toward an ambitious new climate change agreement and setting the world on a safer, more sustainable path,” he said.
...
Also today, Mr. Ban met with President Ollanta Moisés Humala Tasso of Peru at the launch of a National Plan on human rights education. Mr. Ban commended Peru’s landmark law on Consultation with Indigenous Peoples, the first in Latin America. Through this law, Peru has recognized that dialogue is fundamental to social cohesion and sustainable development.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on December 14, 2014, 02:46:02 PM
This is as big as failures come, IMO, so I think I'm entitled to use the F–word.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 14, 2014, 04:08:07 PM
The UN COP20 talks in Lima, Peru have concluded.  The final document is derided as weak, but it is significant that it says all countries, not just the rich ones, must act. Remember, Lima was not supposed to create global law, merely to provide a framework for a Paris 2015 treaty. 

Since so many individual countries haven't managed to pass tough binding legislation on their own turf, it is remarkable that 190 disparate countries found any agreement -- even at a low level.  The most significant climate actions are being taken at other than state level.  And more and more, the people are demanding action.


Note: Recent announcements by China, the United States and European Union, who comprise approximately 53% of global emissions, have bent the world's warming curve away from 4 or 6°C down to 3 +/- .1 °C.   
http://climateactiontracker.org/news/178/China-US-and-EU-post-2020-plans-reduce-projected-warming.html (http://climateactiontracker.org/news/178/China-US-and-EU-post-2020-plans-reduce-projected-warming.html)

 
A few tweets:
@ClimateReality: The goal of Lima? To create a framework requiring all nations to put forward plans over the next six months to cut their own emissions.

@rtcc_sophie: Text includes: language on adaptation, greater balance across elements, CBDR, finance, loss and damage… #COP20

@brandoncwu: New text has nice new words & references re adaptation, finance, loss & damage, carefully placed to have absolutely no legal meaning #COP20

@EricHolthaus: "Lima Call for Climate Action" is anything but... though at least #COP20 isn't a complete collapse. UN process seems increasingly irrelevant

@rtcc_sophie: Of course it makes perfect sense that a meeting about future of planet would start around midnight when no one's slept for 48 hours. #COP20


Tcktcktck has a good summary of the COP20 agreement, pulling no punches.
Overall, this COP shows governments are disconnected from their people who are worried about climate risks and want a just transition to boost our economies, deliver jobs and strengthen public health. Increasingly domestic issues, whether they are elections or decisions about major projects such as the Keystone XL pipeline in the US and the Galilee basin in Australia, will be seen as a country’s intention on climate change. While governments were able to hide in Lima, they won’t have that luxury in Paris where the world will be expecting them to deliver an agreement.

http://tcktcktck.org/2014/12/daily-tck-lima-climate-talks-fall-short-expectations-attention-shifts-paris/65760 (http://tcktcktck.org/2014/12/daily-tck-lima-climate-talks-fall-short-expectations-attention-shifts-paris/65760)


Reuters: Not enough for 2°, but agreement does say all countries, rich and poor, must act.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0JS04520141214 (http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0JS04520141214)

London, The Telegraph: Lima climate change summit: 'weak' UN deal could let countries dodge green pledges
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/climatechange/11292872/Lima-climate-change-summit-weak-UN-deal-could-let-countries-dodge-green-pledges.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/climatechange/11292872/Lima-climate-change-summit-weak-UN-deal-could-let-countries-dodge-green-pledges.html)

WWF:
“Governments crucially failed to agree on specific plans to cut emissions before 2020 that would have laid the ground for ending the fossil fuel era and accelerated the move toward renewable energy and increased energy efficiency."

http://www.wwf.org.uk/about_wwf/press_centre/scottish_press_centre/?7418/UN-climate-talks-fail-to-deliver-progress-despite-hottest-year-on-record---WWF-comment (http://www.wwf.org.uk/about_wwf/press_centre/scottish_press_centre/?7418/UN-climate-talks-fail-to-deliver-progress-despite-hottest-year-on-record---WWF-comment)


Climate Reality gives the positive spin:
First, this has been a critical two weeks with many reasons for #ClimateHope and signs that the tide is finally turning in our favor. Second, we have a lot of work to do between now and December 2015 to get the agreement we need.

http://climaterealityproject.org/blog/cop20-brief (http://climaterealityproject.org/blog/cop20-brief)

@ClimateReality: .@UN negotiators now praise US & China–once outcasts of the climate community–for their climate commitments http://t.co/8uDaMcoauU (http://t.co/8uDaMcoauU) #COP20


The UN's announcement:
UN: Lima Call for Climate Action Puts World on Track to Paris 2015
http://newsroom.unfccc.int/3587.aspx (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/3587.aspx)

Noted: Important steps to bring education back into the spotlight
@cinulima: #COP20 Educación y participación pública claves p/ promover #desarrollosostenible resiliente.
https://mobile.twitter.com/cinulima/status/543969578947477504/photo/1 (https://mobile.twitter.com/cinulima/status/543969578947477504/photo/1)

And here is the document:
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2014/cop20/eng/l14.pdf (http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2014/cop20/eng/l14.pdf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 14, 2014, 07:19:55 PM
Under a new climate deal, all countries will plan to limit carbon emissions. That's a first.
http://www.vox.com/2014/12/14/7389955/climate-deal-lima (http://www.vox.com/2014/12/14/7389955/climate-deal-lima)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on December 14, 2014, 07:26:21 PM
Norwegian Green Party says the 'deal' is that everyone can just do what they want. Ie a no–deal deal.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on December 15, 2014, 10:11:39 AM
The COP20 Climate Talks Disaster Movie
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jamie-henn/the-cop20-climate-talks-d_b_6321326.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jamie-henn/the-cop20-climate-talks-d_b_6321326.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 15, 2014, 02:10:28 PM
Great article pointing out important work being done outside of the talks -- showing, rather than telling, other countries what is working.
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/14/at-climate-talks-in-lima-not-same-as-it-ever-was/ (http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/14/at-climate-talks-in-lima-not-same-as-it-ever-was/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 15, 2014, 02:42:47 PM
It was tempting to leave it to Lima to solve the entire world crises, so we could say, "Now that's done," and get on with our lives.  It's not going to be that easy!
The U.N. process isn't where the action is on climate anymore. Progressive cities, transformative industries, and mass protests have the best chance of providing the tipping point that's needed. These talks are a distraction from the kind of urgent, on-the-ground work that needs to happen in order to steer the world’s economy toward a carbon-free path and prepare for the impacts of increasingly extreme weather.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/12/14/lima_peru_climate_change_negotiations_one_word_undermines_the_entire_thing.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/12/14/lima_peru_climate_change_negotiations_one_word_undermines_the_entire_thing.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 15, 2014, 05:55:52 PM
"Broad participation with moderate ambition trumps narrow participation with big ambition."
The substitution of the phrase “may include” for “shall include” in regard to the elements of the INDCs was one of the compromises that was necessary to gain the approval of developing countries. So, the U.S.-favored requirement for the use of transparent elements in INDCs that would facilitate comparisons among countries was dropped.

However, at least one negotiating team with whom I met in Lima maintained that the analyses and comparisons of INDCs that will inevitably be carried out by various NGOs and research organizations (including universities) will provide the needed transparency and therefore the needed encouragement to countries for greater ambition.

http://t.co/SSnhlTA9aP (http://t.co/SSnhlTA9aP)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 15, 2014, 09:20:08 PM
Full disclosure - I stole this comment...

The final Lima declaration is basically mood music for the real negotiations in Paris.

Figueres' plan is simple. The crucial commitment at Lima was for all countries to submit their detailed national mitigation plans, which will all be published on the UNFCC website. There are no numbers at present, so countries can submit whatever they like,

But lowball targets, as with hapless Australia's, will then come under sustained pressure from the climate hawk countries, and ridicule from public opinion. The success of the plan will depend very much on all of us kicking up an almighty fuss in the second half of 2015.

Watch out especially for India. Will it really refuse to cut, on the grounds that rich countries are responsible for most of the historic CO2?


James Wimberley
http://cleantechnica.com/2014/12/15/enough-weak-un-talk-lima-cop20/#comment-1742679474 (http://cleantechnica.com/2014/12/15/enough-weak-un-talk-lima-cop20/#comment-1742679474)

And I added the emphasis....
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on December 15, 2014, 09:28:27 PM
Let's hope all the delegations stay back in their home cities during the so–called Paris meeting and submit their minuscule emissions cut obligations via the Internet. That way we can at least be sure that the meeting itself does not contribute to catastrophic global warming.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 16, 2014, 12:42:55 AM
China, Australia, India and Russia have already been shamed into acting on climate.  More will follow.  And if even if countries don't count up their own progress (or lack of progress), other groups will do it for them.

By asking countries to put forward plans dictated by their own economies and domestic politics, rather than a top-down mandate, the Lima Accord helped secure the agreement of every nation to some kind of carbon-cutting action, experts say.

But with no language requiring the significant cuts scientists say are needed to stave off the costly effects of global warming, countries can put forth weak plans that amount to little more than business as usual. Countries can even choose to ignore the deal and submit no plan at all.

“If a country doesn’t submit a plan, there will be no punishment, no fine, no black U.N. helicopters showing up,” said Jennifer Morgan, an expert on climate negotiations with the World Resources Institute, a research organization.

Instead the architects of the plan, including top White House officials, hope that the agreement will compel countries to act to avoid international condemnation.

“It relies on a lot of peer pressure,” Ms. Morgan said.

The structure of the deal is what political scientists often call a “name-and-shame” plan.

Under the Lima Accord all countries must submit plans that would be posted on a United Nations website and made available to the public.

A requirement that all countries submit plans using identical metrics, for easy comparison, was deleted from the accord because of the objection of developing nations.

“What’s essential for naming and shaming is that the individual contributions be comparable,” said Robert Stavins, a professor of Environmental Economics at Harvard University.

But already, a number of research groups and universities expect to crunch the numbers of the plans, producing apples-to-apples assessments. The hope, negotiators said, is that as the numbers and commitments of each country are publicized, compared and discussed, countries will be shamed by the spotlight into proposing and enacting stronger plans.

“We see the sunlight as one of the most important parts of this,” said Todd D. Stern, the senior climate-change negotiator for President Obama

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/15/world/americas/lima-climate-deal.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/15/world/americas/lima-climate-deal.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on December 16, 2014, 01:16:41 AM
China, Australia, India and Russia have already been shamed into acting on climate.

You're using a tense of the verb here that I agree would've been nice, but for which there is no basis. If China had 'been shamed into acting on climate' it would mean they'd already acted. As you and I know, all they've done is 1) pledge their rapid rise in GHG emissions will peak in 16 years, by the end of 2030, and 2) agree to tell the UN within 100 days what they would like to do with their own GHG emissions.

China was very clear in Lima that they didn't want the UN or anyone to compare what they would say to the UN (in 100 days) that they would like to do, with what any other regime would say to the UN that they would do. In other words they could still pull out — even from the minuscule promises they've made for what they will do in almost two decades — if in any way their efforts are publicly compared to other regimes.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 16, 2014, 02:04:51 AM
As you and I know, all (China has) done is 1) pledge their rapid rise in GHG emissions will peak in 16 years, by the end of 2030, and 2) agree to tell the UN within 100 days what they would like to do with their own GHG emissions.

If you ignore closing thousands of inefficient coal plants.  Installing very large amounts of wind, solar and hydro generation.  Test driven multiple models for putting a price on carbon and used that data to create a cap and trade system which should be in place in 2016.  Put a major push on moving drivers into EVs, including greatly expanding charging outlets.

Ignore all that and then you'd be correct.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on December 16, 2014, 03:21:23 AM
True, but much of the wind and solar cannot be counted, as they are being used to sell cap and trade allowances to eg. Norway to pollute even more than we already do from the oil and gas sector, as Norway is buying Chinese CO2 quotas even from windfarms that were actually built before Norway signed the deals.

So in a nutshell: With cap and trade, every ton of reduced GHG emissions in China are compensated with increased GHG emissions in Norway. Which of course doesn't help the atmosphere.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 16, 2014, 04:34:54 AM
Norway hit "peak coal" for this century at 1 million tonnes of oil equivalent and has since fallen to 0.7 in 2013.  Norway has recently had a very aggressive program for moving drivers into EVs.

I haven't found recent CO2 numbers for Norway but I did find this graph...

(http://i619.photobucket.com/albums/tt275/Bob_Wall/NorwayGHG.png) (http://s619.photobucket.com/user/Bob_Wall/media/NorwayGHG.png.html)

http://www.environment.no/Topics/climate/norways-climate/ (http://www.environment.no/Topics/climate/norways-climate/)

I see no rise, in fact, it looks to me as if total GHG emissions are flat in recent years.
---

Now, let me ask you.  Why did you attempt to use China's selling of CO2 quota's to pour cold water on the renewables China is installing?

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on December 17, 2014, 07:17:00 PM
Lima: Recipe for Failure (and civilization collapse)
...
Being UN–focused: UN Czar Ban Ki-moon trying very hard to fail.


Nowhere does the article say anything about civilization collapse.  Or failure of the talks


Newsweek now using the F–word:

Why the Lima Agreement Is a Failure (http://www.newsweek.com/study-confirms-lima-agreement-puts-us-past-2-degrees-warming-benchmark-292535)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 17, 2014, 07:30:58 PM
Short sighted article by Newsweek.  No wonder they are a failing magazine.  They lost their quality long ago.

The importance of Lima is that it put countries in the position of creating a plan for their own countries and making those plans public. 

A world wide "law" is not workable.  The way forward is for each country to find its own path and face internal and external criticism when it is not moving rapidly enough.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on December 19, 2014, 02:02:23 AM


http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2014/12/16/the-real-outcome-of-global-warming-talks-in-lima-a-future-for-coal/ (http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2014/12/16/the-real-outcome-of-global-warming-talks-in-lima-a-future-for-coal/)

The Real Outcome of Global Warming Talks in Lima: A Future for Coal

The shift of a single word—from a “shall” to a “may”—means the world will very likely continue to burn lots of coal.

Instead of being required to provide “quantifiable information” about their greenhouse-gas emissions, countries may choose whether or not to include those statistics in their pledges instead, known in the jargon as “intended nationally determined contributions.”

These pledges or INDCs are promises that come in a variety of flavors
– not just strict pollution cuts like those from the E.U. nations, but also softer targets, such as reducing the amount of energy used to produce a single widget in India while producing more widgets overall (a so-called “carbon intensity” goal).

China and India led the charge against any monitoring or verification of such pledges. Worse, the Chinese and Indian negotiators do not appear to want INDCs to be comparable with each other. In other words, the pledges “may” prove mutually inscrutable.

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 19, 2014, 08:17:47 PM


[url]http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2014/12/16/the-real-outcome-of-global-warming-talks-in-lima-a-future-for-coal/[/url] ([url]http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2014/12/16/the-real-outcome-of-global-warming-talks-in-lima-a-future-for-coal/[/url])

The Real Outcome of Global Warming Talks in Lima: A Future for Coal

The shift of a single word—from a “shall” to a “may”—means the world will very likely continue to burn lots of coal.

Instead of being required to provide “quantifiable information” about their greenhouse-gas emissions, countries may choose whether or not to include those statistics in their pledges instead, known in the jargon as “intended nationally determined contributions.”

These pledges or INDCs are promises that come in a variety of flavors
– not just strict pollution cuts like those from the E.U. nations, but also softer targets, such as reducing the amount of energy used to produce a single widget in India while producing more widgets overall (a so-called “carbon intensity” goal).

China and India led the charge against any monitoring or verification of such pledges. Worse, the Chinese and Indian negotiators do not appear to want INDCs to be comparable with each other. In other words, the pledges “may” prove mutually inscrutable.



See #88 above.  If some countries do not do their own accounting, other interested entities most certainly will do it themselves....
However, at least one negotiating team with whom I met in Lima maintained that the analyses and comparisons of INDCs that will inevitably be carried out by various NGOs and research organizations (including universities) will provide the needed transparency and therefore the needed encouragement to countries for greater ambition.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bob Wallace on December 19, 2014, 08:38:17 PM
The OCO-2 satellite should let us get a good fix on where CO2 is being emitted.  That will make it harder to cover up problems.

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/NASA-OCO-2-satellite-launch-CO2-17706 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/NASA-OCO-2-satellite-launch-CO2-17706)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 19, 2014, 09:59:01 PM

The first maps from the OCO-2 satellite are now in -- showing springtime biomass burning in the Southern Hemisphere.
"Where OCO-2 really excels is the sheer amount of data being collected within a day, about one million measurements across a narrow swath," Frankenberg said. "For fluorescence, this enables us, for the first time, to look at features on the five- to 10-kilometer scale on a daily basis." SIF can be measured even through moderately thick clouds, so it will be especially useful in understanding regions like the Amazon where cloud cover thwarts most spaceborne observations.

The changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide that OCO-2 seeks to measure are so small that the mission must take unusual precautions to ensure the instrument is free of errors. For that reason, the spacecraft was designed so that it can make an extra maneuver. In addition to gathering a straight line of data like a lawnmower swath, the instrument can point at a single target on the ground for a total of seven minutes as it passes overhead. That requires the spacecraft to turn sideways and make a half cartwheel to keep the target in its sights.

The targets OCO-2 uses are stations in the Total Carbon Column Observing Network (TCCON), a collaborative effort of multiple international institutions. TCCON has been collecting carbon dioxide data for about five years, and its measurements are fully calibrated and extremely accurate. At the same time that OCO-2 targets a TCCON site, a ground-based instrument at the site makes the same measurement. The extent to which the two measurements agree indicates how well calibrated the OCO-2 sensors are.

http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/oco2/nasas-spaceborne-carbon-counter-maps-new-details/ (http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/oco2/nasas-spaceborne-carbon-counter-maps-new-details/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on December 19, 2014, 10:11:31 PM
You may want to look at that video if you haven't already :
FM14 First results from NASA's Orbiting Carbon Observatory OCO 2 PressConference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYbrSDhTvRU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYbrSDhTvRU)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 06, 2015, 03:03:16 AM
Flying to climate conferences?  Why not meet online?  It's happening more and more. Live stream the talks; offer chat rooms for spontaneous "hallway" discussions.

@EricHolthaus: In-person scientific conferences are unethical in an era of constrained carbon emissions. @ametsoc & @theAGU should stream online. #AMS2015

@theAGU: @EricHolthaus We already stream as many sessions as we can http://t.co/Op3Qa3n9IG (http://t.co/Op3Qa3n9IG) ([registration required], but fee waived)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 13, 2015, 09:13:09 PM
Here we go!  The Royal Meterological Society is running a trial on-line streaming of its next conference.
http://www.rmets.org/events/stratosphere-troposphere-coupling-earth-system-where-next (http://www.rmets.org/events/stratosphere-troposphere-coupling-earth-system-where-next)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 13, 2015, 09:17:39 PM
Fascinating lecture by Christiana Figueres on the Climate Change Negotiating Process.
Why Paris 2015 will be much different than the Copenhagen summit.

http://www.cop21makeitwork.com/2015/01/lecture-by-christiana-figueres-on-the-climate-change-negotiating-process/ (http://www.cop21makeitwork.com/2015/01/lecture-by-christiana-figueres-on-the-climate-change-negotiating-process/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 19, 2015, 03:49:35 PM
The chief executives of Saudi Aramco, Pemex and Total will face questions about their future in a warming world at the World Economic Forum in Davos next week.

Crumbling oil prices and soaring greenhouse gas emissions feature heavily in the agenda for the annual event in the Swiss Alps, which attracts national leaders, heads of business and civil society representatives.

According to the WEF, the fossil fuel chiefs will be joined by Abdalla Salem El Badri, head of the OPEC oil cartel and will discuss, among other issues, the impact of falling oil prices on climate change.
...
A draft version of a global climate deal, due to be signed off in Paris at the end of 2015, includes references to a complete phase-out of fossil fuels by 2050.

Research from UK scientists published this month suggests a third of oil, half of gas and nearly all coal reserves will have to remain below ground if the world is to avoid dangerous temperature rises.

Private sector

Central to the 2015 WEF meeting are efforts to encourage business leaders to embrace low carbon energy sources and a “circular economy” – where resources are reused rather than binned.

  According to a major economic study released last year and backed by seven governments, an estimated $90 trillion will be invested in infrastructure by 2030. How that money is spent will determine whether the world avoids dangerous levels of warming.

Since we plan to spend that money anyway...  Spend it green!

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/01/16/oil-majors-face-climate-grilling-at-world-economic-forum/#.dpuf (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/01/16/oil-majors-face-climate-grilling-at-world-economic-forum/#.dpuf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 19, 2015, 07:15:59 PM
The richest 1 percent are likely to control more than half of the globe’s total wealth by next year, the charity Oxfam reported in a study released on Monday. The warning about deepening global inequality comes just as the world’s business elite prepare to meet this week at the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

The 80 wealthiest people in the world altogether own $1.9 trillion, the report found, nearly the same amount shared by the 3.5 billion people who occupy the bottom half of the world’s income scale. (Last year, it took 85 billionaires to equal that figure.) And the richest 1 percent of the population, who number in the millions, control nearly half of the world’s total wealth, a share that is also increasing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/19/business/richest-1-percent-likely-to-control-half-of-global-wealth-by-2016-study-finds.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/19/business/richest-1-percent-likely-to-control-half-of-global-wealth-by-2016-study-finds.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 19, 2015, 07:37:21 PM
United Nations appoints the first-ever UN Assistant Secretary-General on Climate Change.
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=49821 (http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=49821)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 20, 2015, 03:00:52 AM
@EricHolthaus: Pope Francis to address Congress in September, and call for climate action at the UN: http://t.co/byVlLumNnD (http://t.co/byVlLumNnD)
http://t.co/8OXSvYxrUf (http://t.co/8OXSvYxrUf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 22, 2015, 07:41:01 PM
From the World Economic Forum at Davos:
Financiers have gone from masters of the universe to pariahs to punching bags at the World Economic Forum over the past decade. This year they’re a sideshow as policy makers dominate the debate.

While the global banking industry is still grappling with the consequences of the financial crisis and atoning for past misconduct, its travails are overshadowed at this year’s conclave in the Swiss Alps by oil, new terror threats and the European Central Bank’s plan to start buying government bonds to revive inflation.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2015-01-21/bank-ceos-a-davos-sideshow-as-the-ecb-oil-grab-spotlight.html (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2015-01-21/bank-ceos-a-davos-sideshow-as-the-ecb-oil-grab-spotlight.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 22, 2015, 07:48:46 PM
The World Economic Conference goes "climate."
The president of the World Bank has urged the international community to help developing nations cope with a warming planet as the first day of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos was dominated by calls to make 2015 a year of action on climate change.
...
Former Vice President Al Gore had started the first full day of events at the annual gathering in Davos by telling delegates: “This is the year of climate”.

Speaking against a backdrop of images intended to show the impact of climate change, Gore launched his plans amid criticism at the WEF of delegates arriving in private jets to attend the conference in 5,000 feet up in the Swiss Alps. The organisers of WEF urge delegates not to fly by private jet and use the train instead. Some attendees are transported in electric buggies.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/21/davos-world-bank-chief-climate-change-al-gore-pharrell-williams (http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/21/davos-world-bank-chief-climate-change-al-gore-pharrell-williams)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 22, 2015, 08:42:54 PM
Here's a video of Al Gore's presentation at Davos.  (30 min)
   First half highlights the extreme global weather, up to January 2015; second half shows the incredible growth in renewables around the world.  (In 2012, 62% of clean energy investment, $224 billion, was from private sources.)
   Plus, an announcement about a global digital/broadcast event for this June 18: Live Earth: Climate Action, to support progress in Paris next December.
http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/al-gore-explains-in-davos-whats-next-for-climate-in-2015/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/al-gore-explains-in-davos-whats-next-for-climate-in-2015/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 23, 2015, 09:49:43 PM
Laurent Fabius introduces Paris 2015 - COP21/CMP11 :  http://t.co/LfDdiDcBR2 (http://t.co/LfDdiDcBR2)
(French, with English subtitles.  Two minutes.)

@UN_ClimateTalks: .@LaurentFabius: "We are under threat of appalling climate disruption"
#Paris2015 @COP21

http://t.co/VLZYg2kojn (http://t.co/VLZYg2kojn)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Jim Hunt on January 23, 2015, 10:11:27 PM
Ségolène Royal:

This challenge is a chance to rethink our development model, to bring well-being to people throughout the world.


Personally I'm not optimistic. Can France fill the gaping hole that Obama optimistically says the US will?

http://econnexus.org/the-climatic-state-of-the-union/ (http://econnexus.org/the-climatic-state-of-the-union/)

I've said this before, far too often, but I'll say it once more. Actions speak louder than innumerable fine words, and despite Barack Obama's stated "determination" the evidence of his first 6 years in office suggests that both American leadership and international action will continue to be sadly lacking.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on January 24, 2015, 10:35:57 AM
French politician are like most of politicians, they don't know much in technology so they are easily driven by lobbies and money.
Segolene Royal our minister of "Ecology" declared recently that we will build more nuclear plants...
For CO2 we will play like germany saying a lot but in reality doing even less !
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 25, 2015, 01:00:31 AM
Exclusive interview of President Obama by India Today.
Obama: ...And even as we recognise that our economies are at different stages of development, we can come together with other nations and achieve a strong global agreement this year in Paris to fight climate change. Every nation is being impacted by climate change, and every nation has a role to play in combating it.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/barack-obama-shekhar-gupta-exclusive-interview/1/414805.html (http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/barack-obama-shekhar-gupta-exclusive-interview/1/414805.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Jim Hunt on January 25, 2015, 02:23:07 AM
Exclusive interview of President Obama by India Today.

The headline reads:

We have to make sure words are matched by deeds

Quite so!

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 25, 2015, 02:55:08 PM
A look at India's energy plans, in advance of Obama's visit.  Coal is still seen as a major player -- but its poor logistics may make adoption of alternatives higher than expected.
But the worst may not come to pass, analysts say.

Troubles in India's coal industry have already driven investors to the solar market, and many of the approved new coal projects are stalled thanks to lack of financing or coal supplies.

"The truth is, the coal industry has become the climate advocate's best friend, simply because it's such a mess," Guay of the Sierra Club said. "It's a race between old and new technologies over who can actually get power to the people, and solar is winning hands down."

http://www.freep.com/story/news/nation/2015/01/23/india-climate-obama/22248511/ (http://www.freep.com/story/news/nation/2015/01/23/india-climate-obama/22248511/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 26, 2015, 12:28:36 AM
The India-China announcement has happened:
President Obama and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced on Sunday that the two countries will work together to fight global climate change, laying out a set of goals that the two countries hope “will expand policy dialogues and technical work on clean energy and low greenhouse gas emissions technologies.”

While not a concrete emissions reductions agreement like the one Obama reached with China this past November, the deal includes efforts to cooperate on reducing emissions of fluorinated gases, invigorate India’s promotion of clean energy investment, and partner to reduce the debilitating air pollution that has plagued many of India’s cities.

The agreement also emphasized that the countries would “cooperate closely” for a “successful and ambitious” agreement at the Paris climate talks at the end of the year.
...
As ThinkProgress reported last week, there was very little expectation among analysts that the U.S. would achieve a deal like the one it achieved in China, wherein the country would actually pledge to reduce its overall carbon emissions. ...Many said that it would be unfair to expect India — the world’s third largest carbon emitter behind the U.S. and China — to announce a similar target, considering the hundreds of millions of rural poor.

Still a developing country, climate change stands to impact India more severely than other parts of the world, according to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. India also has a particularly bad air pollution problem — a recent World Health Organization report found that India has 13 of the 20 most polluted cities in the world with the capital, Delhi, being the most polluted of all. The report also found that Delhi had six times the level of airborne particulate matter considered safe. Another investigation found that the levels could be up to eight times higher in heavily trafficked corridors.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/01/25/3615232/us-india-climate-agreement/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/01/25/3615232/us-india-climate-agreement/)

Details here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/25/fact-sheet-us-and-india-climate-and-clean-energy-cooperation (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/25/fact-sheet-us-and-india-climate-and-clean-energy-cooperation)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: jbg on January 26, 2015, 01:45:34 PM
Might be helpful to start amassing the "will they, or won't they, sign a significant treaty in Paris" comments under one thread.

Here's the latest proposal:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States wants to broker a global agreement on climate change that would contain some legal elements but would stop short of being legally binding on an international level, the country's top diplomat on climate change issues said.

Todd Stern, the State Department climate change special envoy, addressed one of the thorniest issues in ongoing talks to secure a global plan to curb greenhouse gas emissions – its legal form.

Stern said a recent proposal by New Zealand for countries to submit a "schedule" for reducing emissions that would be legally binding and subject to mandatory accounting, reporting and review offers an approach that could get the buy-in of countries like the United States that are wary of ratifying an internationally binding treaty.

The content of the schedule itself and the actions each country pledges would not be legally binding at an international level.

[url]http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0I409X20141015[/url] ([url]http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0I409X20141015[/url])
Anything that the U.N. does, just about, defies rational description. The organization is hopelessly inefficient and corrupt.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Shared Humanity on January 26, 2015, 02:10:28 PM
Anything that the U.N. does, just about, defies rational description. The organization is hopelessly inefficient and corrupt.

You would think, after such a long hiatus, you could have developed some better and more relevant talking points.   :o
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 26, 2015, 07:46:01 PM
India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi changes his tune on climate change action.

After a meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama in New Delhi, the prime minister said that his nation along with all others has an obligation to act on reducing the fossil-fuel emissions blamed for damaging the climate.

The remarks represent a shift in India’s tone on global warming. It previously emphasized the historical responsibility of industrial nations for creating the problem, and the Indian government has been ambiguous about whether it will adopt domestic targets for reducing greenhouse gases. Modi’s comments suggest he’s ready to work with Obama on a deal in Paris in December that would for the first time require all nations, rich and poor alike, to restrain emissions.

“When we think about the future generations and what kind of a world we are going to give them, then there is pressure,” Modi said in a news conference with Obama on Sunday. “Global warming is a huge pressure.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2015-01-25/modi-shifts-on-climate-change-with-india-renewables-goal.html (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2015-01-25/modi-shifts-on-climate-change-with-india-renewables-goal.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 26, 2015, 09:55:17 PM
Obama & Modi Link Zero Carbon and Zero Extreme Poverty
The same people who are talking about a target of zero carbon emissions from energy are talking about a target of zero extreme poverty in the world.

http://insideclimatenews.org/carbon-copy/20150126/obama-modi-link-zero-carbon-and-zero-extreme-poverty (http://insideclimatenews.org/carbon-copy/20150126/obama-modi-link-zero-carbon-and-zero-extreme-poverty)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on January 26, 2015, 10:04:15 PM
The good news is it's absolutely doable!

The bad news is they call it planning for extinction.

But think about it: How wonderful wouldn't it be to eradicate poverty to zero and at the same time have a zero emission of anthropogenic carbon? Too bad no–one will be around to celebrate.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 31, 2015, 11:57:04 PM
UN Climate Chief Figueres:  Four Conclusions from the World Economic Forum at Davos
Davos 2015 accelerated the understanding of the economic desirability and the technical ability to meet the climate challenge.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/christiana-figueres/conclusions-from-davos_b_6548208.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/christiana-figueres/conclusions-from-davos_b_6548208.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 01, 2015, 12:00:00 AM
Deadline for Paris
The co-chairs of the UN climate talks have told diplomats that they must finalise the draft version of a 2015 Paris deal this February.  Diplomats from around the world will meet in Geneva 8-13 February for the first time since Lima.
http://www.rtcc.org/2015/01/30/pressure-on-to-finish-draft-paris-climate-deal-in-february/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/01/30/pressure-on-to-finish-draft-paris-climate-deal-in-february/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on February 01, 2015, 02:22:08 PM
Will Paris be soft on farmers and frackers?

Last week, a report on UK GHG emissions was uploaded to the website of the Department of Envionment Food and Rural Affairs. The report, "Assessment of the impact of changes to guidelines on the UK Greenhouse was Gas Inventory" was commissioned by the Department of Energy and Climate Change and is dated 31 July 2014. http://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/library/reports.php?report_id=803 (http://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/library/reports.php?report_id=803)

This explains that the "new" GWP values to be used from 2015

From 2015, all Annex I Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change will be required to report national greenhouse gas emissions inventories using
updated reporting guidelines... These were formally adopted at COP19, and set out how Parties
are to report, incorporating new sources and methodologies set out in the 2006 IPCC
Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
. The Guidelines also set out which set of
Global Warming Potential (GWP) values to use for reporting inventories, and a revised data
reporting structure (the CommonReporting Format, CRF)

This means that the GWP of methane is assessed as 25 - the GWP given in 2006 by IPCC AR4 for a 100 year time horizon.

In 2013, IPCC AR5 updated methane's GWP to 34 for a 100 year time horizon and 86 for a 20 year time horizon. It must be a relief to farmers and frackers to know the methane emissions they cause are measured in inventories at a GDP of 25 rather than 84.

I am in a bit of confusion over methane, not having yet done the homework Chris Reynolds set me some months ago, but I find it shocking to see these time lags dragging through these climate negotiations.

I believe the IPCC is behind the game e.g. Lennart van der Linde's comment on "Conservative Scientists & its Consequences" thread
Ok, but what do you think of Brysse et al 2013 ('erring on side of least drama') and
Anderegg et al 2014 ('risk of type 2 errors')? And about IPCC itself stating that
it's SLR-projections beyond 2100 are probably under-estimates and that carbon feedbacks
are not (fully) included in their models?

So underpowered climate results are being used in Paris. Underpowered because the IPCC has underpowered results and the negotiators plan to use results that they must know are even more underpowered.

Is the game lost before the starting whistle is blown?
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Jim Hunt on February 01, 2015, 06:43:29 PM
Is the game lost before the starting whistle is blown?


If you scroll back up to my link to econnexus (http://econnexus.org/the-climatic-state-of-the-union/) you will note that I very much fear that is indeed the case.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 05, 2015, 03:09:31 AM
Even the Architects of the Next U.N. Climate Change Agreement Are Pessimistic
By Eric Holthaus
This is further evidence that the action on climate change will shift to what are currently perceived to be radical solutions. Absent meaningful action by governments, it’s up to individuals to demand change: non-violent direct action and mass protest, a rethinking of capitalism—in short, a revolution in culture and society—are suitable to the job of limiting climate change to levels that don’t threaten entire ecosystems and thus human prosperity. Just because this sort of change is unlikely doesn’t mean it isn’t necessary.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/02/04/u_n_paris_climate_talks_even_the_architects_of_the_agreement_are_pessimistic.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/02/04/u_n_paris_climate_talks_even_the_architects_of_the_agreement_are_pessimistic.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 05, 2015, 02:18:48 PM
Never mind the UN talks:  Big Business leaders ("The B Team" ;) ) call for net zero emissions by 2050.
There's even a Twitter hashtag:  #ZeroBy2050

Governments should set a clear target of making the world’s economy free from carbon emissions by mid-century, Sir Richard Branson and a group of other prominent businesspeople have urged.

The goal – of eliminating the net impact of greenhouse gases, by replacing fossil fuels and ensuring that any remaining emissions are balanced out by carbon-saving projects such as tree-planting and carbon capture and storage – is more stretching than any yet agreed by world governments. The G8 group of rich nations has pledged to cut emissions by 80% by 2050, and some developing countries to halving emissions by then.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/05/richard-branson-net-zero-emissions-target-businesses (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/05/richard-branson-net-zero-emissions-target-businesses)


  Geneva, 5th February, 2015 – Today, Leaders of The B Team running some of the world’s largest companies, called upon world leaders to commit to a global goal of net-zero greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions by 2050 – and urged business leaders to match this ambition by committing to bold long-term targets.

http://bteam.org/the-b-team/business-leaders-call-for-net-zero-greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-2050/ (http://bteam.org/the-b-team/business-leaders-call-for-net-zero-greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-2050/)


This is particularly interesting because it doesn't require the will of the general public -- voters -- or government partisanship, to get started.  If business comes to see clean tech as preferable, a relatively small number of people (CEOs) can, as we've seen with other technology, change the world -- and in only a few years.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on February 05, 2015, 03:03:45 PM
Yup, this is Big Business' best argument for BAU — Business–As–Usual: Saying we'll fix this and have ZERO emissions in 2050 (when most of our readers are dead anyway), and then worry about the actual cut 'detail' when we see the year 2050 on our calendars. Then it will be a matter of hiring an exceptionally good PR company that can explain any survivors how and why that target was impossible.

People are hardwired to forgive such 'white' lies as long as it gave them some hope along the way.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: JimD on February 05, 2015, 03:40:18 PM
OMG are you trolling us?

This is particularly interesting because it doesn't require the will of the general public -- voters -- or government partisanship, to get started.  If business comes to see clean tech as preferable, a relatively small number of people (CEOs) can, as we've seen with other technology, change the world -- and in only a few years.

Please don't be so desperate for a miracle that you fail to exercise basic common sense and recognize when you are being fed a story designed to manipulate your ability to think clearly.  These people are NOT your friends and do not have your better interests at heart. 

Check out the latest post in the Must Read topic thread.  It is a perfect takedown of this kind of non-critical thinking. 
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 05, 2015, 07:40:49 PM
Off-shore-oil-rich Norway matches EU goal of 40% cut on emissions by 2030.
http://www.rtcc.org/2015/02/04/norway-reveals-40-carbon-cut-goal-for-2030-matching-eu-target/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/02/04/norway-reveals-40-carbon-cut-goal-for-2030-matching-eu-target/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on February 05, 2015, 07:46:47 PM
Off-shore-oil-rich Norway matches EU goal of 40% cut on emissions by 2030.
[url]http://www.rtcc.org/2015/02/04/norway-reveals-40-carbon-cut-goal-for-2030-matching-eu-target/[/url] ([url]http://www.rtcc.org/2015/02/04/norway-reveals-40-carbon-cut-goal-for-2030-matching-eu-target/[/url])


Interesting spin. I do agree it seems positive when viewed from this very special angle. In real life, however, Norway wants to switch from the fraudulent UN carbon quotas to the EU ones, meaning we'll go on emitting exactly the amounts of GHGs that we want, while paying someone else abroad to make 'cuts' (that may or may not be real cuts).
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 05, 2015, 07:51:12 PM
OMG are you trolling us?
...

If by "us" you mean: those who believe business and industry can't possibly come up with solutions to adequately address climate change -- then, yes.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: jai mitchell on February 06, 2015, 07:00:27 AM
A recent landmark study of U.S. polls, compiling over 35 years of consistent data, showed that the general population's interests influenced U.S. domestic and international policy by a "statistically non-existent" margin.

however, this same study also showed that the overwhelming bias of polls and policy effects was determined by the desires of the wealthy or very-wealthy in the United States.

In this it is then clearly understood that, at least for the last 35 years, the U.S. has been a functional Plutocracy.

Once this has been determined and finally accepted as the political-economic truth.  Then we realize that the very wealthy may or may not decide to engage climate change mitigation efforts in a meaningful way.  So, will they? 

It is likely that the very wealthy are the least likely to either believe in the effects of climate change (see:  "Cool white dudes")  or if they do believe in it, will be more likely to believe that their wealth and resources will allow them to have an "escape plan"  (see: "davos wealthy airfields escape")

There is a fantastic potential for real global-level solutions, however, this solution will not look like modern capitalism.  I sincerely fear that as the global wealth inequality and the effects of climate change continue to unfold, we will see an increase in anti-capitalist rhetoric from the environmental community and when it becomes a main cause, we will see the mechanisms of the police state that has been growing in America engage, far beyond what has been seen so far.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 06, 2015, 09:05:54 PM
Joe Romm argues that, like the ozone crisis, Paris is not the be-all, end-all on climate change.  One agreement does not finalize action.  But that's OK.

Paris Climate Talks Won’t Keep Warming Below The Dangerous 2°C Limit
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/02/05/3619717/paris-climate-talks-2c/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/02/05/3619717/paris-climate-talks-2c/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 06, 2015, 09:19:48 PM
Uganda!

Uganda Proposes Strategic Climate Actions
http://namanews.org/news/2015/02/05/uganda-proposes-strategic-climate-actions/ (http://namanews.org/news/2015/02/05/uganda-proposes-strategic-climate-actions/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 07, 2015, 01:12:00 AM
B Team Leaders Call for Net-Zero Greenhouse-Gas Emissions by 2050
Businesses are already incurring the costs of climate change, with increasing supply-chain disruptions from extreme-weather events, rising sea levels and ocean acidification, falling crop yields and increasing desertification. At the same time, the world’s poorest and most vulnerable – who are disproportionately affected and least equipped to cope – are being hit the hardest.

As business leaders, they view the transition to a net-zero GHG emissions economy as an historic opportunity that, if managed responsibly, fairly and collaboratively, can bring economic benefits to countries at all levels of income, including new jobs, cleaner air, better health, lower poverty and greater energy security.

This will require businesses to join forces with governments to help drive the transition, by setting clear national targets and developing enabling policies to shift capital toward carbon-free alternatives, to help drive sustainable, inclusive prosperity for all.

http://bteam.org/the-b-team/business-leaders-call-for-net-zero-greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-2050/ (http://bteam.org/the-b-team/business-leaders-call-for-net-zero-greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-2050/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: viddaloo on February 07, 2015, 01:18:22 AM
B Team Leaders Call for Net-Zero Greenhouse-Gas Emissions by 2050

You posted the exact same hopium link 2 days ago, Sigmetnow?
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 07, 2015, 03:06:59 AM
Ok, then here's another link.  :)
http://track0.org/works/the-business-case-for-adopting-the-long-term-goal-for-net-zero-emissions/ (http://track0.org/works/the-business-case-for-adopting-the-long-term-goal-for-net-zero-emissions/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 07, 2015, 03:09:25 AM
David Victor is optimistic about the Paris agreement.  Here's why.
http://tcktcktck.org/2015/02/david-victor-climate-consensus-signs-new-hope-road-paris/66359 (http://tcktcktck.org/2015/02/david-victor-climate-consensus-signs-new-hope-road-paris/66359)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: JackTaylor on February 07, 2015, 08:32:06 AM
~~
"as the global wealth inequality and the effects of climate change continue to unfold, we will see an increase in anti-capitalist rhetoric from the environmental community and when it becomes a main cause, we will see the mechanisms of the police state that has been growing in America engage, far beyond what has been seen so far."
~~

bold emphasis is my add and somewhat off topic

Yes, in a country such as the United States we are progressing towards a "Police State".  It will be business as usual (BAU) as long as Law Enforcement and Military/Reserve/National Guard personnel believe their existence, role in society, and well being are dependent on serving those calling the shots (instituted government - "ruling hierarchy").

   Stop and give these some thought.  The number of people supporting law enforcement: local police departments, constables-marshals, county/parish sheriff departments, state troopers, state bureau investigation agencies, with all the excess (surplus) military equipment - hardware.  Then add in all the people in federal agencies.   Loyal to their leaders to a fault?

   Sounds like a plan is being steadily being implemented,
( my version of paranoia ).

   There are so many people supporting the "ruling hierarchy" we will continue as is - until a catastrophic event occurs.

   When conditions disturb sufficient numbers of people to cause them take action for change is when the real clash will occur and things get nasty.

   Without an event to cause the overwhelming majority of people to simultaneously take action against BAU - ALL the good intentioned rhetoric will only make for some lively discussions.

   The dimwit gun activist with their individual firearms don't stand a chance at protecting against an oppressive (police state) government.  Their claims of Second Amendment Rights are plain and simple paranoia unless they are members of a large "state supported" - and well organized - militia.

   Don't worry, when the remaining majority of the population is forced into obtaining (producing) food, the police state will go away for awhile.

damn, what a pessimistic post


Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 13, 2015, 08:16:03 PM
NYT:  Surprisingly, a Voluntary Climate Treaty Could Actually Work
... It is tempting to long for an internationally binding treaty that guarantees emissions reductions. However, except under extraordinary circumstances, all treaties are ultimately voluntary. Further, any benefits that could come with a more binding commitment must be weighed against the possibility that they could deter some countries from setting goals for emissions reductions.

If history is a guide, whether this treaty’s goals are met will depend on the extent to which countries make mitigation of climate change a domestic priority. This means that even after the hard work of negotiating the Paris treaty is completed, the hardest work will still be in front of us, wherever we live.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/upshot/surprisingly-a-voluntary-climate-treaty-could-actually-work.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/upshot/surprisingly-a-voluntary-climate-treaty-could-actually-work.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 15, 2015, 02:55:30 PM
Recent UN climate negotiations in Geneva (to develop a draft treaty) focused more on listening to countries, rather than dictating demands to them.  But that still represents progress, participants and environmentalists agree.
http://insideclimatenews.org/carbon-copy/13022015/draft-treaty-aims-fossil-free-future-many-pages-few-answers (http://insideclimatenews.org/carbon-copy/13022015/draft-treaty-aims-fossil-free-future-many-pages-few-answers)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 16, 2015, 06:48:25 PM
The Carbon Brief examines the 15 options for net-zero emissions in the Paris climate text.
http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2015/02/briefing-the-15-options-for-net-zero-emissions-in-the-paris-climate-text/ (http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2015/02/briefing-the-15-options-for-net-zero-emissions-in-the-paris-climate-text/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on February 18, 2015, 04:58:06 PM
The linked article indicates that the USA's ability to sign a COP21 - Paris agreement could become derailed due to US Congress activity:

http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060013553 (http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060013553)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on February 22, 2015, 03:58:10 PM
Your Life, Your Climate Agreement
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-moller-/your-life-your-climate-agreement_b_6725828.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-moller-/your-life-your-climate-agreement_b_6725828.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 23, 2015, 06:06:04 PM
Your Life, Your Climate Agreement
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-moller-/your-life-your-climate-agreement_b_6725828.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green[/url] ([url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-moller-/your-life-your-climate-agreement_b_6725828.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green[/url])


This:
Climate change is a threat to our very existence. Wherever we live and whatever we do. We all contribute to it. And we all have a responsibility to do something about it.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 23, 2015, 07:14:33 PM
The aviation sector will soon have a new way to measure, account for and reward reductions in the gases that contribute to climate change thanks to work agreed to this week by the Board that runs the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

Aviation accounts for about 2% of total global CO2 emissions and about 12% of the CO2 emissions from all transportation sources.
...

The CDM rewards with saleable credits – certified emission reductions (CERs) – projects that reduce or avoid greenhouse gas emissions and contribute to sustainable development. The incentive has led to registration of 7,870 projects and programmes in 107 developing countries, hundreds of billions of dollars in investment, and 1.5 billion fewer tonnes of gas entering the atmosphere.

http://cdm.unfccc.int/press/newsroom/latestnews/releases/2014/0213_index.html (http://cdm.unfccc.int/press/newsroom/latestnews/releases/2014/0213_index.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 23, 2015, 09:13:28 PM
A copy of the European Commission’s proposed contribution to a 2015 UN climate change deal has been leaked on Twitter.

It confirms the bloc will aim for domestic greenhouse gas reductions of 40% on 1990 levels by 2030, with a global goal of 60% below 2010 levels by 2050.

Brussels wants reviews of climate targets every five years, and calls for the UN’s aviation and shipping bodies to develop regulations to cut emissions in those sectors by 2016.

It says all countries wishing to join a “Paris protocol” must commit to internationally legally binding mitigation goals.

The bloc also wants all G20 nations – including India and Saudi Arabia – to commit to economy-wide carbon cuts by 2025 at the latest.

[url]http://www.rtcc.org/2015/02/23/eu-targets-60-global-carbon-cuts-by-2050-in-leaked-climate-plan/#.dpuf[/url] ([url]http://www.rtcc.org/2015/02/23/eu-targets-60-global-carbon-cuts-by-2050-in-leaked-climate-plan/#.dpuf[/url])
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 24, 2015, 09:39:02 PM
Richard Branson (Virgin Group) and Paul Polman (Unilever) renew their call for business-folk to channel their ambition and act on climate.
Business leaders hate unnecessary risk. If governments don't implement strong and responsible climate policy, we are courting both economic and environmental disaster.

This transition, if done equitably and conscientiously, will create jobs, spark innovation and fight global inequality. An estimated $90 trillion will be spent on global infrastructure in the next 15 years, regardless of what future we choose. Economists estimate that the switch to a fully low-carbon infrastructure would raise costs by only 4.5%. If we choose to spend that money wisely under a paradigm of climate action, we can lower emissions, lower our risks and lower the number of people who go without electricity and other essential services. Simply put: Will we spend that same money to go clean, or to stay with the dirty status quo?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/19/opinion/branson-polman-climate-business (http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/19/opinion/branson-polman-climate-business)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Neven on February 24, 2015, 11:28:34 PM
Richard Branson...  (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/13/richard-branson-failed-climate-change-pledge)  ::)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 25, 2015, 01:13:22 AM
Maybe that's why he's so keen on having everyone else join the effort!  ;)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on February 25, 2015, 10:23:30 PM
The linked reference (with an open access pdf) with a US EPA view of the history of efforts to address climate change shows that after over 40-years of general recognition of the nature of the climate change problem; little progress has been made to control carbon dioxide emissions.  In particular, I find it interesting that per the attached image that while the anthropogenic emission rates have fluctuated, the increase of atmospheric CO₂ concentrations has been more uniformly upward, indicating that the Earth Systems may be buffering the impact of anthropogenic radiative forcing.  Hopefully, Paris/COP-21 will be more effective than past efforts to control anthropogenic GHG emissions.

Hecht, O. (2015). Past, Present, and Future: Urgency of Dealing with Climate Change. Retrieved from http://www.energyandclimatechange.org/view/article/54aadc910cf2a51e13d15433 (http://www.energyandclimatechange.org/view/article/54aadc910cf2a51e13d15433)

http://www.energyandclimatechange.org/files/325401_325500/325478/acs-climate-paper.pdf (http://www.energyandclimatechange.org/files/325401_325500/325478/acs-climate-paper.pdf)

Abstract: "This paper gives an historic perspective on 10 critical phases and actions in advancing an understanding of climate change and taking appropriate domestic and international action. Credit goes to atmospheric scientists for their committed efforts to understand, model and measure the impacts of climate change. Today, greenhouse gases are at a record level and little doubt remains that greenhouse gases (GHG) warm the atmosphere and that human-made climate change is real.  Recognizing the urgency of responding to climate change, the 2013 US Climate Action Plan aims to cut carbon emissions and prepare to deal effectively with the economic, social, and environmental impacts of climate change. Many US states, Tribes, and local communities have also begun to take action to reduce GHG emissions and adapt to the impact of climate change, especially on disadvantaged communities. While recognition of the urgency of action on climate change is growing in government and in large parts of the business and financial sector, it has taken over 40 years to get to this point. While an understanding of the reality and impact of climate change has grown, significant efforts to reduce the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and stabilize global warming have not occurred. The problem that society faces is not the absence of scientific knowledge, but rather the need to reduce GHG emissions and create resilient and adaptive responses to climate change. This paper concludes that future successes will need more effective collaboration between government, business, and society to address climate change and greater public understanding of the impacts of climate change on human health and economic well-being."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on March 02, 2015, 06:33:23 PM
The linked editorial articles indicates that the World Economic Forum, WEF, report issued after the gathering in Davos shows that success at COP21 in Paris will depend on a high level of international trust in an era of increasing national sentiment and of weakening international governance.  This does not bode well for the prospects of COP21.

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n3/full/nclimate2565.html (http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v5/n3/full/nclimate2565.html)

Extract: "The WEF report shows that the influencers surveyed have growing concerns about environmental risks, with those closely related to climate change high in the overall risk hierarchy. There is also an acknowledgement that little progress has been made to date. Unfortunately two of the trends identified, increasing national sentiment and weakening of international governance do not bode well for an international climate agreement, and the apparent re-emergence of interstate conflict seems to bear out these concerns. The risk landscape therefore provides a mixed outlook for Paris 2015, and it seems that success will depend on a high level of international trust and cooperation at a time when they are in dwindling supply."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on March 05, 2015, 09:58:58 AM
The linked reference discusses how a UN-backed framework is planning to help prepare the world to better deal with the risks of increasing natural disasters:


http://www.rtcc.org/2015/03/04/un-prepares-for-disaster-risk-deal-to-address-climate-change/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/03/04/un-prepares-for-disaster-risk-deal-to-address-climate-change/)


Extract: "The World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) in Sendai, running from 14-18 March, should be huge news.The 22-page draft negotiating text is packed full of ambitious goals, building on the last DRR deal, agreed in the Japanese city of Kobe in 2005.It will require countries to draw up tougher plans to cope with future natural or human influenced disasters, investing in education, early warning systems and emergency plans.

The report revealed that economic losses from disasters are costing an average of US$250-300 billion every year.And it suggested governments are too focused on managing disasters as they happen rather than managing the underlying risks, calling for $6 billion a year to be invested in risk management.

… he wanted to see closer links between the goals of a DRR deal and a Paris climate pact, which is likely to focus heavily on efforts to slow emissions."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 07, 2015, 07:35:11 PM
EU commits to cut emissions “at least” 40% by 2030 in UN pledge.
On Friday environment ministers approved the bloc’s intended nationally determined contribution (INDC), which targets greenhouse gas cuts of “at least” 40% on 1990 levels by 2030.

Details of the submission, published on the European Commission website, say it is in line with global emission cuts of 60% on 2010 levels by 2050.

The EC said this was “at the upper end of the IPCC’s [UN climate science panel] range of 40-70% reductions necessary to achieve the below 2C target.”

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/03/06/eu-commits-to-cut-emissions-at-least-40-by-2030-in-un-pledge/#.dpuf (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/03/06/eu-commits-to-cut-emissions-at-least-40-by-2030-in-un-pledge/#.dpuf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 11, 2015, 07:13:11 PM
It's official:  EU commits to “at least” 40% cuts of emissions from 1990 level by 2030.

The EU's official contribution will be a target of an at least 40 percent cut in emissions by 2030, compared to levels emitted in 1990.
...

The target has to be achieved domestically rather than through offsets that allow member states to buy into carbon-cutting schemes outside Europe.

EU diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity, say the 40 percent target will have to be shared among member states and debate over how to achieve that is only likely to begin after the Paris talks.

One option is to share the effort based on a member state's GDP per capita.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/03/06/us-eu-environment-idUKKBN0M21KI20150306 (http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/03/06/us-eu-environment-idUKKBN0M21KI20150306)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on March 14, 2015, 02:23:26 PM
Per the linked article, the US GOP may well try to block US participation in the COP21 agreement:

http://grist.org/politics/will-the-gop-try-to-block-a-climate-deal-just-like-they-did-with-an-iran-deal/?utm_content=buffer51c2a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer (http://grist.org/politics/will-the-gop-try-to-block-a-climate-deal-just-like-they-did-with-an-iran-deal/?utm_content=buffer51c2a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 21, 2015, 11:09:23 PM
New York, 20 March (UN Forum on Forests press [r]elease) —The sustainable management and conservation of forests must be considered in the design and implementation of the new sustainable development goals and the new climate change agreement to be adopted this December in Paris, according to UN officials and forest experts in messages for the International Day of Forests, observed on 21 March.

At least 1.6 billion people directly depend on forests for food, fuel, shelter and income, but everyone benefits from the clean air, water, and climate regulation that forests provide. Three fourths of freshwater, crucial for human survival, comes from forested catchments. Healthy forests are critical for building resilience—the ability to bounce back from storms and other natural disasters. Mangrove forests, when left intact, reduce loss of life and damage caused by tsunamis.
...
“Forests are integral to the post-2015 development agenda,” said Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said in his message marking the International Day of Forests, observed on 21 March. “To build a sustainable, climate-resilient future for all, we must invest in our world's forests.”

Forest Remain Greatest Carbon Sink that Humans Can Influence

Forests are the largest storehouses of carbon after oceans. They can absorb and store carbon in their biomass, soils and products, equivalent to about one tenth of carbon emissions projected for the first half of this century. At the same time, deforestation and land-use changes account for 17 per cent of human-generated carbon dioxide emissions.

http://newsroom.unfccc.int/nature-s-role/forest-day-forests-essential-for-meeting-people-s-needs-and-tackling-climate-change/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/nature-s-role/forest-day-forests-essential-for-meeting-people-s-needs-and-tackling-climate-change/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on March 25, 2015, 04:02:10 PM
With one week to go for nations to submit pledges for the CoP21 meeting in Paris, the linked article indicates that most of the nations of the world are missing in action:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-24/biggest-polluters-to-miss-deadline-for-action-on-climate (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-24/biggest-polluters-to-miss-deadline-for-action-on-climate)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on March 29, 2015, 04:39:17 AM
The following link leads to a working copy of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change -  Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action, drafted in Geneva in February 2015.  Note that the possibility of recognizing a 1.5 C (instead of a 2 C) limit on temperature rise by 2100 is cited as an option throughout this linked document (indicating the degree of concern of some of the delegates).  We will see which temperature limit is selected at Bonn in June 2015, and what is finally agreed to at CoP21 in Paris:

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/adp2/eng/01.pdf (http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/adp2/eng/01.pdf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on March 29, 2015, 07:13:01 PM
The linked article makes it clear that while it is highly unlikely that the temperature rise can be limited to 2C, let alone 1.5C, the big point in trying to recognize a 1.5C target is that it provides a scientific baseline in the debate for climate reparations.

Jeff Tollefson, (2015), "Global-warming limit of 2 °C hangs in the balance: Panel creates scientific baseline for debate about climate reparations", Nature News & Comment, doi:10.1038/nature.2015.17202

http://www.nature.com/news/global-warming-limit-of-2-c-hangs-in-the-balance-1.17202 (http://www.nature.com/news/global-warming-limit-of-2-c-hangs-in-the-balance-1.17202)

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 29, 2015, 07:40:03 PM
The linked article makes it clear that while it is highly unlikely that the temperature rise can be limited to 2C, let alone 1.5C, the big point in trying to recognize a 1.5C target is that it provides a scientific baseline in the debate for climate reparations.

Jeff Tollefson, (2015), "Global-warming limit of 2 °C hangs in the balance: Panel creates scientific baseline for debate about climate reparations", Nature News & Comment, doi:10.1038/nature.2015.17202

[url]http://www.nature.com/news/global-warming-limit-of-2-c-hangs-in-the-balance-1.17202[/url] ([url]http://www.nature.com/news/global-warming-limit-of-2-c-hangs-in-the-balance-1.17202[/url])


I like the rather more concrete idea of using CO2 levels (and emissions) as a target, rather than eventual temperature, in these agreements.  Global CO2 concentration is a number reported essentially daily (and soon, using the new satellites, available even by location).  “1.5 or 2 degrees at some point” seems nebulous, in comparison.

From your linked article:
Some researchers argue that the international community should adopt more meaningful measures such as  atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, which has steadily risen in the past half-century in association with a rise in emissions, from about 320 parts per million to 400 parts per million.

“There’s been a very strong incentive for governments to make bold claims about long-term goals that they cannot deliver on,” says David Victor, a political scientist at the University of California, San Diego. “If you start setting goals in terms of emissions, you get closer to what real governments and firms have control over.”
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 29, 2015, 09:19:48 PM
Mexico has become the first developing nation to formally promise to cut its global-warming pollution, a potential milestone in efforts to reach a worldwide agreement on tackling climate change.

Mexico expects greenhouse-gas emissions to peak by 2026 and then decline, Environment Minister Juan Jose Guerra Abud said at a news conference in Mexico City Friday. The nation has pledged to curb the growth of pollutants 25 percent from its current trajectory by 2030.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-27/mexico-pledges-25-cut-in-greenhouse-gas-emissions-growth (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-27/mexico-pledges-25-cut-in-greenhouse-gas-emissions-growth)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on March 29, 2015, 09:54:41 PM
I totally agree with Sigmetnow. The limit should be on CO2 and CO2eq.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 30, 2015, 04:14:37 PM
Australia's climate change policy on course for 'disastrous' 4C warming
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/30/australias-climate-change-policy-on-course-for-disastrous-4c-warming (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/30/australias-climate-change-policy-on-course-for-disastrous-4c-warming)

Graph compares U.S., EU, and Australia emissions/projections:
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 30, 2015, 06:03:45 PM
"A way to get power to the world’s poor without making climate change worse"
... a new paper in Nature Climate Change ... [is] somewhat technical, but boiled down, it does two key things.

First, it shows that on-grid and off-grid technologies are not distinct choices but a continuum, a ladder of energy access, everything from consistent grid access to partial grid access to mini- or micro-grids to home solar systems. And second, it shows how at least the first few steps up that ladder can reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The paper doesn’t propose to solve the ultimate dilemma of providing full energy access to all humanity within planetary boundaries, but it shows that there is a practical road forward, using newly emerging technologies, that can serve to “rapidly increase access to basic electricity services and directly inform the emerging Sustainable Development Goals for quality of life, while simultaneously driving action towards low-carbon, Earth-sustaining, inclusive energy systems.”

http://grist.org/climate-energy/a-way-to-get-power-to-the-worlds-poor-without-making-climate-change-worse/ (http://grist.org/climate-energy/a-way-to-get-power-to-the-worlds-poor-without-making-climate-change-worse/)

Edit: Meant to post this in the Renewables thread, but it makes sense here, as well.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 31, 2015, 08:27:06 PM
The U.S. today has submitted its target for the Paris talks.
Today, the United States followed through on that joint announcement by officially submitting our target — or “intended nationally determined contribution,” in the jargon of the international climate negotiations — to the UNFCCC.

https://medium.com/@Deese44/we-re-taking-action-on-climate-change-and-the-world-is-joining-us-2bf44a62b9b9 (https://medium.com/@Deese44/we-re-taking-action-on-climate-change-and-the-world-is-joining-us-2bf44a62b9b9)

Here's Bloomberg's business take.
Kevin Kennedy, deputy director of the U.S. Climate Initiative at WRI, says the White House has charted a course that falls somewhere between Middle-of-the-Road and Go-Getter.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-31/obama-s-new-climate-change-plan-in-two-charts (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-31/obama-s-new-climate-change-plan-in-two-charts)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 01, 2015, 06:12:57 PM
The U.S. today has submitted its target for the Paris talks.
Today, the United States followed through on that joint announcement by officially submitting our target — or “intended nationally determined contribution,” in the jargon of the international climate negotiations — to the UNFCCC.

[url]https://medium.com/@Deese44/we-re-taking-action-on-climate-change-and-the-world-is-joining-us-2bf44a62b9b9[/url] ([url]https://medium.com/@Deese44/we-re-taking-action-on-climate-change-and-the-world-is-joining-us-2bf44a62b9b9[/url])



The linked article indicates that the US Republican leadership is warning the world the America may not honor the voluntary carbon emission reductions (INDC) that the Obama administration just submitted to the UN:

http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/03/31/climatechange-usa-opposition-idINL2N0WX2ER20150331 (http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/03/31/climatechange-usa-opposition-idINL2N0WX2ER20150331)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 01, 2015, 06:18:59 PM
The Washington Post on the U.S. climate commitment:
The Obama administration’s commitment represents a more realistic approach to climate diplomacy than past efforts.
...
There is plenty of room for responsible criticism of the president’s plan. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), for example, said Tuesday that it puts too much emphasis on wind power and too little on nuclear. But Mr. Alexander properly did not counter with inaction as a viable plan. His fellow Republicans could learn something from his example.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/president-obamas-emissions-plan-sets-an-example-for-the-world/2015/03/31/c13c49ba-d7d1-11e4-b3f2-607bd612aeac_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/president-obamas-emissions-plan-sets-an-example-for-the-world/2015/03/31/c13c49ba-d7d1-11e4-b3f2-607bd612aeac_story.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 02, 2015, 04:26:53 PM
US climate plans will survive Republican attacks, say officials
...Brian Deese, a senior advisor to President Obama said the plans outlined in the US submission were consistent with current policies, and would require no further approval.

“It’s based on existing laws that have been passed by Congress and therefore no new legislation is necessary to realise the reductions we propose,” he said.
...

...Stern – lead climate negotiator since 2009 – argued it would not be easy to take apart two presidential terms of work.

“The undoing of the regulations we are putting in place is something that is very tough to do,” he said.

“Countries ask me about the solidity of what we are doing all the time, and that’s exactly what I say, based on existing authority and the kind of regulations we are putting in place does not get easily undone.”

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/04/01/us-climate-plans-will-survive-republican-attacks-say-officials/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/04/01/us-climate-plans-will-survive-republican-attacks-say-officials/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 03, 2015, 04:46:17 PM
The linked article discusses what measured need to be taken with regards to assessment and review, of the implementation of the CoP21 Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) pledges will be toothless.

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/03/31/accountability-must-be-at-the-heart-of-the-paris-climate-pact/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/03/31/accountability-must-be-at-the-heart-of-the-paris-climate-pact/)

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 04, 2015, 12:30:52 AM
NYT: Obama's strategy on climate deals?  Have regulations in place before he leaves office.
At the heart of the plan are ambitious but politically contentious Environmental Protection Agency regulations meant to drastically cut planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions from the nation’s cars and coal-fired power plants. The plan also relies on a speedy timetable, which assumes that Mr. Obama’s administration will issue and begin enacting all such regulations before he leaves office.

“We can achieve this goal using laws that are already on the books, and it will be in place by the time the president leaves office,” said Brian C. Deese, Mr. Obama’s senior adviser on climate change.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/01/us/obama-to-offer-major-blueprint-on-climate-change.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/01/us/obama-to-offer-major-blueprint-on-climate-change.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 04, 2015, 12:54:13 AM
A new poll finds an overwhelming majority of Americans support an international agreement to cut planet-warming emissions.

The poll found 72 percent of likely 2016 voters said they support the United States signing on to an international agreement on climate change.

...
Sixty-five percent of respondents said they thought the United States “should take the lead and make meaningful reductions in its carbon emissions and other gases that may cause global warming.” Even a majority of Republican respondents -- 52 percent –- expressed support for the U.S. joining an international agreement on climate change. A much stronger percentage of Democrats, at 88 percent, supported it, as did 73 percent of independents.
...
A strong majority of respondents, at 73 percent, said it is important for the U.S. to lead by example and to demonstrate that the country is willing to work with other countries.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/30/us-climate-agreement_n_6972434.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/30/us-climate-agreement_n_6972434.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 07, 2015, 05:02:00 PM
The linked article discusses three lessons learned that need to be applied to the CoP21 process leading to Paris, which are: (a) resolve the politics first (as to what can be declared as "Mission Accomplished" by having each country submit its own voluntary plan; (b) implement a verification process so that the general public can be made to feel that progress is being made (no matter how limited); and (c) actively manage state elite denialist (such as the US Congressional Republican Leadership, see the Edited insert of a second link) who will try to promote backsliding and continued addiction to fossil fuels.

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/04/06/three-lessons-the-iran-nuclear-deal-can-teach-climate-negotiators/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/04/06/three-lessons-the-iran-nuclear-deal-can-teach-climate-negotiators/)

Edited Insert:
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/04/01/3641594/mcconnells-inner-tom-cotton/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/04/01/3641594/mcconnells-inner-tom-cotton/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 09, 2015, 07:32:38 PM
Reports: Japan Will Promise To Reduce Carbon Emissions 20 Percent By 2030
It is not clear which year the reductions would be based off of.

Either way, it is somewhat surprising that Japan would make any carbon reduction pledge considering the significant level of uncertainty facing its energy policies. Following the country’s Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011, Japan shut down all of its working nuclear reactors and switched to more carbon-spewing fossil fuels to fill the energy production void. At the time, Japan was getting about 30 percent of its power from nuclear, and planned to increase that to 40 percent by 2017.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/04/09/3644893/japan-climate-change-pledge-maybe/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/04/09/3644893/japan-climate-change-pledge-maybe/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 26, 2015, 05:49:00 PM
Australia (and Canada) 'public enemy number one' of UN climate talks, says Nobel laureate.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/25/australia-public-enemy-number-one-of-un-climate-talks-says-nobel-laureate (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/25/australia-public-enemy-number-one-of-un-climate-talks-says-nobel-laureate)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 26, 2015, 05:55:56 PM
Australia should 'get off sidelines' with 30 per cent emissions cut by 2025: report
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australia-should-get-off-sidelines-with-30-per-cent-emissions-cut-by-2025-report-20150421-1mq1fe.html (http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australia-should-get-off-sidelines-with-30-per-cent-emissions-cut-by-2025-report-20150421-1mq1fe.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 30, 2015, 05:46:09 PM
The linked article indicates that key parties (including the USA due to politicking from the Republican controlled Congress) have missed the deadline for meeting their obligations to the Green Climate Fund.  Without these contributions there is very little chance that the developing world will be able to make any appropriate level of emissions controls under the CoP21 agreement:

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/04/30/us-japan-and-canada-miss-green-climate-fund-donation-deadline/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/04/30/us-japan-and-canada-miss-green-climate-fund-donation-deadline/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 04, 2015, 05:07:49 PM
The linked article states that many developing countries are urging the IPCC to lower its 2C climate goal, as models indicate that even a 1.5C goal would result in substantial environmental impacts:

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/05/04/rethink-2c-climate-goal-urge-worlds-most-vulnerable/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/05/04/rethink-2c-climate-goal-urge-worlds-most-vulnerable/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 09, 2015, 01:24:40 AM
The linked article and the associated image analyze the gap between emission reduction pledges and the goals to remain below either 2C or 1.5C:

http://climateanalytics.org/files/ca_briefing_benchmark_emissions_1p5_and_2oc_2020_2025_2030_20150210_final_bh_may.pdf (http://climateanalytics.org/files/ca_briefing_benchmark_emissions_1p5_and_2oc_2020_2025_2030_20150210_final_bh_may.pdf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Jim Hunt on May 09, 2015, 12:46:17 PM
A novel take (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/05/08/conservative-majority-increases-uk-climate-influence-barker/) on the UK general election results:

Greg Barker, former climate envoy to the prime minister and strong green voice within the last government, was “absolutely delighted” and said Cameron would be an advocate for climate action.

“I think UK influence has been massively increased as a result of the vote for security and stability – and that includes climate stability.”

Liberal Democrat Ed Davey, former secretary of state for energy and climate change, lost his seat, leaving a vacancy to lead the UK’s delegation to UN climate talks later this year.

Richard Benyon, Amber Rudd, Matt Hancock and Nick Hurd have been suggested as contenders for the role.


My own reaction is more along the following lines:

http://youtu.be/QvD66o0tyTo (http://youtu.be/QvD66o0tyTo)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: silkman on May 09, 2015, 05:55:07 PM
Send Arthur Price to Paris!
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Jim Hunt on May 09, 2015, 06:01:51 PM
Send Arthur Price to Paris!

Unfortunately Arthur failed to get elected as my local Member of Parliament by an overwhelming margin:

https://twitter.com/jim_hunt/status/596621789641449472

347 votes compared to the incumbent Conservative's 28,436.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: silkman on May 09, 2015, 07:58:45 PM
But head held high in defeat I assume .... Unlike one or two others?

Respect for Arthur and power to the "people on the street"!

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Jim Hunt on May 11, 2015, 03:40:28 PM
In the latest news on the Great British “reshuffle”:

Amber Rudd was appointed Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change on 11 May 2015.

https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers/secretary-of-state-for-energy-and-climate-change (https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers/secretary-of-state-for-energy-and-climate-change)

I'm afraid I was unable to resist Twitter temptation:

https://twitter.com/jim_hunt/status/597755643089571841 (https://twitter.com/jim_hunt/status/597755643089571841)

Any chance of a "retweet" or three?
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 12, 2015, 05:59:36 PM
The linked article discusses whether the CoP21 climate change pact to be finalized in Paris in December 2015, will have any teeth:

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/05/12/will-a-paris-climate-change-pact-have-any-teeth/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/05/12/will-a-paris-climate-change-pact-have-any-teeth/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 19, 2015, 05:10:24 AM
Canada announced Friday that it was committing to a goal of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent compared to 2005 levels by 2030, an announcement that comes in the lead-up to the United Nations’ international climate talks at the end of this year.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/05/15/3659589/canada-emissions-pledge/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/05/15/3659589/canada-emissions-pledge/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 19, 2015, 03:57:40 PM
Call for Climate Action - Joint Statement from Angela Merkel and François Hollande (May 19, 2015)
...We invite all countries to join us in this endeavor by doing their part in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and capabilities and in light of different national circumstances. We are committed to the goal of limiting global temperature increase at least to below 2°C compared with pre-industrial levels.
...
Our countries will continue to show leadership in this profound transformation of our economies and our societies towards full decarbonization. We are committed, through the Energiewende in Germany and the “transition énergétique” in France, to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by 80 to 95 % in 2050 compared to 1990.

http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/french-foreign-policy-1/climate-7436/events-7880/article/petersberg-dialogue-call-for (http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/french-foreign-policy-1/climate-7436/events-7880/article/petersberg-dialogue-call-for)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 20, 2015, 06:49:49 PM
More than cities, less than whole countries:

12 States from Different Countries Sign to be Climate Leaders
A group of 12 sub-national governments collectively representing more than $4.5 trillion in GDP and 100 million people have signed Under 2 MOU, which is a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that commits them to take leadership on climate action at their level of jurisdiction.

The signatories include: California, Oregon, Vermont and Washington, USA; Acre, Brazil; Baden-Württemberg, Germany; Baja California and Jalisco, Mexico; Catalonia, Spain; Ontario and British Columbia, Canada and Wales, UK.

The agreement identifies action being taken and promotes greater ambition on climate change than is currently being contemplated in the international process leading to the Paris climate change conference at the end of this year.

Each signatory commits to limit emissions to below eighty to ninety-five percent below 1990 levels, or below two metric tons per capita, by 2050 – which is a level of emission reductions believed to be necessary to limit global warming to less than 2°C by the end of this century.

http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/under-2-mou-a-subnational-global-climate-leadership/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/under-2-mou-a-subnational-global-climate-leadership/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 23, 2015, 04:32:25 PM
Green Climate Fund says it’s funded and open for business
Officials said the fund will now finalise an initial set of projects aimed at helping developing countries develop better clean energy systems and prepare for future climate impacts.

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/05/21/green-climate-fund-says-its-funded-and-open-for-business/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/05/21/green-climate-fund-says-its-funded-and-open-for-business/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 02, 2015, 07:37:46 PM
Facing reality....

The global climate agreement being negotiated this year must be worded in such a way that it doesn’t require approval by the US Congress, the French foreign minister said on Monday.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/01/un-climate-talks-deal-us-congress (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/01/un-climate-talks-deal-us-congress)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 03, 2015, 12:43:03 PM
World Resources Institute:
The $100 billion/year global Climate Fund target is "unlikely to be met unless private sector funding is included. But if it is included, then the target can be reached or even substantially exceeded."
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jun/03/private-sector-climate-change-development-fund (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jun/03/private-sector-climate-change-development-fund)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 07, 2015, 03:31:18 PM
“Paris 2015” is now being referred to as the "Universal Climate Agreement."  Certainly puts a different spin on it....
May need to change the name of this thread.  :)

Website:
http://www.cop21.gouv.fr/en (http://www.cop21.gouv.fr/en)


Green Climate Fund ready to help developing nations fight climate change
Once again, climate negotiators have gathered in Bonn to discuss the fate of the Universal Climate Agreement (UCA). The spiritual grandchild of the Earth Summit Rio agreement of 23 years ago, the UCA is the world's best chance to limit global temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius.

http://www.trust.org/item/20150605120716-naxt1/ (http://www.trust.org/item/20150605120716-naxt1/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: SATire on June 07, 2015, 08:41:00 PM
“Paris 2015” is now being referred to as the "Universal Climate Agreement."  Certainly puts a different spin on it....
May need to change the name of this thread.  :)

Website:
[url]http://www.cop21.gouv.fr/en[/url] ([url]http://www.cop21.gouv.fr/en[/url])


Green Climate Fund ready to help developing nations fight climate change
Once again, climate negotiators have gathered in Bonn to discuss the fate of the Universal Climate Agreement (UCA). The spiritual grandchild of the Earth Summit Rio agreement of 23 years ago, the UCA is the world's best chance to limit global temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius.

[url]http://www.trust.org/item/20150605120716-naxt1/[/url] ([url]http://www.trust.org/item/20150605120716-naxt1/[/url])


They could universally agree, that someone should do something against climate change. Probably not us and not now - but you'll never know ;-) Just paving the way for the next conference...

Sorry - I have seen to many conferences with zero results since Rio & Kyoto. The big ones will not agree on anything that could hurt. Therefore, there will be no effect. Some even did not announce any promise (despite it is promised, that such promise will never be controlled...). But an agreement will be found - just to please the host.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 08, 2015, 02:20:24 PM
SATire,

Yes, looking back at prior agreements, it is hard to be optimistic about the outcome in Paris.  But the thing about Time, in this case, is that every month, the climate change situation is becoming worse -- and the solutions are becoming clearer (and cheaper!), so the impetus to act keeps increasing.  I think Paris will be a step -- a big, but not sufficient one -- towards the globe agreeing what needs to be done, and I'm seeing more talk about "ratcheting up" goals even after that.  Paris will not be the final word, but it will help us get our act together.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32829668 (http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32829668)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 08, 2015, 09:26:19 PM
G7 leaders agree on ambitious decarbonization goal but provide no plan on how they'll do it
http://mashable.com/2015/06/08/g7-nations-decarbonize-economies-2100/ (http://mashable.com/2015/06/08/g7-nations-decarbonize-economies-2100/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 08, 2015, 09:58:57 PM
 ;D

@nytimesworld: This photo is real. Caption contest? http://t.co/6LKzWfPteO (http://t.co/6LKzWfPteO)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 08, 2015, 10:13:11 PM
World’s Richest Countries Decide to Take It Slow on Climate Change
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/06/08/g7_summit_climate_change_world_should_phase_out_fossil_fuels_by_2100.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/06/08/g7_summit_climate_change_world_should_phase_out_fossil_fuels_by_2100.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 09, 2015, 07:21:31 PM
Do 'whatever it takes' for a deal, says majority in global climate survey
Nearly two-thirds of people believe that negotiators at key UN climate talks in December should do “whatever it takes” to limit global warming to a 2C rise, according to what is believed to be the most comprehensive survey of global public attitudes to climate change ever conducted.
...
Two-thirds (66%) thought that measures to combat climate change are “mostly an opportunity to improve our quality of life”, while 27% see it as mostly a “threat” to quality of life.

And 64% said the efforts of developing countries should “partly” depend on funding from developed countries, while 18% said it should depend “completely” on such funding.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jun/08/paris-talks-must-get-agreement-on-2c-limit-majority-say-in-a-global-survey (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jun/08/paris-talks-must-get-agreement-on-2c-limit-majority-say-in-a-global-survey)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 11, 2015, 02:28:45 PM
Powerful editorial in the Washington Post.

A Carbon-free Future?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-clean-energy-target-worth-hitting/2015/06/10/3ba6e4f2-0ee7-11e5-adec-e82f8395c032_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-clean-energy-target-worth-hitting/2015/06/10/3ba6e4f2-0ee7-11e5-adec-e82f8395c032_story.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 12, 2015, 01:09:33 AM
UNFCC says:  Governments Shift Gear Toward Delivery of New Universal Climate Agreement
Groundswell of Action by Cities, Companies and Regions Fire Up Optimism on ‘Pre-2020’Ambition and Beyond
The path to Paris is now happening on both the political and negotiating levels and with a mood of exceptional confidence and engagement—what is being managed here is no longer resistance to an agreement but complexity, enthusiasm and an understanding that every nation is playing its part," said Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

"The negotiations are also occurring against the backdrop of an accelerating wave of climate action from non-state actors including cities, regions, territories and companies which is contributing confidence to the process," she said.

http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/governments-shift-gear-toward-delivery-of-new-universal-climate-agreement/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/governments-shift-gear-toward-delivery-of-new-universal-climate-agreement/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 15, 2015, 06:23:11 PM
On 13 June 2015, UNFCCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres delivered the Commencement Address to the University of California San Diego School of International Relations and Pacific Studies Class of 2015 in La Jolla, California. In her speech, she said:

"You will write the social contract of this century. Contrary to the previous contracts, it will have to address global concerns just as much, or even more so, than national and local concerns. It will have to be a contract enriched by the integration of North and South, East and West, and deeply informed by the interaction between global challenges and national concerns. It will have to be a contract based more on collaboration than on competition. It will have to be a contract guided by the stars of solidarity and equality."

"Through your decisions you will also determine the design of the impressive infrastructure of the twenty-first century, infrastructure that is almost unimaginable to us today. It will be built to transform the way we house, feed, employ and transport nine billion people despite growing climate uncertainties."

http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/speech-ucsd-irps-commencement/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/speech-ucsd-irps-commencement/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 16, 2015, 03:01:14 AM
Updated estimate of pledges = 2.6°C warming.

Pledges already put forward for the Paris conference, including by the U.S., European Union and China, could hold temperature increases to 2.6 degrees Celsius. That’s significantly less of an overshoot than the 3.6-degree long-term gain in the IEA’s main scenario issued in November. The United Nations is trying to hold the increase to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) by 2100.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-14/holding-back-climate-change-isn-t-as-hard-as-you-think-iea-says (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-14/holding-back-climate-change-isn-t-as-hard-as-you-think-iea-says)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 28, 2015, 09:25:39 PM
Australian Climate Roundtable: Business, union, environmental, investor and welfare groups form unusual coalition on climate policy.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-29/australian-climate-roundtable-business-unions-policy-alliance/6579106 (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-29/australian-climate-roundtable-business-unions-policy-alliance/6579106)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 29, 2015, 11:42:05 PM
India, China, Brazil & South Africa issue UN climate deal checklist

Influential bloc of emerging economies sets out priorities for Paris pact with finance and differentiation topping agenda

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/06/29/india-china-brazil-south-africa-issue-un-climate-deal-checklist/#.dpuf (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/06/29/india-china-brazil-south-africa-issue-un-climate-deal-checklist/#.dpuf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 05, 2015, 04:07:06 AM
Civil groups heat up climate debate
The French city of Lyon has been hosting a climate summit. Unlike the UN talks, which take place at government level, this meeting brought regions, cities and other players together to drive climate action from below.
Some 800 mayors, CEOs and trade organizations from around the world have been meeting in Lyon over the past two days to ask for more say in the UN talks, and to showcase their own moves to cut carbon emissions. Local and regional governments have no official seat at the UN climate negotiating table, although they have to cope with the risks of climate change directly. More than half of the global population lives in cities, producing 70 percent of global greenhouse gases.
The World Summit Climate & Territories is part of France's strategy to get as many people involved in climate negotiations as possible, to increase the pressure on world leaders to reach a global accord to reduce emissions at the Paris summit. It was organized by the major global networks of sub-national and local governments in collaboration with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and hosted by the Rhone-Alpes Region, of which Lyon is the capital.

http://www.dw.com/en/civil-groups-heat-up-climate-debate/a-18558155 (http://www.dw.com/en/civil-groups-heat-up-climate-debate/a-18558155)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 08, 2015, 01:17:48 AM
The Media Is Still Confused About Whether The Paris Climate Deal Will Limit Warming To 2 Degrees
Avoiding the 2°C limit remains an essential goal. Indeed, the best science now makes clear we must say as far below 2°C as is humanly possible — a point the world’s top climatologists bluntly explained in May.

But for Paris to single-handedly achieve that goal, every major country would have to commit to specific and ever-deeper post-2030 carbon dioxide cuts all the way to zero emissions in the next half century or so (and possibly negative emissions after that). Such an outcome was never on the table.

As European Union climate chief Miguel Arias Canete has explained: “2C is an objective. If we have an ongoing process you cannot say it is a failure if the mitigation commitments do not reach 2C.”

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/07/07/3677040/paris-climate-deal-2c-limit/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/07/07/3677040/paris-climate-deal-2c-limit/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Clare on July 09, 2015, 05:04:50 AM
NZ has announced its post-2020 target, effectively only 11% below 1990 levels.:
NB. our v high level of emissions/pp cos of all the dairy farming & road transport.

http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/articles/media-releases/new-zealands-post-2020-target--weaker-action-for-a-less-competitive-economy.html (http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/articles/media-releases/new-zealands-post-2020-target--weaker-action-for-a-less-competitive-economy.html)

& a journo sums this up this up most succinctly:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/video.cfm?c_id=39&gal_cid=39&gallery_id=152180 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/video.cfm?c_id=39&gal_cid=39&gallery_id=152180)

Clare, not sure whether to feel angry, depressed, ashamed, frustrated......to be a Kiwi

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 13, 2015, 06:39:04 PM
"Our Common Future under Climate Change" conference
This week has seen thousands of experts come together for the largest scientific gathering on climate change before COP21 in Paris in December.
...
"In many ways, this conference and the 2000-and-some scientists are really gathered to express, more than anything else, their willingness to be part of the process and their commitment to making sure that their knowledge is available as a foundation going into the Paris COP."
...
"We should not see this conference as the scientific input for the [UNFCCC] negotiations. The science is quite clear now. For that, there is no need for such a conference. The purpose of the conference was to generate new ideas after the Paris COP. We should not just focus on the Paris COP. There is a day after Paris, too. Climate policy is not a sprint, it's a marathon."

http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2015/07/scientists-2015-is-a-critical-year-for-bold-action-on-climate-change/ (http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2015/07/scientists-2015-is-a-critical-year-for-bold-action-on-climate-change/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 18, 2015, 01:00:33 PM
A United Nations accord to slow global warming should be short, flexible and long-lasting to avoid complex re-negotiations every few years, according to a document prepared by France before a Paris summit in December.

The deal will also have to ensure that governments do not backtrack on promises to cut greenhouse gas emissions despite a likely lack of sanctions, according to a briefing for climate ministers attending preparatory talks in Paris on 20-21 July.

“There is a common understanding that the Paris agreement should be flexible, because it will need to adapt to changing circumstances,” according to the five-page document, seen by Reuters.
...
On Wednesday, a report based on talks with negotiators indicated strong will in nations to reach a climate agreement in 2015. Negotiations failed in 2009 at the last attempt at a summit in Copenhagen.

“Behind the scenes we see a real desire to find common ground,” said Harald Dovland, a former lead negotiator for Norway who co-chaired the report by the Centre for Climate and Energy Solutions, a US-based think-tank.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/17/france-seeks-short-and-long-lasting-paris-climate-change-deal (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jul/17/france-seeks-short-and-long-lasting-paris-climate-change-deal)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 22, 2015, 06:11:48 PM
New approach to the agreement: individualized country goals instead of "developed/developing" categories, and reviews every five years.

Paris climate ministerial sees progress on global deal
 http://www.rtcc.org/2015/07/22/paris-climate-ministerial-sees-progress-on-global-deal/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/07/22/paris-climate-ministerial-sees-progress-on-global-deal/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on July 24, 2015, 04:43:46 PM
While I applaud the efforts of the CoP21 (Paris 2015) use of "intended nationally determined contributions", or INDCs (see attached figure for INDCs to date), in order to move towards its goals of fighting climate change.  Nevertheless, I note that the attached figure focuses on the situation today, while the greatest threat to the future is possible coming increases in GHG emissions from developing nations that have not yet stated their INDCs (i.e. see the grey countries on the map):

http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2015/03/paris-2015-tracking-country-climate-pledges/ (http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2015/03/paris-2015-tracking-country-climate-pledges/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 24, 2015, 08:24:47 PM
That carbonbrief link is a nice summary by country, ASLR.

For future reference, here is the UNFCC site where the full INDC texts can be found:
http://www4.unfccc.int/submissions/indc/Submission%20Pages/submissions.aspx (http://www4.unfccc.int/submissions/indc/Submission%20Pages/submissions.aspx)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: icefest on July 27, 2015, 10:57:50 AM
NZ has announced its post-2020 target, effectively only 11% below 1990 levels.:
NB. our v high level of emissions/pp cos of all the dairy farming & road transport.

[url]http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/articles/media-releases/new-zealands-post-2020-target--weaker-action-for-a-less-competitive-economy.html[/url] ([url]http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/articles/media-releases/new-zealands-post-2020-target--weaker-action-for-a-less-competitive-economy.html[/url])

& a journo sums this up this up most succinctly:
[url]http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/video.cfm?c_id=39&gal_cid=39&gallery_id=152180[/url] ([url]http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/video.cfm?c_id=39&gal_cid=39&gallery_id=152180[/url])

Clare, not sure whether to feel angry, depressed, ashamed, frustrated......to be a Kiwi




Still better than Australia in almost every way.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on July 28, 2015, 09:42:42 PM
The linked article indicates that the success, or failure, of the CoP21 meeting in Paris (starting November 30) likely will not be certain until November 16 after the Group of 20 meeting in Antalya, Turkey, and will hinge on financing issues:

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/07/28/g20-could-determine-if-rich-will-meet-climate-finance-promise/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/07/28/g20-could-determine-if-rich-will-meet-climate-finance-promise/)


Extract: "A forum of the world’s advanced economies could seal the fate of a UN climate pact to be struck in Paris weeks later, say French officials undertaking a frantic diplomacy blitz.
A Group of 20 meeting in Antalya, Turkey, this November is the moment for rich nations to state how they will mobilise $100 billion a year from 2020 to help poor countries fight climate change.
“If developed countries have to honour their commitment, then it is important to clarify the modalities,” France’s special envoy for the protection of the planet, Nicolas Hulot, said on Monday.



The G20 comprises the world’s largest developed and emerging economies, responsible for 70% of global CO2 emissions, two-thirds of the world’s population and 85% of world GDP.
Its members include the US, Canada, UK, France, Germany, Australia, South Africa, Turkey, China, South Korea, Mexico, and India.
Leaders will meet for two days in Turkey on November 15-16, with the Paris summit starting on November 30."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 29, 2015, 09:32:01 PM
9 things we learnt from the latest UN climate text
On Friday the UN released a streamlined version of a negotiating text for a proposed greenhouse gas slashing pact. Here’s what we have learnt so far.

1 – The two officials running the talks are worried about the speed of talks. They are far too slow and time is running out. There is a “unanimous view that the pace was slow and that there was an urgent need, owing to serious time constraints, to accelerate the work,” they wrote in an opening scenario note.
...
2 – Quit grandstanding, start negotiating. This is linked to the lack of time but also to the nature of the talks. The co-chairs want to bypass the long, rambling and often divisive statements groups make at the start of each session of talks. “We strongly encourage Parties to post their statements and remarks on the UNFCCC website in lieu of presenting them orally,” they write.
...
5 – Developed countries could face an ‘ambition baseline’. One suggestion is that “Developed country Parties shall take on mitigation commitments for the post-2020 period that are more ambitious than emission reductions of at least 25–40% below the 1990 level by 2020.” The EU would pass muster, but the US, Australia, Canada and Japan would struggle.

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/07/27/9-things-we-learnt-from-the-latest-un-climate-text/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/07/27/9-things-we-learnt-from-the-latest-un-climate-text/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 06, 2015, 06:43:14 PM
National Climate Plans Raise Adaptation’s Profile
Countries have a great deal of flexibility in the kind of adaptation information they share, and their rationales for including adaptation may differ. Some may wish to communicate advances in adaptation planning and action, highlight the vulnerability of important economic sectors or demonstrate their readiness for various forms of international support. Some may also wish to raise the general profile of adaptation action in order to encourage and support the idea of a long-term goal on adaptation in the international agreement.

http://www.wri.org/blog/2015/08/national-climate-plans-raise-adaptation (http://www.wri.org/blog/2015/08/national-climate-plans-raise-adaptation)’s-profile
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 21, 2015, 10:41:14 PM
100 days to save the world
...the Paris agreement needs to accomplish a few things: It should send a strong signal that the world is moving away from a fossil fuel economy, and won't turn back; it needs to ensure that pollution pledges only will get stronger over time; it needs to ensure that countries meet again, as soon as five years from now, to ratchet up their commitments; and it needs to require countries to report on their progress transparently, and for those reports to be independently verified.

 http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/21/opinions/sutter-climate-paris-two-degrees-100-days/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/21/opinions/sutter-climate-paris-two-degrees-100-days/index.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 27, 2015, 07:27:33 PM
Rio de Janeiro first fully compliant city in Compact of Mayors, tackles climate change
“I am proud that Rio de Janeiro is the first global city to become fully compliant with the Compact of Mayors, and I call on all cities to join this critical initiative on the Road to Paris and beyond,” said Mayor Paes. “By complying with the Compact, we are advancing our work to make Rio a place with a better quality of life for its citizens and a healthier environment for its visitors. Cities are climate leaders, they are in the best position to effect real change. The actions we take at a local level will have a global impact and, by improving our city, we will be helping create a better world for today’s urban citizens and generations to come.”

Launched by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and his Special Envoy for Cities and Climate Change, Michael R. Bloomberg, the Compact of Mayors is gaining momentum in the run-up to the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris (COP21). Earlier this week, US President Barack Obama announced that 15 new US cities – including several C40 and ICLEI member cities – joined the Compact of Mayors, and set a goal of having 100 U.S. cities in the Compact in advance of COP21 at the end of November.

http://www.compactofmayors.org/press-release-rio-de-janeiro-first-fully-compliant-city-in-compact-of-mayors-tackles-climate-change/ (http://www.compactofmayors.org/press-release-rio-de-janeiro-first-fully-compliant-city-in-compact-of-mayors-tackles-climate-change/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 01, 2015, 06:27:10 PM
UN chief to speed climate talks with New York leaders meet
UN chief Ban Ki-moon has invited leaders from 40 countries to a “closed-door” meeting in New York on 27 September to discuss plans for a global climate deal.

According to Bloomberg, UN officials are targeting leaders of the world’s top greenhouse gas polluters, with China, India, US and EU heads of government slated to attend.

http://www.rtcc.org/2015/09/01/un-chief-to-speed-climate-talks-with-new-york-leaders-meet/#.dpuf (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/09/01/un-chief-to-speed-climate-talks-with-new-york-leaders-meet/#.dpuf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 02, 2015, 08:35:22 PM
Indonesia looks to increase emissions cut pledge ahead of Paris meet
http://reuters.com/article/idUSL4N1162JT20150831 (http://reuters.com/article/idUSL4N1162JT20150831)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on September 02, 2015, 08:52:31 PM

The linked German assessment

http://www.dw.com/en/world-still-on-overheat-experts-warn-in-bonn/a-18690452 (http://www.dw.com/en/world-still-on-overheat-experts-warn-in-bonn/a-18690452)

Extract: "Targets currently stated by individual nations for 2030 made the 2-degree goal "almost impossible," they said.

The average temperature rise - in relation to pre-industrial times - would be closer to 2.9 or 3.1 degrees, said Bill Hare of Climate Analytics, a CAT contributor."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 03, 2015, 01:22:13 PM
Industry comes off the fence and calls for global climate deal
More than 2,000 listed companies have submitted climate change information to CDP, the global system for disclosure on climate, forests and water. CDP is the only organization acting on behalf of investors to ask companies:

"Would your organization’s board of directors support an international agreement between governments on climate change, which seeks to limit global temperature rise to under 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial levels in line with IPCC scenarios such as RCP2.6?"

Amongst the companies asked are 28 of the largest (by market capitalization) energy firms, who together account for more than a quarter (26%) of global greenhouse gas emissions* (see editor’s notes for details).

Despite widespread consensus that a significant amount of fossil fuel reserves will have to remain in the ground if dangerous climate change is to be avoided, none of these carbon majors answered "no" in response to the question.

In fact, a majority (13) of the heavy emitters state their board backs a global agreement. These include Russia’s Gazprom, the single biggest emitter of greenhouse gases among these carbon majors, and the US’s ConocoPhillips. Eight report that they have no opinion on the matter and the remaining seven did not answer the question, which suggests either a lack of clarity around the official board position on the issue or that some companies are not treating the imminent COP21 with the necessary strategic priority.

Looking beyond this significant energy sub sector, CDP data shows that companies that have formulated an opinion on a global climate deal are overwhelmingly in support: 806 companies answer yes versus 111 that said no. A high number of companies (1,075) state that they have no opinion and 330 did not answer the question.

CDP’s executive chairman Paul Dickinson says: "It is time for governments to listen to the business voice in support of climate progress rather than to be influenced by a minority and downgrade environmental priorities. Companies are telling us – and their investors – that they welcome climate action, which brings prosperity and growth."
https://www.cdp.net/en-US/News/CDP%20News%20Article%20Pages/industry-calls-for-global-climate-deal.aspx (https://www.cdp.net/en-US/News/CDP%20News%20Article%20Pages/industry-calls-for-global-climate-deal.aspx)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on September 03, 2015, 04:21:31 PM
The linked article indicates that: "Pressure mounting on UN as Bonn climate talks stutter".


http://www.rtcc.org/2015/09/02/pressure-mounts-on-un-as-bonn-climate-talks-stutter/ (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/09/02/pressure-mounts-on-un-as-bonn-climate-talks-stutter/)


Extract: "Seven days of negotiations remain before Paris summit to finalise global pact, but what leaders will sign is unclear."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 04, 2015, 02:51:42 AM
@SLHDC: .@CFigueres has a warning for press writing about the Paris climate negotiations [url]http://t.co/ow2F1LcCW8[/url] ([url]http://t.co/ow2F1LcCW8[/url])

[url]https://twitter.com/slhdc/status/639515976577515521[/url] ([url]https://twitter.com/slhdc/status/639515976577515521[/url])
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on September 05, 2015, 01:17:45 AM
The link (and associated image) leads to the Sept 1 2015 Climate Action Tracker, CAT, update, showing the current situation for INDCs:

http://climateactiontracker.org/assets/publications/briefing_papers/CAT_EmissionsGap_Briefing_Sep2015.pdf (http://climateactiontracker.org/assets/publications/briefing_papers/CAT_EmissionsGap_Briefing_Sep2015.pdf)

Of course more progress could be made both before and after CoP21.

Edit: Of course the CAT projection assumes: (a) average climate sensitivity; (b) average PDO/IPO/AMO cycle timing; and (c) no additional planetary energy imbalance als Hansen et al 2015.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bruce Steele on September 05, 2015, 02:00:57 AM
It will come from below
 and we will no more know than the trilobites
 our place in it
Brachiopods and bryozoans
 turned to rock
 like before
Cnidarian nightmares
 sulfur, floating fish
It would take a time machine 
 to turn this back
And believe me
 It was us
 
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: TerryM on September 05, 2015, 09:43:35 AM
Wow.....just Wow
Terry
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bruce Steele on September 05, 2015, 03:03:15 PM
Terry, Thanks. I don't know why I write poems. Just trying to put some order to the chaos I suppose.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 06, 2015, 04:24:18 PM
"We all would want to see this baby born," Christiana Figueres, head of the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat, said of the U.N. agreement meant to chart ways to fight global warming beyond 2020 by almost 200 nations.

"Of course we are all impatient, of course we are all frustrated," she told a news conference, referring to efforts to pin down emissions cuts to limit heatwaves, floods and rising sea levels. "We are ... on track with the Paris agreement."

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has in recent weeks criticised the negotiations as progressing at a "snail's pace".

Ahmed Djoghlaf, an Algerian who co-chairs the Bonn meetings, bristled at the description. He said Ban's office was on the 38th floor of the U.N. building in New York. From so high up "you don't see what is going on in the basement," he said.

"We are making progress... We will be on time in Paris," he told a news conference.
...
Governments asked Djoghlaf and his American co-chair Daniel Reifsnyder to present a new streamlined draft text in early October, outlining clear choices.

"It's time for a step change. The real deal needs to start taking shape," European Climate Commissioner Miguel Arias Canete said.

"This is their shot to get it right," Alden Meyer, of the Union of Concerned Scientists, said of the planned draft, adding he felt there was still enough time to line up a deal for Paris.

Overriding choices, for instance, range from a goal of phasing out fossil fuels by 2050 favoured by many developing nations to no deadline at all, favoured by many OPEC states.

http://www.trust.org/item/20150904175046-kwnau/ (http://www.trust.org/item/20150904175046-kwnau/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on September 07, 2015, 08:28:13 AM
The linked articles discusses how the French government has organized an unofficial two-day conference of official from 57 countries in an effort to inject some momentum into the critical question of finance and climate change, leading up to CoP21:

http://www.skynews.com.au/business/business/world/2015/09/07/ministers-talk-climate-finance-in-paris.html (http://www.skynews.com.au/business/business/world/2015/09/07/ministers-talk-climate-finance-in-paris.html)

Extract: "Ministers and diplomats from 57 countries have gathered in Paris to discuss the make-or-break issue of finance in a climate rescue deal to be sealed in the French capital in December.  The two-day huddle of foreign and environment ministers and senior officials is not part of official negotiations for the highly-anticipated agreement, but is meant to inject political momentum into the fraught UN process."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 08, 2015, 03:26:54 AM
The president of France, Francois Hollande, has warned that the global climate change talks scheduled for Paris this December will fail unless nations make a much greater effort to reach agreement – and that the result could be millions of new refugees fleeing climate disaster.

“There is a risk of failure,” he told journalists, after a meeting on the issue of providing financial assistance to poor countries affected by climate change. “If we don’t conclude [with a successful agreement], and there are no substantial measures to ensure the transition [to a climate-affected world], it won’t be hundreds of thousands of refugees in the next 20 years, it will be millions.”

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/07/paris-climate-talks-could-fail-warns-francois-hollande (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/07/paris-climate-talks-could-fail-warns-francois-hollande)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 08, 2015, 04:13:46 PM
About the current refugee situation in the E.U.:

What You Need to Know About Europe's Refugee Crisis: Q&A
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-08/what-you-need-to-know-about-europe-s-refugee-crisis-q-a (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-08/what-you-need-to-know-about-europe-s-refugee-crisis-q-a)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on September 08, 2015, 05:09:53 PM
The linked New Scientist article illustrates the heart of the problem with the CoP21 negotiations, in that the rich GHG polluting nations (like the USA & Australia) do not want to recognize the full cost of the damage to the Earth that they have already incurred.  Furthermore, that within the rich countries, the rich individuals are still trying to transfer their incurred climate debt to the masses.

"Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will."
Frederick Douglass


https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28135-everyone-in-the-us-and-australia-owes-12000-in-co2-emissions/ (https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28135-everyone-in-the-us-and-australia-owes-12000-in-co2-emissions/)

Extract: "If you live in the US or Australia, then between 1990 and 2013 you accumulated a debt of more than U$12,000. People in the UK are doing a bit better, racking up about US$4000 in debt over that time.

This isn’t about overspending on credit cards, but about damage done to our atmosphere. If we think of the atmosphere as a limited resource to be shared equally by all, then those who pollute more than their fair share – that is, more than the global average – can be said to be in “emissions debt”. Conversely, those who pollute less are in “emissions credit”."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 08, 2015, 09:05:12 PM
And here is the link between climate change and the mass migration of refugees.

How Climate Change is Behind the Surge of Migrants to Europe
On Aug. 31, Secretary of State John Kerry warned that climate change could create a new class of migrants, what he called “climate refugees” at a conference on climate change conference in Anchorage, Alaska. “You think migration is a challenge to Europe today because of extremism, wait until you see what happens when there’s an absence of water, an absence of food, or one tribe fighting against another for mere survival,” he said.

http://time.com/4024210/climate-change-migrants/ (http://time.com/4024210/climate-change-migrants/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: oren on September 08, 2015, 09:57:51 PM
And here is the link between climate change and the mass migration of refugees.

How Climate Change is Behind the Surge of Migrants to Europe
On Aug. 31, Secretary of State John Kerry warned that climate change could create a new class of migrants, what he called “climate refugees” at a conference on climate change conference in Anchorage, Alaska. “You think migration is a challenge to Europe today because of extremism, wait until you see what happens when there’s an absence of water, an absence of food, or one tribe fighting against another for mere survival,” he said.

[url]http://time.com/4024210/climate-change-migrants/[/url] ([url]http://time.com/4024210/climate-change-migrants/[/url])


In reality the troubles in Syria began with a big drought (partially blamed on climate change) back in 2008-2009, causing mass poverty and large internal migrations, which in turn led to the instability. Now they are called extremism refugees but that's only partially true.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 09, 2015, 01:05:50 PM
Progress in Climate Talks Attracts Attack Dogs
One of the key breakthroughs made in Germany last week was a pair of proposals put forward on the issue of loss and damage stemming from climate change. From wildfires in the western U.S. to hurricane storm surge on the eastern seaboard fueled by rising seal levels, the impacts of climate change are hitting home, leaving loss and damage in their wake. It's a global trend, driven by decades of carbon pollution. The poorest developing countries are the most vulnerable. So they are hit the hardest.

The U.S. is leading the effort to ensure Paris produces a comprehensive and long-term global climate agreement. And to that end the U.S. used last week's negotiating session to propose a provision addressing the issue of loss and damage for inclusion in the Paris deal. Potential measures under such a deal include helping developing countries with building an early warning system for extreme weather events and creating a displacement coordination facility to deal with those who lose their homes as a result of extreme weather.

This U.S. administration has taken a pretty hard line against defining the issue of loss and damage as a matter of liability or compensation. Nevertheless, CFACT claimed exactly the opposite, going into hysterics and hyperventilating about President Obama in its email to supporters - and of course repeating the usual litany of lies that the earth isn't warming and climate change hasn't affected extreme weather.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hunter-cutting/progress-in-climate-talks_b_8096200.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hunter-cutting/progress-in-climate-talks_b_8096200.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 09, 2015, 01:19:18 PM
Countries edge towards loss and damage deal at climate talks
Proposals published late Friday show positions once light years apart are slowly converging on vexed issue of compensation
http://www.rtcc.org/2015/09/08/countries-edge-towards-loss-and-damage-deal-at-climate-talks/#.dpuf (http://www.rtcc.org/2015/09/08/countries-edge-towards-loss-and-damage-deal-at-climate-talks/#.dpuf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 10, 2015, 06:44:53 PM
Mitch McConnell Is Powerless to Block Obama’s Climate Change Deal
Republican obstinacy is so predictable, it’s already baked into the structure, politics, and messaging ahead of a deal in Paris.
...
Despite the largely hollow threats from McConnell, the Obama administration has been conducting its own outreach to large polluters like China to explain how the U.S. can deliver on its promises in good faith without Congress’ input—as long as a Democrat is in office, that is. In March, the U.S. submitted its pledge to cut greenhouse gas emissions up to 28 percent by 2025 over 2005 levels. When negotiators ask State Department climate envoy Todd Stern about the “solidity of U.S. action," he says he assures them that “the kind of regulation being put in place is not easily undone,” signaling that the White House is confident its Clean Power Plan and other EPA regulations can survive court battles and congressional opposition.

All this means mixed news for Paris: The bad news is that a single Republican is powerful enough to undo the deal—but not until long after December, and only if the GOP wins the White House in 2016. The good news, though, is this means Congress is largely on the sidelines for Paris and won’t make or break the negotiations. It won't be Mitch McConnell who sinks a deal.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/122759/mitch-mcconnell-powerless-block-obamas-climate-change-deal (http://www.newrepublic.com/article/122759/mitch-mcconnell-powerless-block-obamas-climate-change-deal)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on September 14, 2015, 04:30:27 PM
The linked article indicates that Africa is organizing to bring lawyers to CoP21, prepared for tough talk that the developed world may be ill prepared to address.

http://www.ipsnews.net/2015/09/africa-sees-u-n-climate-conference-as-court-case-for-the-continent/ (http://www.ipsnews.net/2015/09/africa-sees-u-n-climate-conference-as-court-case-for-the-continent/)


Extract: "As the clock ticks towards the United Nations climate change conference (COP21) in Paris in December, African experts, policy-makers and civil society groups plan to come to the negotiation table prepared for a legal approach to avoid mistakes made during formulation of the Kyoto Protocol."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 14, 2015, 05:49:18 PM
Obama, World Leaders May Skip Key Part of Paris Climate Talks
Organizers invite leaders to speak at the beginning of COP21, rather than the end, to avoid the eleventh-hour chaos that marked the close of the Copenhagen climate conference.
“I saw everything from the in­side, and the fact that lead­ers were com­ing in at the end of the con­fer­ence con­trib­uted to the para­lys­is in the ne­go­ti­ations,” said Mey­er, an in­form­al ad­visor to Con­nie Hede­gaard, the Dan­ish of­fi­cial who over­saw that sum­mit. “Clearly the French learned the les­sons of Copen­ha­gen. I haven’t heard of any­one who thinks it’s a good idea to bring the lead­ers in at the end.”

http://www.nationaljournal.com/s/68277/obama-world-leaders-may-skip-key-part-paris-climate-talks (http://www.nationaljournal.com/s/68277/obama-world-leaders-may-skip-key-part-paris-climate-talks)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on September 17, 2015, 05:45:31 PM
The linked article (and attached image) discuss how many developing countries are tying their INDCs to the assumption that developed countries will contribute hundreds of billion of dollars to finance much of their efforts:

http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2015/09/paris-2015-tracking-requests-for-climate-finance/ (http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2015/09/paris-2015-tracking-requests-for-climate-finance/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Clare on September 25, 2015, 09:39:28 PM
Open letter to NZ's PM:
"Do us a favour, Prime Minister, don't send anyone to Paris"

http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/72373295/do-us-a-favour-prime-minister-dont-send-anyone-to-paris (http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/72373295/do-us-a-favour-prime-minister-dont-send-anyone-to-paris)

 from Bunny McDiarmid is NZ Greenpeace's executive director, Niamh O'Flynn works for environmental group 350.org and Cindy Baxter is from Coal Action Network Aotearoa.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 27, 2015, 07:54:26 PM
China announces national emissions trading scheme – experts react.
What is surprising is the speed with which the divide between developed and developing states enshrined in both the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol has now crumbled. Both developed and developing countries in Paris in December will now state their climate pledges, or “intended nationally determined contributions”, including China. These contributions won’t be negotiated by all the parties – that approach has long gone. And the legal character of these contributions is uncertain. But China’s announcement on Friday certainly works in favour of a more robust agreement.

The climate change problem can’t be addressed without China, the world’s largest emitter (or indeed India, the third largest). China now joins the other 75 countries (and the European Union) with frameworks for limiting emissions, and the 47 countries (plus the EU) that have carbon pricing.
https://theconversation.com/china-announces-national-emissions-trading-scheme-experts-react-48159
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on September 29, 2015, 07:53:10 PM
While subsequent research has heavily discounted the possibility that ECS might be as low as 1.5C as assumed by AR5, the following linked analysis shows how the AR5 findings can be used to encourage policy makers to relax about taking effective action at CoP21, as all they have to do is assume that ECS is 2.5C and "Mission Accomplished".

Yoichi Kaya, Mitsutsune Yamaguchi and Keigo Akimoto (2015), "The uncertainty of climate sensitivity and its implication for the Paris negotiation", Sustainability Science, pp 1-4, DOI 10.1007/s11625-015-0339-z


http://rd.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11625-015-0339-z (http://rd.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11625-015-0339-z)


Abstract: "Uncertainty of climate sensitivity is one of the critical issues that may affect climate response strategies. Whereas the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) was specified as 2–4.5 °C with the best estimate of 3 °C in the 4th Assessment Report of IPCC, it was revised to 1.5–4.5 °C in the 5th Assessment Report. The authors examined the impact of a difference in ECS assuming a best estimate of 2.5 °C, instead of 3 °C. The current pledges of several countries including the U.S., EU and China on emission reductions beyond 2020 are not on track for the 2 °C target with an ECS of 3 °C but are compatible with the target with an ECS of 2.5 °C. It is critically important for policymakers in Paris to know that they are in a position to make decisions under large uncertainty of ECS."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 30, 2015, 02:38:53 AM
Flattening the curve....  ;)

We May Have Just Bought Ourselves An Extra Decade To Avoid Catastrophic Climate Change
The good news, as you can see, is that the INDCs have bought us another five to 10 years of staying close to the 2°C path. I asked Andrew Jones, one of the systems-thinking savants behind Climate Interactive, if that was correct and he said, “Yep, about seven years.” By “staying close” I mean staying close enough to the 2°C path that it remains plausibly achievable — though (obviously) politically still very, very challenging.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/09/28/3706024/paris-co2-pledges/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/09/28/3706024/paris-co2-pledges/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on September 30, 2015, 02:46:00 AM
Brazil and Indonesia submit INDCs.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/09/29/3706261/brazil-indc-pledge/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/09/29/3706261/brazil-indc-pledge/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on September 30, 2015, 08:35:26 PM
The linked article shows that even considering all CoP21 pledges through Sept 30 2015, we could still end-up with a 3.5C temperature increase:

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/climate-model-shows-limits-emissions-pledges-19505 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/climate-model-shows-limits-emissions-pledges-19505)

Edit: I note that the 3.5C value is a 50% probability value while the video at the linked website gives the confidence range.  Furthermore, I note that this projection assumes an ECS of about 3C; while the effective ECS by the end of this century could be in the 4.5 to 5 C range.

Edit II: Also, before we count our chickens before they hatch, we should remember that many developing countries have tied their pledges to the receipt of Green Climate Fund money; which per the following linked article is far from certain:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/30/business/getting-to-100-billion-in-climate-change-aid.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/30/business/getting-to-100-billion-in-climate-change-aid.html?_r=0)

Extract: "“Financing is the most challenging aspect of the whole deal,” Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, told me over the summer. “There is no credible road map to the $100 billion.”
Once a leader in the effort to muster money to help the world’s poor tackle climate change, the United States these days plays a more modest role. Facing complicated budgetary politics, Washington is having a hard time putting its money where its mouth was six years ago."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 01, 2015, 02:02:23 AM
Paris tracker: Who has pledged what for 2015 UN climate pact?
GLOBAL EMISSIONS COVERED: 80% (EDGAR, 2010)
NUMBER OF COUNTRIES COVERED: 132

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/03/10/paris-tracker-who-has-pledged-what-for-2015-un-climate-pact/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/03/10/paris-tracker-who-has-pledged-what-for-2015-un-climate-pact/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 02, 2015, 01:41:45 PM
India Announces Plan to Lower Rate of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Under growing pressure to join in an international accord to battle climate change, India on Thursday announced its long-term plan to reduce its rate of planet-warming greenhouse gas pollution and to aggressively ramp up its production of solar power, hydropower and wind energy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/02/world/asia/india-announces-plan-to-lower-rate-of-greenhouse-gas-emissions.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/02/world/asia/india-announces-plan-to-lower-rate-of-greenhouse-gas-emissions.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 04, 2015, 01:30:04 PM
A Big Boost for the Climate Summit
India’s announcement of a long-term plan to combat greenhouse gas emissions brings on board all the world’s major economies — including big polluters like the United States, China, the European Union and Brazil — with national pledges to address climate change.

India’s pledge is among the least ambitious of the big emitters, but even so, with less than two months to go before a critical United Nations climate conference in Paris, it is an important development. In contrast to past efforts to reduce greenhouse gases by assigning specific emissions levels only to industrialized countries, while giving developing countries like India a pass (an approach that met with stiff resistance in the United States), the Paris conference is asking every country to create its own plan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/04/opinion/sunday/a-big-boost-for-the-climate-summit.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/04/opinion/sunday/a-big-boost-for-the-climate-summit.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 05, 2015, 01:32:18 PM
Here's What the G-20 Nations are Pledging on Climate Change
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-04/here-s-what-the-g20-nations-are-pledging-on-climate-change (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-04/here-s-what-the-g20-nations-are-pledging-on-climate-change)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 07, 2015, 02:11:11 AM
What Will A Global Agreement On Climate Change Look Like? The U.N. Just Gave Us A Clue.
While the new draft is sparse on specific details, it does include a commitment by the world’s governments to hold global warming at 2°C compared to pre-industrial levels, the threshold that scientists generally agree is required to stave off irreversible consequences of climate change. The new draft also stipulates that nations should readdress their limits on greenhouse gas emissions every five years, a requirement that environmentalists championed at negotiations in Bonn in early September.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/10/06/3709443/un-climate-agreement-draft/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/10/06/3709443/un-climate-agreement-draft/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 08, 2015, 05:08:28 PM
While the linked SciAm graphic science article focuses on the fact that a few small fossil fuel rich countries like Qatar (see attached image) have high per capita carbon footprints; what draws my attention from this graph is that with a sufficiently high GNP growth rate India could both meet its CoP21 pledge and still grow its carbon footprint to surpass China's in just a few decades.  Furthermore, the CoP21 pledges for most of Africa and key countries like Brazil are tied to large transfers of wealth from rich to poor countries, which may not occur.  Thus it is not wise to count the CoP21 chickens before they are hatched (just as it was not wise to believe that the Kyoto Protocol would meet its goals just because a few diplomats said that we should [note that since 1998 the world has stayed on a BAU pathway and is still on a BAU pathway today]:

Mark Fischetti (2015), "A Greenhouse Gas Surprise", Scientific American 313, 88, doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1015-88

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/china-and-the-u-s-are-not-the-biggest-carbon-emitters-on-a-per-person-basis/ (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/china-and-the-u-s-are-not-the-biggest-carbon-emitters-on-a-per-person-basis/)

Abstract: "Per capita, the world's greatest carbon emitters are small countries."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on October 08, 2015, 07:48:37 PM
Yes, there are a few oil-rich countries that on the books show higher per-capita carbon footprints. But their contribution to the whole is rather miniscule, so I'm not sure what the purpose of pointing this out is--to make us 'mericans feel better that someone somewhere on the planet is actually managing to be even more criminally profligate than we are?

I also wonder about the numbers. Many of those small countries have quite large numbers of 'guest workers'--essentially wage slaves often working in pretty horrific conditions. Are these folks counted in these stats, I wonder? No time to dig further, but it may be worth looking into.

Thanks as always for this and for all your interesting postings and lists, ASLR!
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 09, 2015, 01:17:02 AM
The linked article posted on October 2, 2015 by Rolf Schuttenhelm uses MIT projections to illustrate the implications of strict implementation of the CoP21 INDC pledges.  The attached plot shows the optimistic assessment that further emission restriction will occur after CoP21 (see extract); while the end of the extract indicates both (a) that strict global implementation emission restrictions has need been achieved before and may not be achieved when trying to implement CoP21 and (b) the assessment do not account for any natural positive feedback mechanisms that may likely accelerate (like permafrost degradation) once global mean surface temperatures exceed the 1.5C to 2.0C range:


http://www.bitsofscience.org/cop21-paris-emissions-targets-860-ppm-6746/ (http://www.bitsofscience.org/cop21-paris-emissions-targets-860-ppm-6746/)

Extract: "Strict implementation of COP21 Paris emissions targets brings world on path towards 860 ppm CO2eq
That is in line with a 3.5 degrees warming scenario over the course of this century – still excluding albedo and carbon feedbacks. These numbers come from a new pledge calculation performed by Climate Interactive and MIT Sloan School of Management.
Why is the 860 ppm scenario overly pessimistic? It extrapolates countries’ Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) which are for the Paris climate summit mostly focussed on the year 2030 over the rest of the century. Shown below are scenarios with increased levels of ambition beyond 2025/2030. (The 50% chance 2 degree pathway requires urgent increase of emission reductions even before 2025.)
Why is the 860 ppm scenario overly optimistic? It firstly assumes that countries develop effective national climate policies and actually reach their INDC emission goals. This has never before happened on a global scale. Therefore please also always take note of ‘business as usual’ – the scenario we are actually on, which could lead to 1250 ppm CO2eq. Also both the GHG concentration scenario and the linked warming (climate sensitivity) exclude feedbacks, many of which are likely to become significant amplifiers beyond 1.5/2 degrees warming above pre-industrial levels."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 09, 2015, 05:44:49 PM
Per the linked MIT article, what India does, or does not, do many override other climate change fighting efforts around:

http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/542091/indias-energy-crisis/ (http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/542091/indias-energy-crisis/)

Extract: "Can India modernize its manufacturing economy and supply electricity to its growing population without relying heavily on coal—and quite possibly destroying the global climate?

Over the next 25 years, “with the most aggressive assumptions in terms of renewables, we could go up to 18 or 20 percent from renewables,” Ramesh told me. “Hydro takes longer—it involves displacement of people and submergence of land, but we could expect that 17 percent contribution to go up to 25 percent. Nuclear is at 3.5 percent right now and, under the most aggressive assumptions, could go up to 5 or 6 percent. So under the best scenario—the most aggressive programs for nuclear, hydro, solar, and wind—bloody coal will still be at 50 percent.” In other words, while low- or zero-carbon sources would make up a greater portion of India’s energy supply, overall carbon emissions would nearly double: from around 2.1 billion tons in 2014 to more than four billion tons by 2040, according to the International Energy Agency."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on October 10, 2015, 03:08:27 PM
A nice, level-headed look at CoP21 and CoP15 and the progress made from 2009-2014. It is extensively sourced. A bit old now but still likely relevant.

http://www.e-ir.info/2014/11/05/global-climate-change-policy-will-paris-succeed-where-copenhagen-failed/ (http://www.e-ir.info/2014/11/05/global-climate-change-policy-will-paris-succeed-where-copenhagen-failed/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 10, 2015, 09:07:34 PM
The linked Swedish report indicates that using optimistic assumptions the world is close to (by 2020) locking-in committed GHG emissions that would lead to a 2C temperature rise.  The report optimistically notes that major re-organization of the world's major cities could improve this situation:

http://www.sei-international.org/publications?pid=2829 (http://www.sei-international.org/publications?pid=2829)


See also:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/10/09/why-earths-future-will-depend-on-how-we-build-our-cities/ (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/10/09/why-earths-future-will-depend-on-how-we-build-our-cities/)

Extract: "The 1,000 gigaton number has many implications, but we rarely think about what it means for city planning. A new report, though, finds that if we don’t build cities more wisely, using much greener infrastructure, then they could be a crucial factor that tips the planet over the 1,000 gigaton line — and indeed, that they could play this role in just five years time. By 2020.

The research, by the Stockholm Environment Institute and with funding support from the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group — a consortium of global megacities focused on sustainable development and fighting climate change — is based on the central concept of emissions “lock-in.” We haven’t literally emitted anything close to the remaining 1,000 gigatons yet, but prior research suggests that with all the coal plants and other forms of fossil fuel infrastructure that are already constructed — not to mention all of the buildings and roads and other types of urban and non-urban infrastructure whose very existence implies a future of using lots of energy — about 800 gigatons are already committed to go into the atmosphere.

All of this is simply because when humans build big things, they then overwhelmingly tend use them over their useful lifetime — and that implies a heck of a lot of emissions."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 12, 2015, 03:47:52 PM
Opinion: Five Key Takeaways from India’s New Climate Plan
http://www.ipsnews.net/2015/10/opinion-five-key-takeaways-from-indias-new-climate-plan/ (http://www.ipsnews.net/2015/10/opinion-five-key-takeaways-from-indias-new-climate-plan/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 17, 2015, 04:52:03 PM
Included: BP, Saudi Aramco, Shell, Total.  Notably missing: Exxon.

Oil and gas CEOs jointly declare action on climate change
Paris, France; October 16, 2015 – The chief executive officers of 10 of the world’s largest oil and gas companies – which together provide almost a fifth of all oil and gas production and supply nearly 10% of the world’s energy – today declared their collective support for an effective climate change agreement to be reached at next month’s 21st session of the United Nations (UN) Conference of Parties to the UN Framework on Climate Change (COP21).

http://www.oilandgasclimateinitiative.com/news/oil-and-gas-ceos-jointly-declare-action-on-climate-change/ (http://www.oilandgasclimateinitiative.com/news/oil-and-gas-ceos-jointly-declare-action-on-climate-change/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 19, 2015, 04:51:38 PM
France launches global drive for climate deal
Diplomats mobilised for unprecedented PR push, with Paris summit seen as last chance to reach agreement
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/19/france-launches-global-drive-for-climate-deal (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/19/france-launches-global-drive-for-climate-deal)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 19, 2015, 05:15:41 PM
The linked article states that most African countries find the current draft of the CoP21 agreement to be unacceptable for discussion without immediate amendment:

http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2015/10/18/last-round-of-un-climate-talks-before-paris-summit (http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2015/10/18/last-round-of-un-climate-talks-before-paris-summit)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 19, 2015, 06:56:13 PM
Per the linked article it is not only the African Block that rejected the 20-page draft CoP21 document but the entire G77 + China group.  Per the extract, negotiators will make "surgical insertions" into the draft in a effort to save the final document:

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/10/19/developing-countries-demand-additions-to-slimmed-down-climate-text/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/10/19/developing-countries-demand-additions-to-slimmed-down-climate-text/)

Extract: "Negotiators will make “surgical insertions” to the text of a global climate deal on Monday, after developing countries rejected a slimmed-down draft.

The G77 + China group, which represents 134 poor and emerging economies, said the 20-page working document produced by UN officials was unbalanced."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: TerryM on October 22, 2015, 07:43:52 PM
For the first time in many years a global climate summit won't be disrupted by Harper's thugs! I don't know what Trudeau will be able too offer, but Harper's absence will greatly improve the discourse.
I've spent time and money trying to rid the country and the world of Harper's influence. My local MP was the Young Earth chiropractor that the Conservatives appointed as Minister of Science. He's gone too!
My hope is that Trudeau will passionately work to undo the obstructionist, secretive, anti-science, programs that we've been saddled with for almost a decade. Harper has destroyed Canada's manufacturing economy & with the downturn in oil prices we're in for a rough ride. If Trudeau can find a way out, without resorting to expanding the production of the dirty oil that has become our hallmark, he'll deserve the worlds gratitude.
Trudeau fought a clean campaign and won. Let's see if he can keep things running without getting mired in tar sands muck. 
Terry
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: ghoti on October 22, 2015, 11:14:16 PM
Hear! Hear!
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 23, 2015, 03:14:38 AM
Progress, but....

Europe's greenhouse gas emissions fall to record low
Member states report a 23% drop since 1990, but the pace is slowing and several countries have missed renewable and energy efficiency targets.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/20/europes-greenhouse-gas-emissions-fall-to-record-low (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/20/europes-greenhouse-gas-emissions-fall-to-record-low)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: jai mitchell on October 23, 2015, 01:02:08 PM
Congrats Terry!

Harper was (is) a climate criminal it is good you guys kicked him to the curb.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on October 23, 2015, 08:26:54 PM
Sigmetnow. Progress may be an illusion.

Europe's greenhouse gas emissions fall to record low
Member states report a 23% drop since 1990, but the pace is slowing and several countries have missed renewable and energy efficiency targets.
[url]http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/20/europes-greenhouse-gas-emissions-fall-to-record-low[/url] ([url]http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/20/europes-greenhouse-gas-emissions-fall-to-record-low[/url])


All is not as it seems. For example in the case of the UK see UK’s rising carbon footprint in Greenwash from Stern.

Much to Lord Deben’s credit, it is since he became chairman, that the CCC has actually published a report showing the UK’s carbon footprint has been rising not falling since 1990 as the Department of Energy and Climate Change claims – except for two years after the Lehman Brothers crash. (See Figure 1.8: Greenhouse gas emissions associated with UK consumption – imported and domestic emissions, 1993-2010 in Reducing the UK’s carbon footprint.)

The carbon footprint reported was about 20 tonnes per person per year. This is almost ten times the carbon footprint that the Climate Change Act (2008) mandates.

In December 2012 Professor Sir Bob Watson also spoke on the UK’s rising carbon footprint. (At that time he was Chief Scientific Adviser to Defra.)


Greenwash from Stern: http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/green-wash-from-stern/ (http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/green-wash-from-stern/)

Reducing the UK’s carbon footprint: http://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Reducing-carbon-footprint-report.pdf (http://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Reducing-carbon-footprint-report.pdf)

Bob Watson's speech: http://fallmeeting.agu.org/2012/events/union-frontiers-of-geophysics-lecture-professor-sir-bob-watson-cmg-frs-chief-scientific-adviser-to-defra/ (http://fallmeeting.agu.org/2012/events/union-frontiers-of-geophysics-lecture-professor-sir-bob-watson-cmg-frs-chief-scientific-adviser-to-defra/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 23, 2015, 10:07:53 PM
The linked article indicates that very little progress was achieved in Bonn; which leaves many unresolved issues to be addresses in Paris:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/23/climatechange-summit-talks-idUSL8N12N3TO20151023 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/23/climatechange-summit-talks-idUSL8N12N3TO20151023)

Extract: "Disputes over financing for poor nations hampered negotiations on Friday among almost 200 countries racing against the clock to seal an accord on combating global warming at a U.N. climate summit in Paris in December."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 24, 2015, 01:04:21 AM
The linked article indicates that no matter what CoP21 does, or doesn't, achieve; it will probably take negative emissions technology to stay below a 2C limit:

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/19/9567863/climate-change-ambitious-cuts (http://www.vox.com/2015/10/19/9567863/climate-change-ambitious-cuts)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on October 24, 2015, 01:41:21 PM
ALSR, That Vox article (http://www.vox.com/2015/10/19/9567863/climate-change-ambitious-cuts) has been worth a look. Thanks.

It is based on Measuring a fair and ambitious climate agreement using cumulative emissions (http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/10/10/105004/pdf) by Peters et. al.  I note from their figure1 caption that "For the non-CO2 adjustment [e.g.methane] we show the IPCC WG1 value (used in our analysis)".

I've just skipped through the IPCC WG1 report (https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc_far_wg_I_full_report.pdf) and I haven't been able to tell whether it supports the argument that we should cut methane emissions quickly (e.g. No Beef (http://No Beef)) or not bother too much for the time being - because it has a short(ish) lifetime in the atmosphere.

The Vox article says "The US, Europe, and China will use up the world's carbon budget by 2030".

In Now CO2 is short lived, cows really are bad (http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/now-co2-is-short-lived-cows-really-are-bad/) I have written

Scientists Ramanathan and Victor say ([url]http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/28/opinion/28victor.html[/url]) that reducing emissions of two powerful and fast-acting causes of global warming – methane and soot – will not stop global warming but it could buy time. This might allow a few decades, for the world to put in place more difficult efforts to regulate carbon dioxide and keep Global Temperature Rise below the so-called danger level of 2°C. However, Ray Pierre Humbert thinks ([url]http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/12/losing-time-not-buying-time/[/url]) this might detract from the task of reducing the emissions of the main greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide.


I'm supporting the Ramanathan and Victor camp.

Does the fact that we are running out of carbon budget and (as Kevin Anderson suggests (http://kevinanderson.info/blog/duality-in-climate-science/)) having to rely on negative-emissions technology (like BECCS?) support the Ramanathan case?

My fear (along with many that post here) is that the climate is in a much worse state than the official line allows.

It would be stupid not to push for a campaign to discourage beef and dairy production and pay farmers not to use paddy fields.


Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 24, 2015, 04:42:08 PM
This latest round of UN climate talks opened with a deadly typhoon bearing down on the Philippines, and closed with Hurricane Patricia, the most powerful tropical cyclone ever measured, barrelling toward Mexico’s Pacific coast. The country’s lead envoy, Roberto Dondisch, struggled to hold back his tears as he pleaded with fellow negotiators to “put aside your differences” and start compromising.

After five days of intense discussions, late nights and some drama, our partners leave Bonn having helped secure a text that is considerably stronger and more fair than what we started with a week ago. Negotiators spent the session adding ambition, clarity and specificity that many felt was lacking. And as a result, governments have a draft text they can take ownership of – crucial for keeping negotiations on track to an agreement.

Mitigation, adaptation and transparency are among the issues where our partners saw progress made. Spin-off groups and informal bridge-building meetings helped consolidate disparate positions, strengthening the options for a Paris agreement that could signal the end of the fossil fuel age and a rapid decarbonisation of the global economy.

Countries failed to find further common ground on loss & damage. Observers suggested the lack of progress could be due to negotiators reaching the end of their mandates, having arrived at a point where the issue is handed up to Ministers to address at a higher level of political engagement.

The most significant remaining divisions seem focused on climate finance. Developing country governments have called for wording that clearly establishes the responsibility of developed countries to achieve the goal of $100 billion in climate finance by 2020, and a plan to continually scale-up after 2020. Developed countries, on the other hand, have proposed finance language scant on details, with less exclusive focus on their responsibilities.

Finance biggest sticking point as UN climate deal takes shape
http://tcktcktck.org/2015/10/daily-tck-finance-biggest-sticking-point-as-un-climate-deal-takes-shape/ (http://tcktcktck.org/2015/10/daily-tck-finance-biggest-sticking-point-as-un-climate-deal-takes-shape/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 26, 2015, 04:08:46 PM
I've just skipped through the IPCC WG1 report ([url]https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/ipcc_far_wg_I_full_report.pdf[/url]) and I haven't been able to tell whether it supports the argument that we should cut methane emissions quickly (e.g. No Beef ([url]http://No[/url] Beef)) or not bother too much for the time being - because it has a short(ish) lifetime in the atmosphere.


Geoff,

In my opinion AR5 clearly supports the idea of endeavoring to cut methane emissions as quickly as practicable because over a ten year period methane has a GWP of about 130 times that of carbon dioxide.  Unfortunately, currently atmospheric concentrations of methane are accelerating rather than decelerating.

Best,
ASLR
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 26, 2015, 04:21:20 PM
The linked article indicates that the US Republican Party is committed to reversing Obama's climate change fighting regulations; so if the Republican capture the White House, the US pledges to CoP21 may be up in smoke:


http://www.nationaljournal.com/s/91355/republicans-attack-climate-rules-send-message-un (http://www.nationaljournal.com/s/91355/republicans-attack-climate-rules-send-message-un)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 27, 2015, 01:38:48 AM
SYDNEY: Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said on Saturday (Oct 24) he would attend December's UN climate conference in Paris, in contrast to expectations that his predecessor would skip the global gathering.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/australian-pm-to-attend/2214990.html (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/australian-pm-to-attend/2214990.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 27, 2015, 02:17:54 AM
Are some GOP members starting to see the writing on the wall?

First Republican senator openly voices support for the Clean Power Plan.
As soon as the EPA’s Clean Power Plan hit the Federal Register, the rule was met with a flurry of lawsuits from fossil fuel-producing states, utility groups and the coal industry. Republicans in Congress have pledged to block the rule, and could try to kill the rule through the Congressional Review Act this week.

But in a chorus of Republican opposition, the Obama administration won a new ally over the weekend, when Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) became the first Republican senator to openly voice support for the Clean Power Plan.

“It’s so important that we protect New Hampshire’s beautiful environment for our economy and for our future,” Ayotte said in a statement on Sunday, following an interview with New Hampshire Public Radio in which she endorsed the plan. “After carefully reviewing this plan and talking with members of our business community, environmental groups, and other stakeholders, I have decided to support the Clean Power Plan to address climate change through clean energy solutions that will protect our environment.”

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/10/26/3715954/ayotte-gop-support-clean-power-plan/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/10/26/3715954/ayotte-gop-support-clean-power-plan/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 27, 2015, 08:30:12 PM
The linked article makes it clear that CoP21 is just the tip of the iceberg of what needs to be done:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/27/climatechange-summit-decarbonisation-idUSL8N12R1ES20151027 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/27/climatechange-summit-decarbonisation-idUSL8N12R1ES20151027)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 27, 2015, 11:37:47 PM
Prominent Australians ask world leaders to consider ban on new coalmines
Wallaby David Pocock and author Richard Flanagan among 61 signatories to open letter calling for the future of coal to be on the agenda at Paris climate talks.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/27/prominent-australians-ask-world-leaders-to-consider-ban-on-new-coalmines (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/27/prominent-australians-ask-world-leaders-to-consider-ban-on-new-coalmines)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 28, 2015, 04:57:56 PM
The linked article indicates that CoP21 will not include carbon pricing:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/28/us-climatechange-summit-figueres-idUSKCN0SL1J220151028 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/28/us-climatechange-summit-figueres-idUSKCN0SL1J220151028)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 28, 2015, 10:21:07 PM
How critics plan to torpedo Obama’s prized climate rule
Opponents of President Obama’s climate rule for power plants are uniting behind a legal strategy aimed at blocking the contentious regulations from taking effect.

Since a wave of nearly two-dozen lawsuits hit the Clean Power Plan last week, critics of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule have grown increasingly optimistic that they can convince a federal court to issue a stay.

A win on that front, however temporary, would complicate both the rule’s implementation and the Obama administration’s bid for an international deal at climate talks in Paris later this year.

The rule’s supporters say the litigants have a steep hill to climb in making the case for a stay, projecting confidence that they’ll win the first skirmish of what will likely be a years-long legal battle over Obama’s signature climate policy.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/258321-how-critics-plan-to-torpedo-obamas-prized-climate-rule (http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/258321-how-critics-plan-to-torpedo-obamas-prized-climate-rule)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 30, 2015, 12:02:07 AM
U.S. Court won't block climate rule before UN summit
A federal court will not decide on whether to block the Obama administration’s climate rule for power plants until the end of December at the earliest.

That means the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) rule, President Obama’s biggest effort to fight climate change, will be in place when talks at the United Nations’ global climate pact in Paris wrap on Dec. 11.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/258567-court-wont-block-climate-rule-before-un-talks-end (http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/258567-court-wont-block-climate-rule-before-un-talks-end)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 30, 2015, 03:39:56 PM
We have seen relatively optimistic projections about the INDC cuts by NGO's such as that by Climate Interactive in my Reply #259, indicating relatively sharp reductions in GHG emissions starting almost immediately.  Unfortunately, the UN has today issued a Synthesis Report on the INDCs, showing that GHG emissions will continue to rise through 2030 (indicating the Pollyanna type hopes of Climate Interactive).  See the report at the attached link and the two associated images:

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/07.pdf (http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/07.pdf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on October 30, 2015, 09:09:23 PM
It seems more than a little self-serving to me that the IPCC uses TCR to estimate the projected temperature increase (above pre-industrial) of 2.7C (following the fullest implementation of current INDCs; while if they had used ECS they would have estimated at least a 3.7C temperature increase:

http://mashable.com/2015/10/30/paris-climate-summit-emissions-pledges/#5xrN15Ldj8qT (http://mashable.com/2015/10/30/paris-climate-summit-emissions-pledges/#5xrN15Ldj8qT)


Extract: "A U.N. report analyzing the 119 separate emissions reduction pledges from 146 countries shows that, if implemented to their fullest extent, the emissions cuts would limit the forecast temperature rise to around 2.7 degrees Celsius, or about 4.8 degrees Fahrenheit, by 2100, which is only 0.7 degrees Celsius, or 1.26 degrees Fahrenheit above the globally agreed target."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on October 31, 2015, 07:50:26 PM
10 Things We Learned from UN’s Top Climate Official
Christiana Figueres' Reddit "Ask Me Anything"
3)  "The 2 degrees Celsius temperature goal is achievable"

I have been pellucidly clear that the agreement in Paris is not going to reach a 2 degree limit on temperature rise as though that were something we can take off a magical shelf and put on the table. I have been equally clear that getting us on to the 2 degree pathway is entirely possible. This is why the Paris agreement will have two very important components with regard to emission reductions: First, it will harness all the national climate change plans which as a group, if fully implemented, already substantially reduce the business as usual growth in emissions. Second, in recognition that this first set of INDCs (the national climate action plans) is a departure point and not a destination, the Paris agreement will construct a path of ever-increasing emission reductions with periodic checkpoints of progress until we get to the 2 degree pathway.

http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/10-messages-from-the-un-s-top-climate-official-reddit-ama/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/10-messages-from-the-un-s-top-climate-official-reddit-ama/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 01, 2015, 01:26:23 AM
10 Things We Learned from UN’s Top Climate Official
Christiana Figueres' Reddit "Ask Me Anything"
3)  "The 2 degrees Celsius temperature goal is achievable"

I have been pellucidly clear that the agreement in Paris is not going to reach a 2 degree limit on temperature rise as though that were something we can take off a magical shelf and put on the table. I have been equally clear that getting us on to the 2 degree pathway is entirely possible. This is why the Paris agreement will have two very important components with regard to emission reductions: First, it will harness all the national climate change plans which as a group, if fully implemented, already substantially reduce the business as usual growth in emissions. Second, in recognition that this first set of INDCs (the national climate action plans) is a departure point and not a destination, the Paris agreement will construct a path of ever-increasing emission reductions with periodic checkpoints of progress until we get to the 2 degree pathway.

[url]http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/10-messages-from-the-un-s-top-climate-official-reddit-ama/[/url] ([url]http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/10-messages-from-the-un-s-top-climate-official-reddit-ama/[/url])


While I concur that it is possible to stay below 2C; I do not concur with many of her leaps of faith.  For example, she says that if fully implemented then the INDCs already substantially reduce BAU emissions; while in truth we are currently on a BAU pathway and are likely to remain on this path for sometime to come, so she is engaging in hyperbolae. In other words, I will believe the improvement when I see the improvement.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 01, 2015, 02:50:05 PM
While I concur that it is possible to stay below 2C; I do not concur with many of her leaps of faith.  For example, she says that if fully implemented then the INDCs already substantially reduce BAU emissions; while in truth we are currently on a BAU pathway and are likely to remain on this path for sometime to come, so she is engaging in hyperbolae. In other words, I will believe the improvement when I see the improvement.


Yes, the words on the final agreement actually mean very little -- whether it is "enough" or "not enough" is not the point, it is the actions that follow that will mean success or failure, and those actions will, for the most part, be only distantly related to the COP 21 text.

Still, if you didn't like her previous comments, this article will surely rate an eyeroll:  ::)  ;D

Paris climate summit: 'The world is ready for change'
By Christiana Figueres
The political will to act on climate has arrived. We will look back at Paris as a turning point of this century towards a brighter future.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/30/paris-climate-summit-the-world-is-ready-for-change (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/30/paris-climate-summit-the-world-is-ready-for-change)

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 01, 2015, 05:18:44 PM
While I concur that it is possible to stay below 2C; I do not concur with many of her leaps of faith.  For example, she says that if fully implemented then the INDCs already substantially reduce BAU emissions; while in truth we are currently on a BAU pathway and are likely to remain on this path for sometime to come, so she is engaging in hyperbolae. In other words, I will believe the improvement when I see the improvement.


Yes, the words on the final agreement actually mean very little -- whether it is "enough" or "not enough" is not the point, it is the actions that follow that will mean success or failure, and those actions will, for the most part, be only distantly related to the COP 21 text.

Still, if you didn't like her previous comments, this article will surely rate an eyeroll:  ::)  ;D

Paris climate summit: 'The world is ready for change'
By Christiana Figueres
The political will to act on climate has arrived. We will look back at Paris as a turning point of this century towards a brighter future.
[url]http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/30/paris-climate-summit-the-world-is-ready-for-change[/url] ([url]http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/30/paris-climate-summit-the-world-is-ready-for-change[/url])


While I appreciate Figueres' fighting spirit, her words remind me too much of "Mission Accomplished" and more to the point of the failures of the Kyoto Protocol. 

I have read over and over how unexpected things (China's growth, failure of peak oil to materialize, withdrawal of Canada, Australia, Japan etc.) on the road to the failed Kyoto goals.  For example it is not clear to me that the draft CoP21 adequately addresses the risks: (a) that the development of fossil fuel based industries throughout Africa (ala what China did in recent decades), (b) that the growth of the "middle class" around the world will not demand so many luxuries (air conditioning, refrigeration, meat, etc.) that the INDC's will need to be bent; or (c) that the climate sensitivity parameters assumed in their Carbon Budget are too low and that we will remain on a BAU temperature path due to increased acceleration of natural positive feedbacks even if anthropogenic forcing is throttled back after it is already too late.

That said, I do not mean to belittle the serious efforts that are being made in the fight against climate change.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 02, 2015, 12:47:25 PM
Cheerleaders.  Scorekeepers.  Need them both.
Also, a team.  A bigger team, and fewer spectators!  8)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: jai mitchell on November 02, 2015, 06:54:24 PM
I do not concur that it is possible to stay below 2C.  Current GHG abundance levels and the recently rapid rise in the rate of ocean heat accumulation shows that, with the aggressive reduction in Anthropogenic Aerosols due to these climate agreements we will move quickly above the current 1.056C average above preindustrial temps to 2C, possibly as early as 2035.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 02, 2015, 07:38:36 PM
While the linked Huffington Post article about CoP21 is about a week old, it still makes some interesting points; which remind me of the Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times".
The article makes it clear that just to meet the somewhat weak INDCs, the private sector will need to make tens of trillions of dollars of investments to re-tool the global economy; which will soon utilize all of the expected bond capacity in the international market place.  I note that this investment will have a significant carbon footprint for the next few decades; at just the same time as the private sector is already planning on making major investments in robotics, and smart infrastructure (which will also have an additional significant carbon footprint).  Also, I note that photovoltaics are highly dependent on rare earths that will soon come into short supply; which will cause another round of re-investment in capital for other types of renewable energy sources (which will also have a carbon footprint).  Assuming that the world economy will re-invent itself in a few short decades without a lot of inefficiencies and increased levels of risk, seems short sighted.  Which is not to say that we should not try, but is to say that we should be prepared to deal with some major fallout during the next several decades:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/assaad-w-razzouk/the-paris-climate-talks-c_b_8358928.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/assaad-w-razzouk/the-paris-climate-talks-c_b_8358928.html)

Extract: "The INDCs are the driving force of COP21 and will become the development pathway for all countries. Weak and general at first, they will become stronger and more detailed over time.
Two major consequences will follow.
First, multi-trillion dollar investment opportunities for the private sector will be clearly delineated, while others, far from where the country is heading, should be avoided.

Second, the breadth of these INDCs means that within a few years, all finance will be climate finance; and all bonds will be green bonds.

The business and the financial world will be markedly absent from Paris, but should closely monitor the evolution of INDCs and of "loss and damage" in Paris. These could upend how they currently do business."

PS: In response to jai's post, I concur that using the term "possible" is not a good idea; as many people assume that this means that I think we will in fact stay below the 2C goal; which I do not believe to be the case.  My point in using the term "possible" is to emphasis that anthropogenic global warming is pure and simply a result of human mindset; unfortunately, I do not believe that people will can their way of thinking fast enough to prevent very dire consequences to our socio-economic-environmental systems, possibly as soon as 2035, but certainly by 2050.

PPS: I neglected to mention that all of the "loss & damage" from climate change will also require still more capital investment (which will also have some level of carbon footprint).
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on November 02, 2015, 08:41:38 PM
In case anyone else has trouble with acronyms: Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs)

all of the "loss & damage" from climate change will also require still more capital investment (which will also have some level of carbon footprint)

Another generally overlooked human-mediated feedback loop.

I think we've already seen that in clean up and rebuilding (often in the same stupid places) after things like Katrina and Sandy, to name only two stateside disasters.

If we ever do really wake up to the threats slr pose to our coastal infrastructure, there will doubtless be many super-uber-mega-projects to try to counter it, which themselves will also be part of this sort of feedback. (Think sea walls around NYC, or a giant damn across the straits of Gibraltar...)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 02, 2015, 11:45:00 PM
Just as the IPCC is proposing to leverage capitalism to maximize the CoP21 INDCs; Bill Gates, is warning that it would be better to use a quasi-socialistic approach:

http://www.salon.com/2015/10/29/bill_gates_the_private_sector_is_completely_inept_partner/ (http://www.salon.com/2015/10/29/bill_gates_the_private_sector_is_completely_inept_partner/)

Extract: "Bill Gates, still the world’s richest man after all these years, does not have a lot of faith in his fellow billionaires or even capitalism when it comes to doing the right thing. It turns out he thinks the private sector is too selfish and inept to tackle the dire climate change situation, and relying on it would be courting disaster. Better to take a quasi socialist approach and remove the profit motive altogether from this important work."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 03, 2015, 02:07:08 AM
61 Percent of Public Supports Clean Power Plan in States Suing to Stop It
Twenty-six attorneys general have sued to stop the EPA rule, despite its support from most voters and even some governors.
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/11/02/61-percent-of-public-supports-clean-power-plan-in-states-suing-to-stop-it (http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/11/02/61-percent-of-public-supports-clean-power-plan-in-states-suing-to-stop-it)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 03, 2015, 11:11:07 PM
The linked Huffington Post article indicates that while most American currently acknowledge climate change; relatively few of them are very worried about it:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/americans-largely-unconcerned-about-climate-change-survey-finds_563906d8e4b079a43c04de2d (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/americans-largely-unconcerned-about-climate-change-survey-finds_563906d8e4b079a43c04de2d)

Extract: "Most Americans know the climate is changing, but they say they are just not that worried about it, according to a new poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. And that is keeping the American public from demanding and getting the changes that are necessary to prevent global warming from reaching a crisis, according to climate and social scientists.
As top-level international negotiations to try to limit greenhouse gas emissions start later this month in Paris, the AP-NORC poll taken in mid-October shows about two out of three Americans accept global warming and the vast majority of those say human activities are at least part of the cause.
However, fewer than one in four Americans are extremely or very worried about it, according the poll of 1,058 people. About one out of three Americans are moderately worried and the highest percentage of those polled - 38 percent - were not too worried or not at all worried."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 03, 2015, 11:24:27 PM
Why We Can Be Hopeful About Climate Change
This should be the year we turn to preparing for the future.
  By Eric Holthaus
The U.N.’s own assessment of all the pledges, released last week, framed the remaining challenge most accurately: We’re definitely seeing a slow down of emissions growth, but no peak yet. That means we’re still going to be making the problem considerably worse for the foreseeable future, just not as bad as we could have. So, um, yay!

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/11/paris_pledges_will_avoid_worst_case_climate_change_scenario.1.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/11/paris_pledges_will_avoid_worst_case_climate_change_scenario.1.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 04, 2015, 12:37:25 AM
It is interesting to note that per the first attached image from the following linked site about a 2013 UN Carbon Gap Analysis, if we had followed the Kyoto Protocol Pledges in 2020 we would be emitting about 55 GtCO2equiv/yr; while per the second image of the UN assessment of the current INDC's in 2020 we will likely be emitting about 55 GtCO2equiv/yr.  So at least we are not moving backwards in our negotiations :)

http://newenergynews.blogspot.com/2013/11/todays-study-world-must-raise-its.html (http://newenergynews.blogspot.com/2013/11/todays-study-world-must-raise-its.html)

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 04, 2015, 03:27:21 PM
China and France say Paris climate pact should have five-year reviews
François Hollande and Xi Jinping say that any climate change deal agreed in Paris must include future checks on whether countries are cutting emissions.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/02/china-and-france-say-paris-climate-pact-should-have-5-year-reviews (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/02/china-and-france-say-paris-climate-pact-should-have-5-year-reviews)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on November 04, 2015, 05:34:13 PM
Wow, sig, quite a mismatch in tone between that article's title and the actual content you quoted:

"we’re still going to be making the problem considerably worse for the foreseeable future, just not as bad as we could have. So, um, yay!"

I read considerable irony in that last 'yay.'

ASLR, remember that we are talking about a country where about half the people don't believe in evolution and about a quarter think the sun orbits around the earth. http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/14/277058739/1-in-4-americans-think-the-sun-goes-around-the-earth-survey-says (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/14/277058739/1-in-4-americans-think-the-sun-goes-around-the-earth-survey-says)

So getting even a quarter of that population to understand the science enough to be deeply concerned about GW is quite an achievement, I'd say. Especially when one of the two major political parties almost unanimously rejects the science, and many millions are spent every year on disinformation about the subject.

It's still pretty damn depressing, though.

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 04, 2015, 06:08:21 PM
The linked article discusses some of the remaining challenges to achieving a meaningful agreement in Paris:

http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/11/04/climatechange-summit-politics-idINKCN0ST0XV20151104 (http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/11/04/climatechange-summit-politics-idINKCN0ST0XV20151104)

Extract: "While companies and citizens find ways to cope with climate change on the ground and push governments to swap fossil fuels for clean energy, officials negotiating a U.N. deal to curb global warming often appear stuck in a time warp, experts say.



An analysis of the national climate action plans, released last week by the U.N. climate change secretariat, found that a quarter of the emissions reductions pledged are conditional on receiving financial and technical support to make them happen.
"(Developing nations) are saying 'We'll do something, and if we get more money we will do even more, and so it's about how much money are you going to give us?'," said Huq.



Until wealthy governments clarify how they will make good on a promise to mobilise $100 billion a year in climate change funding for vulnerable nations by 2020 - and how it will be scaled up after that - the G77 and China group of developing countries is expected to continue using finance as a bargaining chip at the U.N. talks.
"For Paris, you can almost guarantee that this is going to be an end game," said Athena Ronquillo-Ballesteros, a finance expert with the World Resources Institute.
Wrangling is likely over the definition of which countries should - or could - provide climate finance, and to which vulnerable states.
Even developing nations that are willing to put money on the table don't want to be bound by the same accounting and reporting rules as their richer counterparts, experts noted."

See also:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/opinion/the-tough-realities-of-the-paris-climate-talks.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/opinion/the-tough-realities-of-the-paris-climate-talks.html?_r=0)

Extract: "Unconditional national commitments made by countries for the Paris meeting are projected to reduce total greenhouse gas emissions through 2030 by an average of only 3 percent below the business-as-usual average rise of 8 percent."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 04, 2015, 07:21:51 PM
Per the linked Joe Romm article from yesterday Christiana Figueres is using too-clever wording which is confusing the media so that many of them do not realize that the current draft INDC's are leading to at least 3.5C warming by 2100 (see attached plot):

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/11/03/3718146/misleading-un-report-confuses-media-paris-climate-talks/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/11/03/3718146/misleading-un-report-confuses-media-paris-climate-talks/)

Extract: "Memo to media: If countries go no further than their current global climate pledges, the earth will warm a total of 3.5°C by 2100.
A very misleading news release from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) — coupled with an opaque UNFCCC report on those pledges, which are called intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs) — has, understandably, left the global media thinking the climate talks in Paris get us much closer to 2°C than they actually do.
Indeed, the news release contains this too-cleverly worded paragraph quoting UNFCCC Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary:
“The INDCs have the capability of limiting the forecast temperature rise to around 2.7 degrees Celsius by 2100, by no means enough but a lot lower than the estimated four, five, or more degrees of warming projected by many prior to the INDCs,” said Ms. Figueres.

So why does Figueres say the Paris pledges will limit warming to 2.7°C by 2100? In fact, she doesn’t say that. She says they “have the capability of limiting the forecast temperature rise to around 2.7 degrees Celsius by 2100.” What does that mean?
It means that the overwhelming majority of the pledges end by 2030 — but most of them imply a rate of reduction in CO2 emissions between now and 2030. So, if you assume countries will commit in the future to keep reducing emissions after 2030 at the rate they did before 2030 — and make a bunch of other optimistic assumptions — you can limit warming to 2.7°C in 2100.

Note to nerdtastic readers: Yes, the 3.5°C calculation does assume that no unmodeled carbon cycle feedbacks kick in — such as the permafrost melting. I’ll cover that issue in a later post."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 04, 2015, 07:59:04 PM
Coalition of 18 States to Move to Defend Carbon-Emissions Rules
Group expected to ask court to intervene in lawsuit challenging greenhouse-gas regulations
WASHINGTON—A group of 18 states is expected to ask a federal court on Wednesday to intervene in support of Obama administration greenhouse-gas regulations that require significant emissions cuts from hundreds of U.S. power plants.

The move will mean most states in the nation are taking sides in a legal battle over a top Environmental Protection Agency initiative on reducing carbon-dioxide emissions.

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who is leading the coalition seeking to let the EPA’s new rules, called the Clean Power Plan, stand, said they are “a critical step forward in responding to the threat of climate change.” Mr. Schneiderman said the intervening states were committed to joining the EPA in defending the regulations aggressively.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/coalition-of-18-states-to-move-to-defend-carbon-emissions-rules-1446613261 (http://www.wsj.com/articles/coalition-of-18-states-to-move-to-defend-carbon-emissions-rules-1446613261)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 05, 2015, 07:24:43 PM
We're winning the war against coal
Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is the U.N. secretary general's special envoy for climate change and cities and Michael Brune is executive director of the Sierra Club. The opinions expressed in this commentary are theirs.
According to a study being released Wednesday by the Sierra Club and Bloomberg Philanthropies, 2015 U.S. economy-wide carbon emissions are even lower than they would have been had the [2010 cap-and-trade bill] passed. In fact, the United States can now say it has led the world in reducing carbon pollution over the last decade.

A primary driver is that over the past five years 130 coal-fired power plants have been retired and another 70 are preparing to retire over the next few years. Yes, cleaner energy sources have played an important role in reducing emissions. So did the Obama administration's tougher fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks. But the biggest factor, as the new data shows, was the decline in coal use.
...
The progress we have made on phasing out coal will greatly improve the prospects of a global agreement. In the past, political resistance in the United States to climate change legislation hampered our ability to persuade the rest of the world to take action. Countries could say to U.S. negotiators: "You are the wealthiest country in the world. You take action, and then we'll consider it." But in Paris, U.S. negotiators will be able to assert: "We are leading the world in carbon reduction. But we need all countries to be a part of the solution."

Moreover, the phase-out of coal in the United States has only just begun. Our analysis of the new data shows that once all planned and targeted coal plant closings are factored in, the United States will exceed the Obama administration's flagship pledge to cut electric sector carbon emissions -- even if no other actions are taken -- 32% by 2030. In other words, even if Congress does nothing else for the next decade, the work we've all already completed will allow the United States to deliver on its commitments, ensuring we can lead the way on significant international climate action in Paris and beyond.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/03/opinions/bloomberg-brune-coal-climate-change/index.html (http://edition.cnn.com/2015/11/03/opinions/bloomberg-brune-coal-climate-change/index.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on November 06, 2015, 05:59:32 AM
Thanks for that info on emissions. But I wonder, even as we are closing coal plants and (with the help of many activists) not building as many coal plants as once planned, how much is the US still mining lots of coal that is being sent over seas and burnt there?

It seems a bit...disingenuous to say we are reducing coal emissions if what we are really doing is essentially outsourcing these emissions.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 06, 2015, 04:01:52 PM
The linked Time magazine article calls climate change the "Mother of all Risks" to National Security, and states that:

"That’s why a bipartisan group of 48 national security and foreign policy leaders—including three former Secretaries of Defense and two former Secretaries of State—recently issued a statement urging the highest levels of American government and business to take domestic and international action to fight climate change."

http://time.com/4101903/climate-change-national-security/ (http://time.com/4101903/climate-change-national-security/)

The article also encourages support for the CoP21 process.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 06, 2015, 05:06:22 PM
Thanks for that info on emissions. But I wonder, even as we are closing coal plants and (with the help of many activists) not building as many coal plants as once planned, how much is the US still mining lots of coal that is being sent over seas and burnt there?

It seems a bit...disingenuous to say we are reducing coal emissions if what we are really doing is essentially outsourcing these emissions.

So, leading by example, we simply need to get all the other countries to figure they can sell their coal elsewhere while they stop burning coal at home and start cleaning up their energy.  Then soon, no one will want to import any coal (because they aren't using it any more!).  At that point, shutting the coal mines will be a no-brainer, and it won't turn off anyone's lights.  (Except the coal miners, who will need new jobs.). Ta-da!  ;D
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 06, 2015, 05:26:22 PM
We've already lowered emissions by 5 Gt/yr from IPCC-5 projections, so with 6 Gt from the INDCs, we're about halfway to where we need to be. 

@LiisaMaijaHarju: Current efforts 1/2 of the total required of staying below the 2°C target in 2100. More needed. #EmissionsGap #COP21 https://t.co/7faQLjKr5N (https://t.co/7faQLjKr5N)

https://twitter.com/liisamaijaharju/status/662564043559948288 (https://twitter.com/liisamaijaharju/status/662564043559948288)

UN:  INDCS Signal Unprecedented Momentum for Climate Agreement in Paris, But Achieving 2 Degree Objective Contingent upon Enhanced Ambition in Future Years

INDCs Projected to Reduce Emissions in 2030 by up to 6 Gt But Additional 12 Gt Required to Close Gap
The INDCs represent GHG emission reductions of 4 to 6 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (GtCO2e/yr) in 2030 compared to projected emissions under current policy trajectories. 2030 projections based on current policies are themselves 5 GtCO2e per year lower than the estimate of 65 GtCO2e, based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Fifth Assessment Report scenarios, which assumed no additional climate policies are put in place after 2010.

http://unep.org/newscentre/default.aspx?DocumentID=26854&ArticleID=35542 (http://unep.org/newscentre/default.aspx?DocumentID=26854&ArticleID=35542)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on November 06, 2015, 08:27:29 PM
Sig, sorry, I couldn't follow your reply to me.

I get a sense that there was some kind of irony involved, but I don't get from that a clear critique or position.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 07, 2015, 09:02:02 PM
Sig, sorry, I couldn't follow your reply to me.

I get a sense that there was some kind of irony involved, but I don't get from that a clear critique or position.


Sorry.  Yes, major irony intended.  :)
My idea being: let's say all countries decided, like the U.S., to lower their own emissions by closing coal plants, and to sell their excess coal overseas, instead.  But if everyone is closing coal plants, they will no longer need to import coal.  So the overseas market disappears.

Can't burn it at home, no buyers overseas.  End of coal!  [If only things were that easy!  ;) ]


I was thinking of this huge Kentucky-coal-to-India deal that fell through:
http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/ky-legislature/2014/03/01/eastern-kentucky-coal-deal-with-india-stalls/5940489/ (http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/ky-legislature/2014/03/01/eastern-kentucky-coal-deal-with-india-stalls/5940489/)

That was from 2014, and I don't see anything more recent indicating the deal was reactivated.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on November 07, 2015, 09:15:22 PM
Ah, ok. Thanks. That is an interesting hypothetical. I do think that a responsible country would try to do both, though (not burn and not mine it for others to burn).

As you say, if only...
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 09, 2015, 07:05:15 PM
The linked Washington Post article indicates that Putin's doubts about climate change has contributed to Russia's relatively weak pledge to CoP21:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/wildfires-burning-up-siberia-surely-it-cant-be-climate-change-putin-says/2015/11/09/da1b82ce-7e53-11e5-beba-927fd8634498_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/wildfires-burning-up-siberia-surely-it-cant-be-climate-change-putin-says/2015/11/09/da1b82ce-7e53-11e5-beba-927fd8634498_story.html)

Extract: "Environmentalists say that attitude is also reflected in Russia’s pledge for December’s global summit, one that received little media coverage at home. In suggesting a reduction in its emissions to “70 to 75 percent” of 1990 levels by 2030, Moscow is actually proposing an increase from 2012 levels. Russian emissions are currently far below the levels produced by obsolescent ex-Soviet smokestack industries in 1990.

Even that offer is hedged. Russia has said reaching the target will require generous accounting for the role Russia’s forests play in removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 12, 2015, 06:22:35 PM
The linked Climate Central article discusses how following the Bonn meeting a few weeks ago, the level of distrust between developed and undeveloped countries has increased to the extent that it could de-rail the CoP21 agreement unless developed countries accept more financial responsibility for the consequences of the GHG that they have already emitted (so we should not count our chickens until they hatch):

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/dispute-threatens-paris-climate-agreement-19666 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/dispute-threatens-paris-climate-agreement-19666)

Extract: "“Developing countries have become more wary of what developed countries are doing,” Singh said. He warned that the loss-and-damage debate could “absolutely” trigger a breakdown of talks in Paris. “The situation is very fragile.”"
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 13, 2015, 02:59:43 AM
Apparently France and the United States don't even know whether they are negotiating a treaty or not.


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/13/world/europe/any-paris-climate-deal-must-be-legally-binding-french-leader-says.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/13/world/europe/any-paris-climate-deal-must-be-legally-binding-french-leader-says.html?_r=0)

Extract: "French officials said on Thursday that any agreement at the coming climate conference in Paris would have to be legally binding, expressing alarm at comments by the American secretary of state that suggested the opposite."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: solartim27 on November 13, 2015, 08:48:00 AM
Does COP21 assume that the glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica are stable?

Thwaites has a new calving, and a big crack advance.  Dates are 11/11 and 10/30.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 13, 2015, 01:22:10 PM
Webcast:  24 Hours of Reality and Live Earth, on November 13 and 14, 2015.  Solutions from around the globe; telling the Paris conference that we're watching their efforts.

It's not every day that you can say you were a part of history. Tune in right here on November 13 at 12:00ET when we'll make climate change history.  Join us for 24 Hours of Reality and Live Earth.
https://www.climaterealityproject.org/24hoursofreality (https://www.climaterealityproject.org/24hoursofreality)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 13, 2015, 04:24:57 PM
Per the linked Climate Central article, the majority of nations at the CoP21 conference are glossing over their responsibilities to foster forests and to slow deforestation:

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/paris-climate-pact-could-leave-forests-vulnerable-19683 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/paris-climate-pact-could-leave-forests-vulnerable-19683)

Extract: "Efforts to foster forests and slow deforestation, which is one of the leading causes of global warming, are largely being glossed over by most nations as they prepare for a historic round of climate negotiations."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 13, 2015, 07:19:37 PM
Per the linked article, the Paris Pact may have more twists than a pretzel in order to avoid qualifying as a treaty, while retaining both binding and non-binding provisions


http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/climate-countdown-whens-warming-treaty-treaty-35165698 (http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/climate-countdown-whens-warming-treaty-treaty-35165698)


Extract: " It's the elephant in the negotiating room that few officials want to acknowledge: Whatever international deal comes out of Paris climate talks, it likely won't be a treaty that needs ratification by a reluctant Republican U.S. Congress.

That's not the only complication in Paris. China, the U.S. and India don't want the international community dictating their carbon dioxide emissions, but they do want to do something about ever escalating greenhouse gas levels and the rising temperatures they cause. So they have to come up with an agreement that doesn't dictate binding, internationally set targets or require U.S. Senate approval — and yet gets the job done. At least partly.

To do so, they must reach a pact that has as many twists and turns as a pretzel.

...

Experts expect different layers of agreements. The key is that more than 100 nations have already made pledges of what they would do, including the U.S. promise to cut emissions by about 28 percent. In addition, there will likely be an agreement that nations will do what they promise, meet again to ratchet up their emission cuts and set up a monitoring and verification system for those pledges.

Purvis said it probably will hinge on a 1992 international treaty, signed by President George H.W. Bush and approved by the Senate, that promised to do something about climate change; a decades-old U.S. air pollution law; a U.S. Supreme Court decision that said the air pollution law applies to carbon dioxide; and presidential executive action.

And it involves diplomacy that explains how non-binding international agreements can still be binding domestically, because the president is enforcing the Clean Air Act, Purvis said.

"Getting an international binding agreement is in the cards; what is then binding inside that agreement is what's up for debate," said Jennifer Morgan, global director of climate program for World Resources Institute."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 14, 2015, 03:51:11 AM
Webcast:  24 Hours of Reality and Live Earth, on November 13 and 14, 2015.  Solutions from around the globe; telling the Paris conference that we're watching their efforts.

It's not every day that you can say you were a part of history. Tune in right here on November 13 at 12:00ET when we'll make climate change history.  Join us for 24 Hours of Reality and Live Earth.
https://www.climaterealityproject.org/24hoursofreality (https://www.climaterealityproject.org/24hoursofreality)


@ClimateReality: Out of solidarity with the French people and the City of Paris, we have decided to suspend our broadcast (1/2) #24HoursofReality

https://twitter.com/climatereality/status/665312605464952832 (https://twitter.com/climatereality/status/665312605464952832)
@ClimateReality: @patrullaverde We are safe. Out of solidarity w/ the French people we suspended our broadcast. Our thoughts are with all those affected.

https://twitter.com/climatereality/status/665321886377754624 (https://twitter.com/climatereality/status/665321886377754624) [/quote
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 14, 2015, 05:00:51 PM
@BenjaminJullien: .@COP21 confirmed despite #ParisAttacks, says @LaurentFabius - COP21 maintenue à Paris malgré les attaques
https://t.co/vDcjlHNhz7
Le Monde

https://twitter.com/benjaminjullien/status/665552045328461824
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 15, 2015, 05:14:53 PM
Finding the words to convey obligation that are acceptable to various countries but that don't require ratification by the U.S. Senate.

Explainer: The legal form of the Paris climate agreement
It is hard to see a credible deal from Paris emerging without US support. The US Senate would not ratify a treaty, but the US can still sign up to Paris under an “executive agreement” with the sole authority of the president. In terms of international law, this is equivalent to US ratification.

George Washington signed the first such agreement in 1789, and thousands have been signed since, including several international environmental treaties.

http://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-the-legal-form-of-the-paris-climate-agreement (http://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-the-legal-form-of-the-paris-climate-agreement)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 15, 2015, 07:27:33 PM
Thanks for the Memories, Fossil Fuels, but Now It's Time to Change
By Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christiana-figueres/thanks-for-the-memories-fossil-fuels_b_8556350.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christiana-figueres/thanks-for-the-memories-fossil-fuels_b_8556350.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 17, 2015, 11:47:44 PM
Paris climate deal meeting still on as Republican leaders register opposition
Despite Friday’s horrific attacks, Obama and other world leaders will attend talks in France, as Republicans in Congress continue to fight Obama’s climate plan.
Todd Stern, the State Department’s climate change envoy, said the Republican pushback against the Obama agenda and the EPA rules had had no effect on the preparations for the Paris conference. “I don’t see a lot of anxiety about that,” he told a conference call with reporters.

“It is standard operating procedure in the history of environmental regulation in the United States that when the EPA lays down an important regulation, it gets attacked,” Stern said. “It’s never not happened.”

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/nov/16/paris-climate-deal-meeting-still-on-despite-attacks-as-republican-leaders-register-opposition (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/nov/16/paris-climate-deal-meeting-still-on-despite-attacks-as-republican-leaders-register-opposition)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 19, 2015, 07:08:46 PM
The linked article indicates that when Obama attends CoP21 in Paris, that he will only be able to sign a document that makes legally binding the restrictions on US GHG emission reductions, with no legal commitment to provide funding to the Green Climate Fund, GCF (which apparently requires approval from the Republican controlled Senate).  It is possible that the lack of US legal commitment to contribute to the GCF many make many developing countries unhappy; which could complicate the final agreement:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/18/us-climatechange-summit-congress-idUSKCN0T72LM20151118#5ZljOAIxQDSZsfw0.97 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/18/us-climatechange-summit-congress-idUSKCN0T72LM20151118#5ZljOAIxQDSZsfw0.97)

Extract: "U.S. Senate Republicans on Wednesday said Congress would not approve the Obama administration's $500 million request for its first payment into a United Nations climate fund, a move they said would undermine the upcoming climate change summit in Paris.

"This president is going to go (to Paris) with no money," said Republican Senator Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, who chaired a hearing in the Senate environment panel on the international climate negotiations, which begin on Nov. 30.

Capito and other Republican members of the committee said they will ensure any deal the U.S. strikes in Paris will face congressional scrutiny, and warned they will block President Barack Obama's 2016 budget request for the first tranche of the $3 billion pledged last year to the U.N. Green Climate Fund.

"Without Senate approval (of a climate agreement), there will be no money," added Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming, acknowledging that guarantees of climate aid to developing countries is "the linchpin" of the Paris climate conference.

Administration officials have said the U.S. contribution to a global climate agreement would not require Senate approval."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 21, 2015, 04:43:10 PM
The authors of the linked article about introducing more “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation,” (REDD+) commitments to the CoP21 Pact, end their article with the statement: "It is the lowest cost, most practical and immediately available strategy that can make a real, long-lasting difference to the climate problem. REDD+ is a signal to the world that we are serious about confronting the threat of runaway climate change. Who could oppose it?"

Obviously, these authors are not thinking of the leaders of the US Congress who have cut off any US contributions the UN's Green Climate Fund, which could be used to pay for such a REDD+ program.


http://www.dailyclimate.org/tdc-newsroom/2015/11/commentary-the-imperative-of-forest-conservation (http://www.dailyclimate.org/tdc-newsroom/2015/11/commentary-the-imperative-of-forest-conservation)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 24, 2015, 04:34:45 PM
Heads of state invited to climate talks in Paris starting on Nov. 30 have confirmed they will attend
http://in.mobile.reuters.com/article/idINKCN0TB07O20151122 (http://in.mobile.reuters.com/article/idINKCN0TB07O20151122)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 24, 2015, 06:34:08 PM
Dana Nuccitelli:
@dana1981: The GOP Climate Supervillains' Plan to Thwart the Paris Climate Conference will fail  https://t.co/grAGLPcJPR

https://twitter.com/dana1981/status/669176356349964288

The good news for climate hawks is that none of these efforts are likely to work. Foreign governments understand the separation of powers in the U.S., and that President Obama can implement the Clean Power Plan even if Congress disapproves. The pledges that other countries have produced ahead of the Paris talks were made with the knowledge that Republicans oppose climate action. So Obama could succeed in getting a deal in Paris, but only in spite of the GOP’s best efforts to stop him.
https://newrepublic.com/article/124412/gops-plan-thwart-paris-climate-conference
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 24, 2015, 10:30:39 PM
The linked Climate Central article could be taken as an indication that the developed world is playing games with the developing world regarding pledges of funds to help developing countries to adapt to climate change; and I am sure this issue will be discussed extensively at CoP21:

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/the-100-billion-climate-question-19726 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/the-100-billion-climate-question-19726)

Extract: "What’s a difference in opinion worth?
When it comes to interpreting a climate pledge by richer countries to help poorer ones tackle the problem of climate change, about $60 billion last year.
That’s the difference between the amount of money that developed countries provided to those in earlier stages of development in 2014 to help them deal with global warming — depending on how the figure is calculated.
By one interpretation, $62 billion was provided last year. By another: $0."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 26, 2015, 04:59:01 PM
The linked Dutch study indicates that while the rate of increase of anthropogenic CO₂ emissions decreased in 2014.  The first two attached associated figures show that these anthropogenic emission rates are higher than ever before, while the third image of the 1-year Keeling Curve through Nov 24 2015, shows that the rate of increase of atmospheric CO₂ concentrations are currently running well ahead of the BAU emissions scenario.  Policy makers choose to focus on anthropogenic emissions while downplaying other mechanisms that contribute to high CO₂ (and other GHGs) concentration including: wildfires, forest degradation, permafrost degradation, etc.  Furthermore, if the goal is to limit temperature increase then the record temperature increases for both 2014 and 2015 indicate that focusing only on reducing the rate of increase of CO₂ emissions is not adequate, or acceptable:

http://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/cms/publicaties/pbl-2015-trends-in-global-co2-emisions_2015-report_01803.pdf (http://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/cms/publicaties/pbl-2015-trends-in-global-co2-emisions_2015-report_01803.pdf)

See also:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/25/global-emissions-nearly-stall-after-a-decade-of-growth-report-shows (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/25/global-emissions-nearly-stall-after-a-decade-of-growth-report-shows)

Extract: "Chinese emissions went up 0.9% in 2014, the same amount as the US, as it used more gas for heating. India’s emissions jumped by 7.8% while the European Union’s emissions dropped by an “unprecedented” 5.4%, but the Indian increase was the largest contributor to global emissions growth in 2014 and effectively cancelled out the EU fall."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 26, 2015, 07:57:40 PM
The linked (open access) reference indicates that when including permafrost degradation and other anthropogenic GHG emissions (besides CO₂) that the remaining carbon budget (to stay below a 2C rise) is 810 Pg; however, this estimate ignores:

(a) possible higher values of climate sensitivity;
(b) possible degradation of CO₂ absorption;
(c) possible higher than expected reductions in the rates of aerosol emissions;
(d) the positive feedback associated with dynamic ice sheet mass loss identified by Hansen et al. (2015).

Andrew H MacDougall, Kirsten Zickfeld, Reto Knutti and H Damon Matthews (25 November 2015), "Sensitivity of carbon budgets to permafrost carbon feedbacks and non-CO2 forcings", Environmental Research Letters, Volume 10, Number 12


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/10/12/125003 (http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/10/12/125003)


Abstract: "The near proportionality between cumulative CO2 emissions and change in near surface temperature can be used to define a carbon budget: a finite quantity of carbon that can be burned associated with a chosen 'safe' temperature change threshold. Here we evaluate the sensitivity of this carbon budget to permafrost carbon dynamics and changes in non-CO2 forcings. The carbon budget for 2.0  of warming is reduced from 1320 Pg C when considering only forcing from CO2 to 810 Pg C when considering permafrost carbon feedbacks as well as other anthropogenic contributions to climate change. We also examined net carbon budgets following an overshoot of and return to a warming target. That is, the net cumulative CO2 emissions at the point in time a warming target is restored following artificial removal of CO2 from the atmosphere to cool the climate back to a chosen temperature target. These overshoot net carbon budgets are consistently smaller than the conventional carbon budgets. Overall carbon budgets persist as a robust and simple conceptual framework to relate the principle cause of climate change to the impacts of climate change."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 27, 2015, 11:19:10 PM
Can we avoid climate apocalypse?
CNN Opinion invited experts to share their views on what the best solutions are.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/23/opinions/opinion-roundup-climate-change/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/23/opinions/opinion-roundup-climate-change/index.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 28, 2015, 01:45:39 AM
Here is the Economist's opinion of solutions to climate change apocalypse; however, to me without recommending some kind of corrective measures to our crony capitalistic system (with emphasis on the word: "crony"), all of the Economist's solutions look more like band aids rather than cures:

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21679193-global-warming-cannot-be-dealt-using-todays-tools-and-mindsets-so-create-some-new (http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21679193-global-warming-cannot-be-dealt-using-todays-tools-and-mindsets-so-create-some-new)

Extract: "A broad commitment quickly to raise and diversify R&D spending on energy technologies would be more welcome than more or less anything else Paris could offer.

...

 Well-designed carbon prices can boost green power, encourage energy-saving and suppress fossil-fired power much more efficiently than subsidies for renewables.

...

Radical innovation is the key to reducing emissions over the medium and long term, but it will not stop climate change from getting worse in the meantime. This is where the realism comes in: many people will have to adapt to a hotter Earth, and some of them will need help.

...

The final strand of new thinking ought to be research into cooling the Earth artificially.

...

The best way to cope is to keep inventing."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 28, 2015, 09:49:45 PM
Christiana Figueres: the woman tasked with saving the world from global warming
“We haven’t questioned whether we’re going to get an agreement [in Paris] for many, many months,” she says. “Now the question is how ambitious is the agreement going to be. At the beginning of this year when I started talking about how we are going to get an agreement, people were quizzical. Now I think everybody has accepted that as a fact: we are going to get an agreement, because there is enough political will, increasing political will. It makes fundamental economic sense. It is in countries’ national interests to really spur up this transformation [to a low-carbon economy].”
...
“The investments that we’re going to make globally over the next five, 10, maximum 15 years, but certainly the ones within the next five years, will determine the quality of life of future generations,” she says, “as simple as that.”

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/27/christiana-figueres-the-woman-tasked-with-saving-the-world-from-global-warming (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/27/christiana-figueres-the-woman-tasked-with-saving-the-world-from-global-warming)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 29, 2015, 01:57:04 PM
California may be a leader on climate change, but it still has plenty of work to do
Pavley said California has had plenty of opportunity to preview the Paris conference, with a parade of international officials visiting to discuss climate. “Almost never a week goes by that we don’t have people from a foreign country coming to Sacramento on these policies,” she said.

http://grist.org/climate-energy/california-may-be-a-leader-on-climate-change-but-it-still-has-plenty-of-work-to-do/ (http://grist.org/climate-energy/california-may-be-a-leader-on-climate-change-but-it-still-has-plenty-of-work-to-do/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 29, 2015, 02:17:29 PM
Global Climate March: Record Numbers Turn Out for Climate Protests
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/global-climate-march-record-numbers-turn-out-climate-protests-n470836 (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/global-climate-march-record-numbers-turn-out-climate-protests-n470836)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 29, 2015, 04:38:08 PM
AP Interview: UN chief Ban Ki-moon calls for review of climate targets before 2020
http://neurope.eu/wires/ap-interview-un-chief-ban-ki-moon-calls-for-review-of-climate-targets-before-2020/ (http://neurope.eu/wires/ap-interview-un-chief-ban-ki-moon-calls-for-review-of-climate-targets-before-2020/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 29, 2015, 04:57:42 PM
@tcktcktck: In Paris a silent #ClimateMarch at Place Republique.. where people could not march they laid their shoes instead https://t.co/CVKtpK7cVR (https://t.co/CVKtpK7cVR)

https://twitter.com/tcktcktck/status/670972650370502657 (https://twitter.com/tcktcktck/status/670972650370502657)


Empty Shoes Take Place of Marchers at Canceled Paris Climate Rally
http://time.com/4128618/paris-climate-empty-shoes/ (http://time.com/4128618/paris-climate-empty-shoes/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 29, 2015, 05:02:08 PM
@UNFCCC: Major #ClimateAction announcements are expected at #COP21 - see where to find them https://t.co/Zno12MpwZB (https://t.co/Zno12MpwZB) https://t.co/0Ah7s3nhGm (https://t.co/0Ah7s3nhGm)

https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/670970373194842113 (https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/670970373194842113) 


http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/key-cop21-press-events-starting-30-november/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/key-cop21-press-events-starting-30-november/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 30, 2015, 03:03:15 PM
Op-Ed Bill McKibben: What the Paris conference on climate change can do for planet Earth
All of this means that Paris should be both a scoreboard and a springboard. It will show how far we've come, and it could launch more progress. Two issues in the negotiations will signal how much more. First, how much aid will go to the poorest nations to help them leapfrog the fossil fuel age and deal with the effects of global warming that are now unavoidable. It will take real money — ongoing, steady support — to substitute alternative energy sources for coal in the developing world. Republicans aren't helping here: 11 days ago , they voted down even $500 million in funding from the United States, one of many explicit efforts to torpedo the negotiations.

The second clue is whether the conference will set a clear goal for not just reducing but ending the use of fossil fuels. Will it establish an efficient way to ratchet up emission pledges, as science and technology evolve? Having wasted the last quarter-century, the world can't afford to keep gearing up for once-a-decade grand gatherings; it needs to move smoothly forward into a 100% renewable energy future.

The Paris climate conference represents a possible turning point in the fight between the fossil fuel industry and the rest of us, but the great murky unknown remains: How much of a margin do physics and chemistry allow a warming Earth? The recent news that October was the hottest month ever recorded on our planet, and that the atmosphere's CO2 level has topped 400 parts per million, sobers any optimism.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-mckibben-paris-un-climate-conference-20151129-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-mckibben-paris-un-climate-conference-20151129-story.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on November 30, 2015, 09:09:29 PM
India unveils global solar alliance of 120 countries at Paris climate summit
Narendra Modi announces a new alliance of nations and industry on large-scale expansion of solar energy use in the tropics and beyond.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/30/india-set-to-unveil-global-solar-alliance-of-120-countries-at-paris-climate-summit (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/30/india-set-to-unveil-global-solar-alliance-of-120-countries-at-paris-climate-summit)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on November 30, 2015, 11:04:23 PM
The linked article indicates that the U.S. House will not support President Obama's expenditures for CoP21:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/11/30/world/europe/ap-climate-countdown-the-latest.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/11/30/world/europe/ap-climate-countdown-the-latest.html?_r=0)

Extract: "U.S. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy says the House will not go along if President Barack Obama tries to commit taxpayer money to support a climate accord reached in Paris.
He says Congress has the authority to decide how to spend U.S. taxpayer dollars, "and I don't think that's the best use of our money."
McCarthy suggested that a must-pass year-end spending bill currently in the works could become the vehicle for language blocking any such expenditure.
The California Republican on Monday also criticized Obama's overall approach at the Paris talks, saying he should be focusing on America's progress in switching to natural gas and thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 01, 2015, 02:55:39 AM
The Fossil of the Day Award is the Best Part of the Paris Climate Summit
Activists name and shame, with humor.
When it comes to saving the planet, public humiliation can be surprisingly effective. Take the satirical Fossil of the Day award, which has a simple premise: Figure out who’s doing the best job at spoiling the Earth’s atmosphere that day, and make a huge deal about it in the most hilarious way possible.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/11/the_fossil_of_the_day_award_wins_the_paris_climate_summit.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/11/the_fossil_of_the_day_award_wins_the_paris_climate_summit.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 01, 2015, 01:40:21 PM
Government Leaders Endorse Forests as Key Climate Solution
Announce New Actions, Expanded Partnerships
Paris, 30 November 2015 - Heads of Government from major forest countries and partner countries joined together today to endorse forests as a key climate solution. They recommitted to providing strong, collective and urgent action to promote equitable rural economic development while slowing, halting and reversing deforestation and massively increasing forest restoration.
...
Several leaders announced major new actions to protect and restore forests

Brazil and Norway made a joint announcement to extend their climate and forest partnership until 2020. Brazil has delivered impressive results in reducing Amazon deforestation over 70 percent in the last decade. Both Germany and Norway will continue to support Brazil at scale to further increase ambition on reducing deforestation and forest degradation.

Colombia announced an ambitious partnership , together with Germany, Norway, and the United Kingdom, to implement its vision for green growth, with a particular focus on reducing deforestation in the Amazon region.
Germany, Norway and the United Kingdom announced a collective aim to provide $5 billion from 2015 to 2020, or $1 billion per year by 2020, if countries pursue ambitious REDD+ programs, and an intent to significantly increase pay-for-performance finance if countries demonstrate measured, reported and verified emission reductions.

http://newsroom.unfccc.int/nature-s-role/forests-as-key-climate-solution/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/nature-s-role/forests-as-key-climate-solution/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 01, 2015, 02:22:17 PM
From Bloomberg News, Dec 1:
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 01, 2015, 02:45:10 PM
Video clip.
@CNN: .@POTUS speaking at #COP21 "I'm convinced we're going to get big things done here" https://t.co/ZL75583gvM  https://t.co/hWnkVs7tlV

https://twitter.com/cnn/status/671680566325022720
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 01, 2015, 04:04:57 PM
The linked New York Times article discusses the pivotal role that India will play in determining the strength, or weakness, of the pending CoP21 Paris Pact.  The article indicates that as the US Congress has declined to help pay for the transition of developing countries from fossil fuels to green renewables Obama and Hollande have been forced to turn to the private sector (like Bill Gates) to try to bridge the remaining gap between developed and developing countries relative contributions to the CoP21 Paris Pact:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/01/world/asia/narendra-modi-could-make-or-break-obamas-climate-legacy.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/01/world/asia/narendra-modi-could-make-or-break-obamas-climate-legacy.html?_r=0)

Extract: "India, the world’s third-largest greenhouse gas polluter, has emerged as a pivotal player in shaping the outcome of a deal on which Mr. Obama hopes to build his legacy — or whether a deal emerges at all. So far, Indian negotiators have publicly staked out an uncompromising position.
India embodies a critical tension that will play out in Paris between developed nations like the United States, which are calling for universal emissions cuts, and developing nations like India, which say they deserve to increase fossil fuel use as their economies grow or else receive billions of dollars to make the transition to cleaner energy.

India’s annual per capita carbon dioxide emissions are 1.7 tons, compared with 16.6 tons per person in the United States and 7.4 tons per person in China.
During the climate change talks, India is expected to challenge the United States on three counts: to speed up emissions reductions by wealthy countries to compensate for emissions growth in poor countries, to pay more to poor countries to assist in mitigation plans, and to provide clean-energy technology to poor countries.
Ashley Tellis, a senior associate with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said Mr. Obama had “tried hard” to persuade Mr. Modi to shift India off those more hard-line negotiating positions ahead of the climate talks, “but failed.”

In a move that appeared explicitly intended to win India’s cooperation in Paris, Bill Gates, the Microsoft founder and billionaire philanthropist, joined the Obama administration to create what is being called the largest public-private coalition for funding renewable energy. The coalition has the cooperation of 20 countries, including the United States and India, which have pledged to double their funding of renewable energy research, and it will feature a renewable energy research fund paid for by 28 billionaire philanthropists, including two prominent Indian businessmen.
The plans for the fund came together after the French president, François Hollande, who is deeply invested in the success of the Paris talks, invited Mr. Gates and Mr. Modi to meet on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York in September. As Mr. Obama has tried to find ways to bring Mr. Modi into a deal, his officials have worked closely with Mr. Gates.
Mr. Hollande in the meantime worked with Mr. Modi on another initiative: a 121-nation solar energy alliance, which Mr. Modi unveiled Monday in the conference’s Indian pavilion.
Some analysts caution against overreacting to India’s negotiating postures — or, for that matter, its projections for expansion in its coal sector, which is dogged by corruption and inefficiency."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 01, 2015, 05:41:00 PM
Per the linked Climate Analytics article, it may be difficult to meet many INDC's given the number of planned and existing coal-fired power plants (so don't count your chickens before they are hatched):

http://climateanalytics.org/latest/the-coal-gap---climate-action-tracker (http://climateanalytics.org/latest/the-coal-gap---climate-action-tracker)

Extract: "If all coal plants in the pipeline were to be built, by 2030, emissions from coal power would be 400% higher than what is consistent with a 2°C pathway, according to a new analysis released by the Climate Action Tracker at the Paris Climate Summit today.
Even with no new construction, in 2030, emissions from coal-fired power generation would still be more than 150% higher than what is consistent with holding warming below 2°C.
Using data from Coal Swarm’s updated Global Coal Plant Tracker, (1) the CAT has calculated the effect on global emissions from coal-fired power, comparing the compatibility of projected coal power production with 2°C and 1.5°C pathways, as well as current policy scenario pathways.
There are 2440 planned coal plants around the world (2), totalling 1428GW, which could emit approximately 16-18 percent of the total allowed emissions in 2030 (under a 2°C-compatible scenario, medium range).
Including existing capacity with a technical lifetime beyond 2030, total emissions from coal-fired power generation could reach 12 GtCO2 in 2030."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 01, 2015, 07:18:05 PM
France to Invest 2 Billion Euros in Africa Renewables
President Hollande Announces Commitment at COP21
France will invest a total of 2 billion euros in renewable energy in Africa in 2016-20, a 50% increase in comparison with the last five years.

http://newsroom.unfccc.int/financial-flows/france-to-invest-2-billion-euros-in-renewables-in-africa/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/financial-flows/france-to-invest-2-billion-euros-in-renewables-in-africa/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 01, 2015, 08:07:00 PM
Obama offers vulnerable nations $30m for climate risk insurance
After a clear rebuff from developed countries, island states have dropped demands for compensation. But they are insisting on a separate section in the Paris deal on support to cope with their losses.
...
Insurance is a middle ground. Obama’s $30m forms part of a G7 initiative to extend insurance cover to 400 million people on the frontlines of changing weather patterns.

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/12/01/obama-offers-vulnerable-nations-30m-for-climate-risk-insurance/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/12/01/obama-offers-vulnerable-nations-30m-for-climate-risk-insurance/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 01, 2015, 08:26:11 PM
http://endcoal.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Proposed-Coal-Plants-by-Country-Annual-CO2.pdf (http://endcoal.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Proposed-Coal-Plants-by-Country-Annual-CO2.pdf)

If you take out Announced and substitute Construction in for the "Announced+Pre-Permit+Permit" number, there's about 3.9 Gt/a CO2 emissions just baked into coal plant construction over the next few years. Is there a reliable source showing retirements to compare?
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 01, 2015, 11:43:23 PM
India plans to rapidly increase its coal consumption over the coming decades unless the West finances faster renewable energy development:

http://time.com/4131236/india-coal-climate-change-paris-summit/ (http://time.com/4131236/india-coal-climate-change-paris-summit/)


Extract: "India’s aim is to produce 1.5 billion metric tons of the fossil fuel by 2020, up about 600 million tons in 2012. (It currently consumes some 800 million metric tons a year.)
To make this happen, India will need to open the equivalent of a new coal mine every month until the end of this decade. That thirst for coal—the single biggest source of man-made carbon emissions—has made India a country to watch in Paris, where officials from around the world are meeting to try and hammer out a deal to slow rising global temperatures."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 02, 2015, 04:21:07 PM
I happen to like Rolling Stone articles on climate change, & the linked article makes several good points including that there is no question that CoP21 will achieve something (as it already has achieved something), but whether mankind is responding fast enough to the climate change challenge.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/john-kerry-on-climate-change-the-fight-of-our-time-20151201 (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/john-kerry-on-climate-change-the-fight-of-our-time-20151201)

Extract: "The challenge is not whether we'll respond. The question is whether we'll respond fast enough."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 02, 2015, 05:22:53 PM
Watch Tesla CEO Elon Musk live From Université Paris [12pm ET – 18h local – 17h UTC]
While Paris is hosting the COP21 climate change talk, Tesla CEO Elon Musk is at Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne to talk about his vision of what we can do to help the world transition to a sustainable future.

http://electrek.co/2015/12/02/watch-tesla-ceo-elon-musk-live-from-universite-paris-12pm-et-18h-local-17h-utc/ (http://electrek.co/2015/12/02/watch-tesla-ceo-elon-musk-live-from-universite-paris-12pm-et-18h-local-17h-utc/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 02, 2015, 05:24:15 PM
I happen to like Rolling Stone articles on climate change....

I do, too.  Thanks for the link!
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 02, 2015, 05:51:40 PM
[url]http://endcoal.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Proposed-Coal-Plants-by-Country-Annual-CO2.pdf[/url] ([url]http://endcoal.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Proposed-Coal-Plants-by-Country-Annual-CO2.pdf[/url])

If you take out Announced and substitute Construction in for the "Announced+Pre-Permit+Permit" number, there's about 3.9 Gt/a CO2 emissions just baked into coal plant construction over the next few years. Is there a reliable source showing retirements to compare?


I would like to say "Look at the 'Shelved' and 'Cancelled 2010-2015' columns" for a clue to this -- but, as we've found with renewables, we are at a point where you really can't use the recent past to judge the future.   ;)

Countries may want lots more coal plants, but the pressures against them are high, and rising:

Citi:
http://www.businessinsider.com/citi-peak-coal-in-china-is-coming-2013-9 (http://www.businessinsider.com/citi-peak-coal-in-china-is-coming-2013-9)

Goldman Sachs:
http://d35brb9zkkbdsd.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/GS_Rocks__Ores_-_Thermal_Coal_July_2013.pdf (http://d35brb9zkkbdsd.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/GS_Rocks__Ores_-_Thermal_Coal_July_2013.pdf)

Edit: I still like your question: how many coal plants have been/will be retired, globally, soon?  Wish I could find some numbers!
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 02, 2015, 11:53:09 PM
The linked article discusses some of the challenges associated with trying to curb deforestation:


Jeff Tollefson (2015), "Forests in spotlight at Paris climate talks: Uptick in deforestation in Brazil hints at difficulty of preserving and expanding forests", Nature, doi:10.1038/nature.2015.18934

http://www.nature.com/news/forests-in-spotlight-at-paris-climate-talks-1.18934 (http://www.nature.com/news/forests-in-spotlight-at-paris-climate-talks-1.18934)

Extract: "Brazil has long been a source of hope in the fight against climate change. Since 2004, the country has curbed deforestation in the Amazon by roughly 79%.

But now, as nations gather in Paris to negotiate a new global climate treaty, there are signs that this progress may have stalled — another reminder of just how hard it will be to curb humanity's impact on the planet. On 27 November, the Brazilian government announced that landowners cleared 5,831 square kilometres of forest in 2015, an increase of 16% over the previous year."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 03, 2015, 03:06:48 AM
$3.4 Trillion: Fossil Fuel Divestment Commitments Break New Record
http://ecowatch.com/2015/12/02/divest-fossil-fuels-cop21/ (http://ecowatch.com/2015/12/02/divest-fossil-fuels-cop21/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 03, 2015, 03:09:44 AM
COP21 Fossil of the Day Winners: IMO and ICAO
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jaxJDAnVmXs   (1-min video)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 03, 2015, 03:12:56 AM
First small sign of climate accord on 5-year review of carbon cuts
PARIS, Dec 2 (Reuters) - Climate negotiators in Paris are drawing close to resolving one of the sticking points for a breakthrough emissions pact by favouring a five-year review period on promised greenhouse gas cuts, a top official said on Wednesday.

Regular reviews are seen as a crucial part of any agreement since countries' current pledges to cut emissions - submitted by 185 nations to the United Nations - will fail to prevent temperatures from rising 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial times, seen as a dangerous level.

http://www.trust.org/item/20151202171907-nfsts/ (http://www.trust.org/item/20151202171907-nfsts/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 03, 2015, 03:17:22 AM
@350: Germignaga, Italy has a population of 3,809. They had a 3,000-person #ClimateMarch. Wow. https://t.co/Ojjv75HfN3

https://twitter.com/350/status/672233976103370752
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 03, 2015, 03:23:35 AM
Businesses Awaken To The Opportunities Of Action On Climate Change
More than 1,000 business representatives will be in Paris and most will be supportive of climate action, says Edward Cameron, who represents We Mean Business, a nonprofit coalition that is working with companies on climate change.
...
One gauge of business support for curbing carbon emissions is that more than 150 large U.S. companies have signed a White House pledge to reduce their carbon footprint. The list includes firms like General Motors, General Electric and Wal-Mart.

What's changed, Bakker says, is that businesses now see that the cost of inaction is greater than the cost of acting to curb climate change. That's the case at General Mills, the big food company whose products include Cheerios, Lucky Charms and Yoplait yogurt.

"For us it's not theoretical," says Ken Powell, the company's CEO. "We depend on natural systems. And we depend on healthy environment for the crops and the ingredients that we use."

For that reason, businesses in the agriculture and food sector are among those most interested in curbing carbon emissions. General Mills started by reducing energy use in its facilities.

"We've eliminated about $250 million of energy cost over the last 10 years," Powell says. "So for people who worry that companies are misspending resources to address this issue, our experience has not been that; it's been very positive from a business standpoint."

http://www.npr.org/2015/12/01/458020744/businesses-awaken-to-the-opportunities-of-action-on-climate-change (http://www.npr.org/2015/12/01/458020744/businesses-awaken-to-the-opportunities-of-action-on-climate-change)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 03, 2015, 06:17:54 PM
As I have mentioned before The Economist has published the linked special report on climate change to coincide with CoP21, and while I do not agree with all of their points, the do raise several notable issues including:
1. Until renewables like wind & solar power can be married to storage systems, they will need to be tied to base-load power plants, so that for all the money that Germany has spent on renewables they have had marginal gains on emissions as indicated by the attached image and extract, below.
2. As global warming increases more & more money will be spent on counter-productive adaption such as more air conditioning and refrigeration.
3.  The existing over-built base load power plant capacity will be difficult to eliminate in coming decades.
4.  Loss and damage will be a difficult issue to deal with.

http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21678951-not-much-has-come-efforts-prevent-climate-change-so-far-mankind-will-have-get (http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21678951-not-much-has-come-efforts-prevent-climate-change-so-far-mankind-will-have-get)

See also:

http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21678955-renewable-power-good-more-renewable-power-not-always-better-when-wind-blows (http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21678955-renewable-power-good-more-renewable-power-not-always-better-when-wind-blows)

Extract: "And because of generous feed-in tariffs for renewables that are guaranteed for 20 years, consumers in Germany are paying high prices for their not especially clean power. In the first half of this year households there paid 0.30 euros for a kilowatt-hour of electricity, whereas the French paid a mere 0.16 euros."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 03, 2015, 08:35:18 PM
Some may believe that both Robert Scribbler and Pope Francis are being Pollyanna's in the linked article focused on CoP21, but to me, even Kevin Anderson's warnings are erring on the side of least drama:

http://robertscribbler.com/2015/12/01/paris-climate-conference-at-the-limits-of-suicide-commitments-nowhere-near-enough-to-miss-2-c/ (http://robertscribbler.com/2015/12/01/paris-climate-conference-at-the-limits-of-suicide-commitments-nowhere-near-enough-to-miss-2-c/)

Extracted quote from the Pope: "We are at the limits. If I may use a strong word I would say that we are at the limits of suicide.”
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 03, 2015, 09:39:10 PM
Video of Elon Musk's Paris talk on sustainability (see #355 above) and a brief article:
http://electrek.co/2015/12/03/elon-musk-we-designed-civilization-to-be-super-sensitive-to-climate-change/ (http://electrek.co/2015/12/03/elon-musk-we-designed-civilization-to-be-super-sensitive-to-climate-change/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 04, 2015, 12:32:08 AM
Australia's actions so far at COP21: "Very disappointing." 
Video interview.

https://www.facebook.com/denial101x/videos/899179706845286/ (https://www.facebook.com/denial101x/videos/899179706845286/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 04, 2015, 01:21:31 AM
India a leading force at climate talks
On Wednesday, Ajay Mathur, one of India’s lead negotiators, made a shrewd and brilliant pledge: We’ll cut back on our coal use if the rest of the world helps fund our transition to renewables. The lead U.S. negotiator, Todd Stern, joined activist groups in welcoming the comments as productive.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/12/03/thankfully_india_is_a_leading_force_at_paris_cop21_climate_talks.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/12/03/thankfully_india_is_a_leading_force_at_paris_cop21_climate_talks.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 04, 2015, 06:00:06 AM
1. Until renewables like wind & solar power can be married to storage systems, they will need to be tied to base-load power plants, so that for all the money that Germany has spent on renewables they have had marginal gains on emissions as indicated by the attached image and extract, below.

I was against nuclear when Sweden had our "folkomröstning" vote/referendum(?) in 1980. And still is. But Germanys transition away from nuclear right now feels a bit misplaced. Out of two bad things, it's better to select the least bad.

Swedens share through Vattenfall, is to emit 88,4 million tonnes per year abroad and mostly in Germany.
Finland on the other hand, has spent too much on their new plant in Olkiluoto and are loosers in transition towards renewables.

There's no easy way out of this. :(
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: tombond on December 04, 2015, 07:07:47 AM
France made the transition from fossil fuels to nuclear in just 20 years between 1975 and 1995 by the construction of 60GW of reactors.  Today their emissions from electricity generation are just 40g/kWh.

http://www.rte-france.com/en/eco2mix/chiffres-cles-en (http://www.rte-france.com/en/eco2mix/chiffres-cles-en)

(scroll to the bottom of the page)

Germany is making the transition to a renewable energy economy and to date has installed about 80GW of renewable capacity since 1999.

Today their emissions per kWh are more than 10 times higher than France.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Germany (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Germany)
https://www.iea.org/newsroomandevents/graphics/2015-04-28-carbon-emissions-from-electricity-generation-for-the-top-ten-producer.html (https://www.iea.org/newsroomandevents/graphics/2015-04-28-carbon-emissions-from-electricity-generation-for-the-top-ten-producer.html)

In addition their total CO2 emissions from electricity and heat generation are practically unchanged since 1999 at about 350 million tonnes annually.

http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/germany/co2-emissions (http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/germany/co2-emissions)

(Scroll down the page to electricity CO2 emissions)

As Hansen keeps saying, we must accept nuclear energy as part of the solution to the climate crisis.

 https://newmatilda.com/2015/12/04/father-of-climate-change-james-hansen-urges-support-for-nuclear-energy-at-cop21-climate-talks/ (https://newmatilda.com/2015/12/04/father-of-climate-change-james-hansen-urges-support-for-nuclear-energy-at-cop21-climate-talks/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: folke_kelm on December 04, 2015, 08:00:46 AM
You must always ask what is behind the numbers for France and Germany.
Germany´s coal is subsidised to a huge amount. Only for burning 1T of coal the german taxpayer looses 100 Euro to the big coalburning companies E.ON, RWE and Vattenfall. Germany has a surplus of renewable energy which results in cutting off coalplants from the net, but still burning coal inside these plants. Germany´s nuclear plants are old and before shutting down all there was a documented lack of upgrading and service.
Nuclear power stands today for less than 10% of all domestic energyproduction. To make it count it will cost huge amounts of money.

There is an easy way out. Take the money from subsidising fossil fuels and nuclear and invest this money in renewables and a smart net.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 04, 2015, 09:26:57 AM
Folke, i know that you are much more aware of Germanys situation, as you have mentioned those things before. Do you have any links to those facts about the coal subsidies and maintenance problems of their nuclear plants?

I guess they can't do, or think that they can't do, what you suggest while investing/building smart grids and renewables?

Vattenfalls "easy" solution is to shut down. But they are still waiting for buyers.
Personally, I would vote for a shut down and all of us in Sweden would have to take those costs. Unfortunately the Germans would also loose that capacity.

Tar man fan i båten får man ro honom i land.

Edit; I can see now that SATire has written a lot in here about the Energiewende.
And found this from yesterday: http://www.energypost.eu/energiewende-easily-affordable-dont-go-way/ (http://www.energypost.eu/energiewende-easily-affordable-dont-go-way/)
I'll see if I can find some more about those coal subsidies myself.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 04, 2015, 01:16:43 PM
Obama Just Committed $30 Million To Insure Developing Countries Against Climate Threats
The U.S. contribution will specifically support parametric-risk insurance programs operated by the Pacific Catastrophic Risk Assessment and Financing Initiative (PCRAFI), the Caribbean Catastrophic Risk Insurance Facility (CCRIF), and the African Risk Capacity (ARC). Parametric risk insurance is a type of insurance that issues payout immediately when a specified condition — such as a certain wind speed or rainfall level — is met. These plans can be structured to insure nations against damages caused by extreme weather such as hurricanes, or financial costs associated with prolonged drought. Parametric risk insurance can help developing countries better prepare for the impacts of climate change, as the Center for American Progress discussed in a recent report.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/12/02/3727056/obama-commitment-climate-risk-insurance/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/12/02/3727056/obama-commitment-climate-risk-insurance/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: folke_kelm on December 04, 2015, 03:18:07 PM
Sleepy,
it´s all in german, send me a pm if i shall translate something.
if you search google with "kohlesubventionen deutschland" you will get much information. This study
https://www.greenpeace.de/sites/www.greenpeace.de/files/Kohlesubventionen_1950-2008_0.pdf (https://www.greenpeace.de/sites/www.greenpeace.de/files/Kohlesubventionen_1950-2008_0.pdf)
will povide you with many sources and information about subsidies of german coal plants and mining. It is a very traditional business in Germany and has very active lobbyism in the gouvernment. Yhere are not only direct subsidies, but also indirect subsidies like tax reductions, cost partitioning for restoring of environment etc etc, it is a long list. You can be sure that without subsidies there would not be one german coal plant left, not to talk about nuclear.
According to the nuclear plants there is not much available if you do not have insight in construction and maintainace problems of these plants. The main problem is that all pants are constructed under presupposition of a limited number of starts and shutdowns. These presumptive conditions of drift has never been met for any of the german plants. Numbers of starts and shutdowns exceed by far the constructive limits.
Vital components in nuclear power plants are not replaceable, and when you understand, that every mechanical part will fail some day, and that part failure of a series of similar parts follows a gaussian normal curve. This curve has to be very steep in the case ov nuclear plants due to the fact that you can not afford any premature part failure.
Bt this means too, that you must avoid drift longer than the constructive limits allow or drift under unusual circumstances outside the constructive limits (meaning numbers of shutdowns and start ups) because you leave the safe side of the normal curve very fast.
This is in fact a problem most mechanical engineers know about (or should know about).
Before Fukushima the german government decided that german nuclear plants should get a prolonged drift WITHOUT further maintainance or upgrading, this under heavy press from E.ON, RWE and Vattenfall. In my opinin this was a safe recipe for desaster. I my private opinion i am rather sure that Angela Merkel was very pleased about the Fukushima desaster, because it gave her the opportunity to overrule the big companies and force a shutdown of the plants.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 04, 2015, 03:42:00 PM
Vielen Dank, Folke! Aha, kohlesubventionen were the magic word, think I tried five or six different german words for subsidies. :)
And Ouch, that was a fair bit of reading, I might send you a PM later on.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: SATire on December 04, 2015, 05:47:53 PM
Maybe this "German"-post is also a bit off-topic, since the German "Energiewende" is not only related to CO2 emissions.
Please keep in mind while judging the transition in Germany, that the first goal here is to get out of nuclear. Hansen does not like it and maybe you do not like it for good reasons, too - but the German people want it that way and German people pay the electricity bill. Without the nuclear-exit people would not have paid for the initial ramp-up of renewables.

Today people are pretty aware that coal (especially lignite - which is extremly CO2 intense compared to black coal) is the next thing to exit. Vattenfall wants to sell its lignite in Germany (but unfortunately not to Greenpeace - they really bidded about 0€ for it). RWE lost 80% of its previous value and is about to split the lignite & nuclear business as E.on did last year. Lignite is the next to die after nuclear. But politics (and communal owners of RWE) try to delay that for various local reasons.

Furthermore keep in mind that we do not need "base load" power stations (basically nuclear and lignite here) anymore. There is not such a thing like "base-load" in a grid with renewables. Consumption minus production from renewables floats between zero and 40 GW - thus only tunable dynamic power plants are necessary. Last comment: High power grids are much more efficient than storage. So an European answer is needed to address fluctuations just because that is easier and cheaper than any local national answers to problems (as allways...).   

Back to Paris: I hope we could start to do what we promised in Rio & Kyoto allready. That was much more than we can hope for this time. Sorry - but it did not work well the last decades for any international agreements.   
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 04, 2015, 07:42:39 PM
The linked article discusses evidence that secret trade talks on the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA), could undermine climate discussions in Paris by outlawing subsidies for renewable energy (carbon pricing would get around this problem):

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/dec/03/secret-trade-talks-climate-targets-paris-geneva (http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/dec/03/secret-trade-talks-climate-targets-paris-geneva)

Extract: "Secret trade talks in Geneva could outlaw subsidies for renewable energy, undermining climate discussions in Paris that aim to cut greenhouse gas emissions, anti-poverty campaigners have warned.

The Geneva summit involving 22 countries including the US, Mexico, Australia and the 28 EU member states, aim to create a “level playing field”, with the possible consequence that fracking companies could dispute subsidies for solar or wind power."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 04, 2015, 07:48:10 PM
The linked article discusses the 11 countries that have not submitted INDC's to CoP21:

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/4969171004634cdcae912051bd01287f/11-countries-havent-made-pledges-climate-deal (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/4969171004634cdcae912051bd01287f/11-countries-havent-made-pledges-climate-deal)

Extract: "Only 11 countries haven't submitted pledges for the envisioned agreement, including conflict-ridden Syria, reclusive North Korea and socialist Latin American countries who say it's up to the West to clean up the world's carbon pollution."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 04, 2015, 09:20:27 PM
The World’s Richest People Also Emit The Most Carbon
On Wednesday, British charity Oxfam released a study that found the richest 10 percent of people produce half of the planet’s individual-consumption-based fossil fuel emissions, while the poorest 50 percent — about 3.5 billion people — contribute only 10 percent. Yet those same 3.5 billion people are “living overwhelmingly in the countries most vulnerable to climate change,” according to the report. According to the data used by the report, individual consumption — as opposed to consumption by governments and international transport — makes up 64 percent of worldwide climate emissions.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/12/03/3727515/climate-change-economic-inequality-study/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/12/03/3727515/climate-change-economic-inequality-study/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 04, 2015, 09:50:26 PM
The Lawyers Who Trekked to Paris for Climate Change Talks
Lawyers said that as political consensus around the need to combat climate change has strengthened, the business community is transitioning from a defensive to an opportunistic mindset.

“Until recently private sector involvement with COPs has focused on, ‘How might this damage my business?’ and ‘How can I make money out of the carbon markets?'” said London-based Tim Baines, Of Counsel at Norton Rose Fulbright who is attending the conference.

“This now appears to be changing dramatically, with a great deal of interest and enthusiasm about renewables in particular, how they can be rolled out and how they can best be financed,” Baines said.

Aside from new opportunities, the business community has also grown tired of the legal uncertainty created by the international community’s drawn-out debate over climate change, according to Saines.

“The business community likes certainty,” he said. “We’re moving towards a low carbon economy in all corners of the global economy. Doing that with clarity will be helpful to businesses around the world.”

Bacchus said the key difference in this year’s COP, and the reason so many are optimistic, is a change in approach: While past agreements at Kyoto and Copenhagen have imposed “top-down” targets for emissions reductions, which put caps on the amount of carbon emissions produced by each country, countries are now asked to make reduction “pledges.”

According to Bacchus, there is no official compliance mechanism: the negotiations at COP 21 are about how to “promote transparency, monitoring, reporting, verification, and other ways of making certain that we know what countries have promised they will do.”

“Politically, we’ve reached a decision,” Bacchus said. “We’re not going to be able to come together as a world and agree that every country should cut their emissions by 5 percent next Tuesday, and others by 10 percent by next Wednesday. We’re not going to have that kind of top-down global agreement.”

“They’re trying to create long term enduring agreement that can be a bit flexible with need to revisit targets,” Saines said. “It’s all bottom-up. There’s a new paradigm being forged here.”
https://bol.bna.com/the-lawyers-who-trekked-to-paris-for-climate-change-talks/
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 05, 2015, 01:47:49 AM
World Leaders Met to Save the Planet and the Only Full Public Record Is This Google Doc
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/12/04/follow_the_paris_cop21_climate_talks_live_via_google_docs.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/12/04/follow_the_paris_cop21_climate_talks_live_via_google_docs.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 05, 2015, 02:01:59 AM
See the link for New Republic's report card on big issues at the conference.
Here’s our progress report on COP21. Blue bars indicate progress toward the goals, compared to yesterday, red bars indicate backward momentum, and gray bars indicate no change....
https://newrepublic.com/article/125128/frantic-scramble-make-headway-paris
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 05, 2015, 04:40:18 AM
Climate Talks Watch: Prospects of a Deal Deteriorate

http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-COP21-deal-watch/ (http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-COP21-deal-watch/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 05, 2015, 06:19:40 AM
Thanks SATire, your posts have been very helpful.
There's so much nonsense floating around here in Sweden and I'm not judging Germany, just reaching for a better understanding.

I do judge my own country though. Our old nuclear plants should have been closed a long time ago.


Trying to be a bit more COP21 related:
http://www.english.rfi.fr/general/20151203-Nuclear-not-so-much-dirty-word-Cop21-it-can-barely-be-heard (http://www.english.rfi.fr/general/20151203-Nuclear-not-so-much-dirty-word-Cop21-it-can-barely-be-heard)
"For us nuclear is part of the solution, but it’s not available for everybody because of the technical and technological requirements. The initial cost is high. The electricity produced is affordable," says Poncelet. This is not the inclusive message of Cop21.

Cyrille Cormier of NGO Greenpeace France disagrees. He says that compared to renewables, nuclear is far more costly.

"Every megawatt-hour produced by nuclear energy from an EPR reactor costs about 100 euros. The cost of producing the same amount of renewable energy with wind turbines and solar is already less almost everywhere in the world. For example in France, it’s already 70 euros per MW-hour for big solar farms and wind turbines.”


Despite all of the other problems related to todays nuclear plants, time is maybe the most important aspect. Consider how long it has taken Finland to build Olkiluoto 3 (start 2002) and that they now estimate more than three years until production...
http://www.tvo.fi/news/1661 (http://www.tvo.fi/news/1661)
3.12.2015
​It will still be more than three years until regular electricity generation in Olkiluoto 3 plant unit will commence. This schedule estimate is made by the plant supplier Areva-Siemens consortium. The next steps towards commissioning are now more accurate.


Today's nuclear is stone dead and ice cold for mitigation purposes, as I see it. Use the ones we have for as long as we dare...
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 05, 2015, 03:02:36 PM
Thanks SATire, your posts have been very helpful.
There's so much nonsense floating around here in Sweden and I'm not judging Germany, just reaching for a better understanding.

I do judge my own country though. Our old nuclear plants should have been closed a long time ago.


Trying to be a bit more COP21 related:
[url]http://www.english.rfi.fr/general/20151203-Nuclear-not-so-much-dirty-word-Cop21-it-can-barely-be-heard[/url] ([url]http://www.english.rfi.fr/general/20151203-Nuclear-not-so-much-dirty-word-Cop21-it-can-barely-be-heard[/url])
"For us nuclear is part of the solution, but it’s not available for everybody because of the technical and technological requirements. The initial cost is high. The electricity produced is affordable," says Poncelet. This is not the inclusive message of Cop21.

Cyrille Cormier of NGO Greenpeace France disagrees. He says that compared to renewables, nuclear is far more costly.

"Every megawatt-hour produced by nuclear energy from an EPR reactor costs about 100 euros. The cost of producing the same amount of renewable energy with wind turbines and solar is already less almost everywhere in the world. For example in France, it’s already 70 euros per MW-hour for big solar farms and wind turbines.”


Despite all of the other problems related to todays nuclear plants, time is maybe the most important aspect. Consider how long it has taken Finland to build Olkiluoto 3 (start 2002) and that they now estimate more than three years until production...
[url]http://www.tvo.fi/news/1661[/url] ([url]http://www.tvo.fi/news/1661[/url])
3.12.2015
​It will still be more than three years until regular electricity generation in Olkiluoto 3 plant unit will commence. This schedule estimate is made by the plant supplier Areva-Siemens consortium. The next steps towards commissioning are now more accurate.


Today's nuclear is stone dead and ice cold for mitigation purposes, as I see it. Use the ones we have for as long as we dare...


This is mostly due to the fact that renewables penetration is still fairly low and the cost of regulation on nuclear is very high. At higher renewables penetration, storage costs invariably come into play, which will rapidly increase the cost. Storage isn't cheap and it's virtually certain -- math-wise -- that trying to eliminate nuclear at the same time as coal and gas for electric generation will result in failing to meet CO2 targets.

Cormier is being pie-in-the-sky and a bit disingenuous by leaving out storage costs and making those kinds of statements about cost competitiveness with nuclear.

Risk-weighting CO2 against nuclear needs to be a valid discussion. I have yet to see a realistic proposal that gets us where we need to be fast enough and not include some sort of nuclear backstop until we can get the storage issue solved.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 05, 2015, 03:12:06 PM
Climate Talks Watch: Prospects of a Deal Improve

http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-COP21-deal-watch/ (http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-COP21-deal-watch/)

Prospects improved on Friday after the UN published two draft agreements: one capturing the results of negotiations, and a shorter one containing "bridging proposals" designed to narrow gaps and trim fat from the deal. With envoys prepared to look at the refined document, optimism rose that a more manageable set of outstanding issues will be forwarded to ministers next week.

"What caught my eye?" said Richard Black, director of the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit in London. "That’ll be negotiators doing what they’re supposed to. As never spotted at Copenhagen," he said, referring to the last, failed attempt to forge a global deal in 2009.

Talks continue in Paris today before a break tomorrow.


Edit: After looking at the draft text -- holy crap with the brackets. Agree with the sentiment of the Bloomberg article not to raise this into the "green". Getting the bridging proposals was a good thing, but we'll need a hurculean effort to get this agreement to truly mean something next week. Too many "outs" left in the brackets. Otherwise, we're going to be left with something only slightly better than CoP15.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 05, 2015, 05:03:02 PM
Edit: After looking at the draft text -- holy crap with the brackets. Agree with the sentiment of the Bloomberg article not to raise this into the "green". Getting the bridging proposals was a good thing, but we'll need a hurculean effort to get this agreement to truly mean something next week. Too many "outs" left in the brackets. Otherwise, we're going to be left with something only slightly better than CoP15.



For those who want to see a copy of the draft (bracketed) agreement, see the following link(s):

http://unfccc.int/meetings/paris_nov_2015/session/9126.php (http://unfccc.int/meetings/paris_nov_2015/session/9126.php)
&
http://unfccc.int/files/bodies/awg/application/pdf/draft_paris_outcome_rev_5dec15.pdf (http://unfccc.int/files/bodies/awg/application/pdf/draft_paris_outcome_rev_5dec15.pdf)

See also:
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/05/world/global-climate-change-draft-agreement/ (http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/05/world/global-climate-change-draft-agreement/)

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 05, 2015, 07:44:55 PM
Paris climate talks: Democratic senators say they 'will not back down'
Group of 10 lawmakers pledge to defend president’s environmental agenda in Congress, citing ‘promise from the American people to the world’
Democratic senators staged a show of force at the Paris climate meeting on Saturday, pledging they “had Barack Obama’s back” and would defend his agenda in a Republican-controlled Congress.

The appearance by 10 Democratic senators, days after Congress voted to repeal new power plant rules, was intended to demonstrate solid political support for Obama’s climate plan – despite Republican claims to the contrary.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/05/paris-climate-change-talks-democratic-senators-obama-cop-21 (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/05/paris-climate-change-talks-democratic-senators-obama-cop-21)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 05, 2015, 07:54:29 PM
As tensions mount between developed & developing states, it will be interesting to see what actually gets agreed to as we near the deadline:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/05/paris-climate-summit-developing-countries-angry-financial-commitments (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/05/paris-climate-summit-developing-countries-angry-financial-commitments)

Extract: "Wealthy nations have come under attack from developing countries over proposed financial commitments designed to help them deal with the effects of global warming."

See also:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/12/04/scientist-this-is-what-doesnt-make-sense-about-the-paris-climate-debate/?postshare=4951449257648898&tid=ss_tw (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/12/04/scientist-this-is-what-doesnt-make-sense-about-the-paris-climate-debate/?postshare=4951449257648898&tid=ss_tw)

Extract: "As we get deeper into the Paris climate negotiations, activists are poring over confusing texts full of noncommittal brackets. Upon this, it seems, does the fate of the planet depend.
We don’t know yet which brackets will come off, but at least we’re getting a good sense of the different camps in the negotiations – the developed countries like the U.S., major developing nations (India, China, and so on), highly vulnerable countries including small island states, and so on."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 05, 2015, 09:10:54 PM
Click on a dot for details.

@UNFCCC: Pleased to present new interactive website displaying climate funding
announcements: https://t.co/Bzfk88jAuA (https://t.co/Bzfk88jAuA) #COP21
https://t.co/umG0yUP0Xk (https://t.co/umG0yUP0Xk)

https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/673193430638460928 (https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/673193430638460928)

http://climatefundingsnapshot.com/ (http://climatefundingsnapshot.com/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Clare on December 05, 2015, 09:13:19 PM
Our PM was there, NZ even got a Fossil Award, again.
 :(
Cartoon: New Zealand's PM John Key's contribution to gases discussion
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 06, 2015, 02:10:28 PM
Many thorny details are now being worked on by foreign ministers and their counterparts:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/climate/2015-paris-climate-talks/climate-talks-split-into-groups-to-tackle-thorny-issues (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/climate/2015-paris-climate-talks/climate-talks-split-into-groups-to-tackle-thorny-issues)

Extract (from Dec. 6 2015): "On Saturday night, the negotiators for the delegations at the climate talks here formally handed over the working draft of the climate change accord to the French foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, who is serving as the president of the conference.

Mr. Fabius will now shepherd that 21-page text — which remains rife with major unresolved questions — through high-level meetings with his ministerial counterparts from around the world, who begin arriving in Paris today."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 06, 2015, 06:23:51 PM
Eight-minute video.

Call to Earth - A Message from the World's Astronauts to COP21
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NN1eSMXI_6Y
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 06, 2015, 07:28:25 PM
What Paris Talks Have Accomplished So Far
By Michael Bloomberg
The two-week United Nations conference on climate change is halfway over, and no matter what else happens, it has already been a clear-cut success in two critical areas.

As important as a global accord is, the most influential actors on climate change have been cities and businesses, and leaders in both groups made it clear that they will not wait for an agreement that, if it comes together, won’t even take full effect until 2020.

Climate Change

Mayors and officials representing more than 500 cities organized and attended their own summit in Paris (which Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo and I co-hosted). It was the first time local leaders had ever gathered in such numbers during a UN climate-change conference. They came not only to ensure that their voices were heard by heads of state, but also to express their determination to act on their own, and to learn from one another and share best practices.

Cities account for about 70 percent of global greenhouse-gas emissions, and while some heads of state have been arguing over which countries should do more, cities recognize that reducing their emissions is in their own best interest. After all, when cities cut their emissions, they help their residents live longer, healthier lives. When they improve the energy efficiency of their buildings, they save their taxpayers money. When they invest in modern low-carbon infrastructure, they raise their residents’ standard of living. Taken together, these actions make cities more attractive to businesses and investors. Even if climate change were not a concern, reducing emissions would be smart policy.

City leaders rarely need to be convinced of the benefits of climate-related actions, and in Paris, they committed to doing more. By Saturday, more than 400 cities had signed the Compact of Mayors, which requires them to set bold climate goals, adopt a common measurement system for emissions, and publicly report their progress. If so many cities can agree to these three actions, why not nations?

The Compact of Mayors is the best insurance we have against backsliding by central governments, and it’s the best hope we have -- along with technological innovation -- for accelerating the pace of change in every region of the world over the next five years.
...

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-12-06/what-paris-talks-have-accomplished-so-far (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-12-06/what-paris-talks-have-accomplished-so-far)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 06, 2015, 07:41:11 PM
Financial Industry Faces Daunting Transformation for Climate Deal to Succeed
Business leaders including Michael Bloomberg argue that a carbon-free world can only happen if the global economy leads the move away from fossil fuels.
PARIS—The crux of the Paris climate talks is as simple as this: to ultimately succeed, they must set in motion a swift transformation of the global energy economy away from fossil fuels and toward clean power.

That tipping point presents substantial opportunities, but also ominous risks in the world of finance.

To help the financial industry get prepared, the Financial Stability Board, an international body that coordinates the work of regulators and central banks around the world, is setting up an industry-led task force on the disclosure of climate-related financial risks.

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/04122015/climate-deal-success-paris-economy-financial-clean-energy-michael-bloomberg-al-gore (http://insideclimatenews.org/news/04122015/climate-deal-success-paris-economy-financial-clean-energy-michael-bloomberg-al-gore)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 07, 2015, 12:45:58 AM
The Washington Post has a good write-up on how Obama is keeping the Paris agreement out of Congressional hands.

Trick or treaty? The legal question hanging over the Paris climate change conference
If a group of senators gets its way, any commitments President Obama makes at the Paris climate summit will be put to a congressional test.

But first, the mainly Republican lawmakers must prove that the product of the Paris meeting is effectively a treaty – and that is a legal hurdle they may not be able to clear.

World leaders are gathering in Paris starting Monday to attempt to seal an international deal to curb greenhouse gas emissions and slow climate change. If given the opportunity, the Republican-led Senate would almost undoubtedly reject such a deal.

President Obama doesn’t plan to give it the chance. Whatever agreement emerges from Paris, he has no intention of submitting it to the Senate for ratification as a treaty. The administration argues that any agreement does not bind the United States to a course of action. Moreover, it says the Clean Air Act and the United Nations Framework on Climate Change signed by former President George H.W. Bush already give Obama the authority he needs to carry out climate commitments.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/11/30/trick-or-treaty-the-legal-question-hanging-over-the-paris-climate-change-conference/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/11/30/trick-or-treaty-the-legal-question-hanging-over-the-paris-climate-change-conference/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 07, 2015, 09:55:36 AM
Legally binding, but no penalties besides "name & shame":

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/climate-talks-shift-binding-targets-shame-35618061 (http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/climate-talks-shift-binding-targets-shame-35618061)

Extract: "It's clear at this point that even if the international climate accord being negotiated in suburban Paris becomes legally binding, it won't include punitive measures like trade sanctions or embargoes on straggler countries that fail to meet their commitments.

The only penalty for falling short on efforts to fight global warming would be failing in front of the whole world to achieve their goals."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 07, 2015, 10:11:06 AM
Thanks SATire, your posts have been very helpful.
There's so much nonsense floating around here in Sweden and I'm not judging Germany, just reaching for a better understanding.

I do judge my own country though. Our old nuclear plants should have been closed a long time ago.


Trying to be a bit more COP21 related:
[url]http://www.english.rfi.fr/general/20151203-Nuclear-not-so-much-dirty-word-Cop21-it-can-barely-be-heard[/url] ([url]http://www.english.rfi.fr/general/20151203-Nuclear-not-so-much-dirty-word-Cop21-it-can-barely-be-heard[/url])
"For us nuclear is part of the solution, but it’s not available for everybody because of the technical and technological requirements. The initial cost is high. The electricity produced is affordable," says Poncelet. This is not the inclusive message of Cop21.

Cyrille Cormier of NGO Greenpeace France disagrees. He says that compared to renewables, nuclear is far more costly.

"Every megawatt-hour produced by nuclear energy from an EPR reactor costs about 100 euros. The cost of producing the same amount of renewable energy with wind turbines and solar is already less almost everywhere in the world. For example in France, it’s already 70 euros per MW-hour for big solar farms and wind turbines.”


Despite all of the other problems related to todays nuclear plants, time is maybe the most important aspect. Consider how long it has taken Finland to build Olkiluoto 3 (start 2002) and that they now estimate more than three years until production...
[url]http://www.tvo.fi/news/1661[/url] ([url]http://www.tvo.fi/news/1661[/url])
3.12.2015
​It will still be more than three years until regular electricity generation in Olkiluoto 3 plant unit will commence. This schedule estimate is made by the plant supplier Areva-Siemens consortium. The next steps towards commissioning are now more accurate.


Today's nuclear is stone dead and ice cold for mitigation purposes, as I see it. Use the ones we have for as long as we dare...


This is mostly due to the fact that renewables penetration is still fairly low and the cost of regulation on nuclear is very high. At higher renewables penetration, storage costs invariably come into play, which will rapidly increase the cost. Storage isn't cheap and it's virtually certain -- math-wise -- that trying to eliminate nuclear at the same time as coal and gas for electric generation will result in failing to meet CO2 targets.

Cormier is being pie-in-the-sky and a bit disingenuous by leaving out storage costs and making those kinds of statements about cost competitiveness with nuclear.

Risk-weighting CO2 against nuclear needs to be a valid discussion. I have yet to see a realistic proposal that gets us where we need to be fast enough and not include some sort of nuclear backstop until we can get the storage issue solved.


Sorry for the late reply, I've been away for the weekend.
I simply don't know France well enough. But I do know that Sweden has been praised and used by many as a green successful western nation using nuclear. Including James Hansen.

The problem; we don't need nuclear here.

We have two major sources here, hydro and nuclear. We have one plant here that was shut down in 1974, it's still sealed... Back in 1972 we actually planned for 24 nuclear plants. Then something happened in 1979 (you all know what) and we had our referendum in 1980. Our plants are now old but generates about 40% of our electricity, those 40% can be replaced by solar and wind. This was shown in 2013 by professor Lennart Söder at KTH in the following paper.
http://kth.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:657544/FULLTEXT01.pdf (http://kth.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:657544/FULLTEXT01.pdf)
Unfortunately it's in Swedish.

We are also on the move here regarding a smarter grid.
http://www.swedishsmartgrid.se/english/ (http://www.swedishsmartgrid.se/english/)
And as SATire commented above (#376), a European solution is needed as well.

This must also be combined with increased energy efficiency. There are a lot of things we can do better here, we are definately not mitigating when you look at our increasing consumption rates or Vattenfalls emissions abroad, but I'm really glad that we don't need to follow Finland or France.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 07, 2015, 02:07:26 PM
Thirteen million health professions call for climate action in the name of public health.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KGuggxJ5RDg
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 07, 2015, 02:10:35 PM
Fossil of the Day winners, Day 3:  IMO and ICAO
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jaxJDAnVmXs
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 07, 2015, 06:45:43 PM
Big move under way for lowering the target to 1.5C (down from 2C).

Under the current INDC layout -- the median temp increase would be 3.5C (with caveats as already listed in this thread). Under the most optimistic scenario, we still won't reach that 1.5C mark. 2C is getting dangerously tenuous as it is.

Political games.....
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on December 07, 2015, 09:29:03 PM
Am I not calculating correctly or is it our dear scientific community that has a problem ?

2°c ? so we are at 1°c, it does globally increase 0,1°c/year that mean 2°c is in 10 years 2025...
There is absolutely no way we will limit 2°c and even more 1,5°c ...

The real limit is around 0,5°c ... where it seems that the ice start to melt in the Arctic in summer.

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 07, 2015, 10:07:18 PM
Kerry signals U.S. support for ambitious 1.5-degree goal in climate deal
PARIS — The United States is in favor of incorporating an ambitious 1.5-degree Celsius goal into the climate agreement at the ongoing U.N. Climate Summit in Paris, also known as COP21, provided that the language wouldn't replace the previously agreed-upon 2-degree target, Secretary of State John Kerry told Mashable on Monday.

http://mashable.com/2015/12/07/kerry-climate-target-cop21/ (http://mashable.com/2015/12/07/kerry-climate-target-cop21/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 07, 2015, 10:11:41 PM
Am I not calculating correctly or is it our dear scientific community that has a problem ?

2°c ? so we are at 1°c, it does globally increase 0,1°c/year that mean 2°c is in 10 years 2025...
There is absolutely no way we will limit 2°c and even more 1,5°c ...

The real limit is around 0,5°c ... where it seems that the ice start to melt in the Arctic in summer.

I think they mean they are in favor of a "faster slowing" of emissions, along with increases in carbon-capture research, development, and action.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on December 07, 2015, 10:25:10 PM
I think I understood what you did, except that there is a few billion people that were trusting the scientists (and politicians) to help them, save them. But they won't, even with carbone capture and they will have a hard time to define a physical threshold limit because there is no "safe" threshold limit, the one that does make sense is related to the Arctic but they do not seem to think that way... (yet)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 07, 2015, 10:25:39 PM
If the agreement doesn't have teeth, the headline number is meaningless. Hell, let's slap 1C on there. I mean, we want that too, right?

It's just political posturing and false appeasement to the island nations thusfar.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on December 07, 2015, 10:30:28 PM
agree
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 07, 2015, 11:04:34 PM
Am I not calculating correctly or is it our dear scientific community that has a problem ?

2°c ? so we are at 1°c, it does globally increase 0,1°c/year that mean 2°c is in 10 years 2025...
There is absolutely no way we will limit 2°c and even more 1,5°c ...

The real limit is around 0,5°c ... where it seems that the ice start to melt in the Arctic in summer.

With so many different scales I am not sure what we are reporting sometimes, but in Reply #641 of the "Global Surface Air Temperatures" thread James Lovejoy stated:

"Preliminary results through December 14, (Nick Stokes through Dec 4, and Karsten Haustein for forecasts through December 14), suggest that December will blow the October Anomalies away.   Anomalies over 0.7C, suggesting GISS anomalies of 1.2-1.3C.

That need to be taken with two big cautions however.  (1)  This is just the 1st 1/2 (approx) of December, and (2) most of it is from forecasts, the forecasts can give an idea, but things change.

Even so, I'll add another 9 to the chances of 2015 taking the record for warmest year since global records were kept to 99.99%."

So, if we use the GISS anomalies as a guide maybe we are further down the rabbit hole than most people think.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: crandles on December 07, 2015, 11:32:43 PM
Am I not calculating correctly or is it our dear scientific community that has a problem ?

2°c ? so we are at 1°c, it does globally increase 0,1°c/year that mean 2°c is in 10 years 2025...
There is absolutely no way we will limit 2°c and even more 1,5°c ...

The real limit is around 0,5°c ... where it seems that the ice start to melt in the Arctic in summer.

More like 0,1°C to 0.17°C per decade not year. But we are committed to at least 0.5°C, so it it hard to believe we are not already committed to 1.5°C. Actually reaching  1.5°C or 2°C is much further off than your message calculation seems to indicate. Committment probably matters more.


Strictly being committed to 1.5°C does not mean we will reach 1.5°C - if we learn to do substantial negative emissions very soon after we reach the committed to 1.5°C then we wouldn't actually reach 1.5°C. However that also seems such a hopelessly pie in the sky belief that perhaps the meaning of your message is still appropriate. We certainly haven't got until 2115 or even 2065.



Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on December 08, 2015, 12:14:44 AM
0,1°c per decade... really just from memory last year was at 0,85°C ? that mean 0,15°c/year... we have to expect an increase in the speed and acceleration. Ok I know there is El Nino but... well we will see, you understand my point.

If you want to debate the cop, you can try here : http://app.opencop.org/ (http://app.opencop.org/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 08, 2015, 12:47:54 AM
Longer-term trend is 0.2C/decade. There's certainly support for 0.3-0.4C/decade with the way emissions are going and with natural variability now releasing the brakes.

But that might partially miss the point. I mean, nobody lives in the Southern Ocean. I'm personally more interested in N. Hem. temps -- specifically N. Hem. land temps. Those have been going up considerably faster. Those have averaged +1.25C above 1951-1980 temps (>1.75C above preindustrial) so far this year.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 08, 2015, 01:08:11 AM
If (per the linked article) the CoP21 negotiators are assuming that CO₂ emissions in 2015 declined by 0.6 percent then why is the attached 6-month Keeling Curve well above the BAU scenario?  Either emissions are not actually lower than BAU, or worse, climate sensitivity is higher than the experts expect:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/climate/2015-paris-climate-talks/paris-climate-talks-highlights-from-the-start-of-2nd-week (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/climate/2015-paris-climate-talks/paris-climate-talks-highlights-from-the-start-of-2nd-week)

Extract: "The “high-level segment” of the Paris climate talks began on Monday, and new data was released that puts possible changes in context.
•   The Global Carbon Project, a collaboration that studies emissions of greenhouse gases, released new data on Monday indicating only a slight rise in 2014 and a projected decline in 2015. The decline of 0.6 percent for this year, should it come to pass, would come at a time when the global economy is growing. That’s unusual, reports Justin Gillis and Chris Buckley."

See also:
http://www.npr.org/2015/12/07/458543432/small-surprising-dip-in-worlds-carbon-emissions-traced-to-china (http://www.npr.org/2015/12/07/458543432/small-surprising-dip-in-worlds-carbon-emissions-traced-to-china)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: crandles on December 08, 2015, 01:09:46 AM
You asked "Am I not calculating correctly"?
Well yes you certainly don't do trend calculations by picking two adjacent years with different El Nino conditions.

I thought your question should be answered but that shouldn't just be by pointing out one major error which might leave impression what you were saying was flawed when I don't think it is. There were two major errors that acted in opposite directions. Sorry if this complicates matters but if you ask a question like "Am I not calculating correctly" perhaps getting an answer shouldn't be a surprise?

What 'we will see', I am not very sure, but a five fold or more increase in the trend rate of warming any time soon and sustained over a decade or more would be a big surprise. A small acceleration in trend seems to have been much anticipated over the last 20? years and hasn't so far arrived. That certainly doesn't guarantee we won't get a small acceleration but I don't see anything arguing for a big acceleration.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: crandles on December 08, 2015, 01:13:08 AM
If (per the linked article) the CoP21 negotiators are assuming that CO₂ emissions in 2015 declined by 0.6 percent then why is the attached 6-month Keeling Curve well above the BAU scenario?  Either emissions are not actually lower than BAU, or worse, climate sensitivity is higher than the experts expect:


Or maybe natural emissions are much higher as a result of El Nino while antho emissions have done as they said?

One years' CO2 data (or even any number of years CO2 data) does not have implications for climate sensitivity estimates. Edit: Maybe several  years CO2 data may have relevance for carbon cycle sensitivity is what you were trying to say there?
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 08, 2015, 01:19:17 AM
Am I not calculating correctly or is it our dear scientific community that has a problem ?

2°c ? so we are at 1°c, it does globally increase 0,1°c/year that mean 2°c is in 10 years 2025...
There is absolutely no way we will limit 2°c and even more 1,5°c ...

The real limit is around 0,5°c ... where it seems that the ice start to melt in the Arctic in summer.

More like 0,1°C to 0.17°C per decade not year. But we are committed to at least 0.5°C, so it it hard to believe we are not already committed to 1.5°C. Actually reaching  1.5°C or 2°C is much further off than your message calculation seems to indicate. Committment probably matters more.


Strictly being committed to 1.5°C does not mean we will reach 1.5°C - if we learn to do substantial negative emissions very soon after we reach the committed to 1.5°C then we wouldn't actually reach 1.5°C. However that also seems such a hopelessly pie in the sky belief that perhaps the meaning of your message is still appropriate. We certainly haven't got until 2115 or even 2065.

Per the attached NASA data at the end of Oct 2015 the GIS Temp LOTI v3 at 12m was already at 1.063C above pre-industrial and it looks like both November & December 2015 will be well above that value.  So since global warming is non-linear who says that the current rate is increase is following the old trend line?
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: crandles on December 08, 2015, 01:59:45 AM
Longer-term trend is 0.2C/decade. There's certainly support for 0.3-0.4C/decade with the way emissions are going and with natural variability now releasing the brakes.


Wouldn't particularly want to argue between 0.17C/decade I mentioned and your 'longer-term trend is 0.2C/ decade'. I am sure there are projections for 0.3-0.4C/decade on BAU scenarios not far in the future. e.g.
http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/fig9-14.htm (http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/fig9-14.htm)
Taking the top of several models all SRES range gives that sort of rate for 2000 to 2020, but that is using the uncertainty range to the max. While the highest possible rate of rise could be as high as 0.4C/decade, over the next couple of decades I don't think our best estimate of the expected rate would be as high as 0.35C/decade.

>"with the way emissions are going"
Well that is a little vague, eg anthro or anthro + natural, also you could be referring to recent announcement that emissions are flat or have fallen for last year. The impression is you are asserting a strong rise. I suppose I have no real complaint as it is only asserting what has actually happened and recent fall is not expected to continue.

>"with natural variability now releasing the brakes"
I certainly wouldn't deny this is a likely future development. However, is there evidence that the airborne fraction has actually started to change upward? Doesn't the way you have expressed this give the impression it has definitely already started rather than a position of being a likely future development?

(Sorry if I am grumpy and complaining. Truth rather than over doing the alarm seems a sensible precaution against alarmism. If we don't challenge what we think we know, how do we know whether we are deluding ourselves in either direction?)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: crandles on December 08, 2015, 02:05:34 AM

Per the attached NASA data at the end of Oct 2015 the GIS Temp LOTI v3 at 12m was already at 1.063C above pre-industrial and it looks like both November & December 2015 will be well above that value.  So since global warming is non-linear who says that the current rate is increase is following the old trend line?

If you are going to look at a short period like a month or two or even a year or two, then I think it essential we adjust out El Nino effects. Do that and the 1.063C is noticeable reduced. With such an adjustment or by using longer term trend to reduce the need for El Nino adjustment, is there any evidence an acceleration has already started?
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 08, 2015, 02:19:55 AM
Not my intention to argue here the science/physical possibilities ;) , just to say it is heartening for the world's biggest emitters to even discuss a 1.5°C target at Paris, as a means of saying they recognize a much stronger effort is needed.

Paris climate talks: biggest polluters back tougher warming target
US, China, Canada and EU among big carbon emitters at UN summit supporting 1.5C target to protect most vulnerable countries such as small island states.
The world’s biggest climate polluters rallied around a stronger target for limiting warming on Monday, saying they were open to the 1.5C goal endorsed by the most vulnerable countries.

In the final push to a climate agreement, the US, Canada, China and the European Union declared they were now on board with demands from African countries to adopt an even more ambitious goal to limit warming.
...
In the last few days, the 1.5C target has become short-hand for reaching a more ambitious agreement that would keep pace with real-time changes already underway on the ground.

“We are working with other countries on some formulation that would include 1.5C,” Todd Stern, the State Department envoy, told a press conference.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/07/paris-climate-talks-biggest-polluters-back-tougher-warming-target (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/07/paris-climate-talks-biggest-polluters-back-tougher-warming-target)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 08, 2015, 02:47:29 AM

Per the attached NASA data at the end of Oct 2015 the GIS Temp LOTI v3 at 12m was already at 1.063C above pre-industrial and it looks like both November & December 2015 will be well above that value.  So since global warming is non-linear who says that the current rate is increase is following the old trend line?


If you are going to look at a short period like a month or two or even a year or two, then I think it essential we adjust out El Nino effects. Do that and the 1.063C is noticeable reduced. With such an adjustment or by using longer term trend to reduce the need for El Nino adjustment, is there any evidence an acceleration has already started?


First, the 1.063C value is the year to date anomaly value through Oct 2015 (& is not a monthly value).

Second, I concur that there is variability and it is difficult to say in a non-stationary situation what is happening with high certainty; which to me is an argument for erring on the side of greater safety rather than on the side of least drama.

Third, regarding evidence that net positive feedback may currently be accelerating:
(a) See the evidence discussed in the: "2015 -The Year of the Feedback?" at:
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1419.0.html (http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1419.0.html)
(b) Per the attached MEI index, our current El Nino is significantly weaker than either the 82-83 or the 97-98 El Nino events; which provides some support to the idea that much of the 1.063C value is due to global warming rather than only to a Super El Nino event.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 08, 2015, 05:37:42 AM
Emissions are flat or has fallen? Have I missed something?
The most recent I read was an estimated range between -1,6% to +0,5%.
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2892.html (http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2892.html)
Paywalled but there are som more info about the uncertainties in the supplementary.
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/extref/nclimate2892-s1.pdf (http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/extref/nclimate2892-s1.pdf)

I'd rather see these drop:
(http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/aggi/aggi.fig2.png)

---
I might be ovely focused on my own country, but that's what I see IRL so please bare with me.
People in general doesn't understand averages or anomalies and definately not on the global scale. That won't convince them to do anything.

Beeing able to harvest fresh potatoes in southern Sweden in December might?
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,179.msg66727.html#msg66727 (http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,179.msg66727.html#msg66727)
That forecast was right. We are running out of colors in our anomalies. It was the same last "winter".
First picture, the anomalies for Sunday.
Second picture, anomalies for 2015 up to yesterday.
Third picture, mean temperature from 35 stations.
(1961-1990)

OT again, sorry. Let's hope they do really well in Paris.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: OrganicSu on December 08, 2015, 06:58:22 AM
I am terrified - I counted the Guardian as an allay and yesterday's article claiming a fall in emissions is disinformation. It is especially hurtful to be released during COP21. It makes it so much harder to discuss using real/important facts. It negates a sense of urgency by giving the impression that things are going in the right direction.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/07/global-emissions-to-fall-for-first-time-during-a-period-of-economic-growth (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/07/global-emissions-to-fall-for-first-time-during-a-period-of-economic-growth)

Cumulative emissions in the air are increasing as per the Keeling curve.
Yearly emissions even with a slight decrease are still on BAU path.
The carbon sinks cannot keep up with these emissions and emitting this year 99.4% of last years emissions is still suicidal.

Imagine you live in a castle and some mad man has been taking away 1000 stones from the walls every year, but this year only takes 994 stones. Do not celebrate that. Do not give the message that the problem is being fixed.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 08, 2015, 08:04:34 AM
OrganicSu, I haven't seen that article but it refers to the same study as I posted above, but with a complimentary share in the article, thanks! I'll save that projection...

Considering all of those deniers who only read headlines, that headline is really bad.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on December 08, 2015, 10:39:49 AM
Sir David King ICE ARC COP21 Paris
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqMsOxXyTX4&feature=share (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqMsOxXyTX4&feature=share)

Chief Scientific Advisor to the UK Government, Sir David King, presents at COP21 as part of the EU funded ICE, Climate, Economics - Arctic Research on Change presentation at the EU Pavilion at COP21 in Paris.

The sea level that is drawn does not mach my graphs like these ones :
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 08, 2015, 12:22:28 PM
Laurent, I just had a quick browse through that video, but at least the SLR graph in the middle comes from Levermann 2013. It has no timescale, just temperature correlated to SLR.
http://www.pnas.org/content/110/34/13745.full.pdf (http://www.pnas.org/content/110/34/13745.full.pdf)
Fig 1E attached.
Paleo-Evidence
To compare the model results with past sea-level anomalies for
the temperature range up to 4 °C, we focus on three previous periods for which the geological record provides reasonable constraints on warmer climates and higher sea levels than preindustrial: the middle Pliocene, marine isotope stage 11, and the LIG (Fig. 1E).
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 08, 2015, 06:16:52 PM
OrganicSu, I haven't seen that article but it refers to the same study as I posted above, but with a complimentary share in the article, thanks! I'll save that projection...

Considering all of those deniers who only read headlines, that headline is really bad.

Love the non-mention of upward revisions in the previous two years (1.1% to 1.7% in 2013 and 0.0 to 0.6% in 2014) and the massive (13%!) uncertainty in Chinese emissions -- also note massive consumption drop to 2-3%/a over the last year. Decoupling my ass.


Seriously, are people willing to accept this stuff at face value even after multiple massive upward revisions in Chinese emissions over the past few years (including the recent one)?

Slowing I can buy -- after all, there was a period of outright contraction in industrial output earlier this year. But the claims of a huge change in decarbonization and decoupling are extremely premature -- if not outright farcical, just like the 1.5C "target" being thrown around right now. We'll only know a few years from now.

In the meantime, Mauna Loa is a better gauge after ENSO adjustment.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 08, 2015, 07:47:00 PM
Maybe they are just trying to be positive.
But maintaining a positive attitude, while beeing lazy, will fail. It doesn't matter if you want to be successful in marathon, or be successful in mitigation.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 08, 2015, 08:42:29 PM
New coal: Is there a market?
Real-world market conditions make it unlikely that plans to expand the use of coal around the world will come to full fruition, according to several reports presented at the UN climate summit in Paris (COP21).

While the potential of new coal investments to take the world well past 2C of global warming has been noted at the summit, the real world experience of coal’s decreasing viability has been less well discussed.
...
The context for decisions about coal are changing. Two coal plants are shelved or cancelled for every one plant built worldwide, according to a forensic bottom-up analysis by specialists CoalSwarm, which examined every plant around the world planned, permitted, built or cancelled from 2010 to the present day. In India, the figure jumps to six shelved or cancelled for every one built.

http://eciu.net/press-releases/2015/new-coal-is-there-a-market (http://eciu.net/press-releases/2015/new-coal-is-there-a-market)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 09, 2015, 01:26:17 AM
Once a fixture, climate sceptics say they are being stifled in Paris
On Monday night, Morano showed his new film, "Climate Hustle" in a Paris cinema, featuring climate-sceptic scientists. Police cordoned off the road leading to the venue as guests lined up and a demonstrator hung a banner on a nearby gate reading "Welcome Heartland Institute Scum".

http://www.trust.org/item/20151208061756-fz5v9/ (http://www.trust.org/item/20151208061756-fz5v9/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 09, 2015, 03:15:52 PM
Per the linked article, the rich countries (the EU & USA) are still pressuring the developing countries to shoulder equal climate change responsibility, while key developing countries are pushing back (to require developed countries to accept responsibility for their past free emissions upon which they built their wealth):

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/developing-world-spurning-key-us-climate-demand-19780 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/developing-world-spurning-key-us-climate-demand-19780)

Extract: "Under the U.S.-backed vision for a new approach to global climate diplomacy, which gained strong traction in the leadup to the Paris talks, all countries would contribute to the fight against climate change, with wealthier countries helping poorer ones reduce their impacts.
China, India, Brazil and South Africa generally agree that they must address climate pollution, but they want clear distinctions between nations based on wealth to remain in any climate agreement, which could limit their accountability."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 09, 2015, 04:17:00 PM
The following is an update on CoP21.  However, people should realize that if recognizes a goal of 1.5C, this will contribute to more future litigation if/when we blow past this goal:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/12/09/world/europe/ap-climate-countdown-the-latest.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/12/09/world/europe/ap-climate-countdown-the-latest.html?_r=0)

Extract: "The talks in Paris are scheduled to end in two days. The draft document released by U.N. climate agency Wednesday is 29 pages, down from a 48-page version released Saturday.
It does not resolve the question of the long-term goal of the accord — whether it is to remove carbon emissions from the economy altogether, or just reduce them.
Nor does it resolve whether governments are aiming at reducing overall global temperatures by 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial times or closer to 2 degrees.
There are about 100 places where there are decisions still to be made — either multiple options in brackets, or blank spaces."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 09, 2015, 05:09:05 PM
Climate coalition breaks cover in Paris to push for binding and ambitious deal
A coalition representing more than 100 countries, formed in secrecy six months ago, has emerged at key UN talks in Paris to push for a legally binding global and ambitious deal on climate change.

The “high ambition coalition” speaks for the majority of the 195 countries at the crunch conference and consists of 79 African, Caribbean and Pacific countries, the US and all of EU member states. But notable exceptions include major developing countries such as China and India.

The group is focusing on at least four key issues. They want an agreement at Paris to be legally binding; to set a clear long-term goal on global warming that is in line with scientific advice; to introduce a mechanism for reviewing countries’ emissions commitments every five years; and create a unified system for tracking countries’ progress on meeting their carbon goals.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/08/coalition-paris-push-for-binding-ambitious-climate-change-deal (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/08/coalition-paris-push-for-binding-ambitious-climate-change-deal)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 09, 2015, 06:34:25 PM
New text:

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/da01.pdf (http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/da01.pdf)

Definitely not what I would call "ambitious".
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 09, 2015, 08:06:08 PM
Saudi Arabia accused of trying to wreck Paris climate deal
One of the world’s largest oil producers is getting in the way of a deal and making implausible objections, say delegates and campaigners.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/08/saudi-arabia-accused-of-trying-to-wreck-the-paris-climate-deal (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/08/saudi-arabia-accused-of-trying-to-wreck-the-paris-climate-deal)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: werther on December 09, 2015, 08:34:46 PM
“Peaking soon, max 95% of 2010 emissions level… “    Man, they haven’t got an idea. If this represents what’s politically/socially possible, it will fail. This unimposed commitment won’t even prohibit CO2 levels to pass 450 ppm. Nor will it counter the baked-in lagged temperature response.

Because Werther’s opinion is that we should pay careful attention to ECS in a sense of risk.

Who will gamble with our unprecedented dumping of the fossil energy condensate into the troposphere? Most of us will, our illusionary individuality projects an ‘après moi la déluge’-attitude.

Thus, in the realm of general providence, our fate is quite obvious. Leaving us the personal providence as a haven. May we be strong and generous while weathering the storm.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 09, 2015, 09:51:37 PM
Love this little gem:

Hey guys, let's take a five year holiday before the agreement comes into effect:

This Agreement shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date on which at least [50][60]
Parties to the Convention have  deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession [, but not earlier
than 1 January 2020].] 
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 10, 2015, 01:30:44 AM
India’s New Paris Pledge: We’ll Cut Back On Coal If We Get Help With Renewables Now
Until now, India’s position at the Paris climate talks had been that it will massively increase coal production and use without limit. As a result, the country has not been willing to embrace a peak in carbon pollution, even though that will ultimately be crucial if India and the world are going to avoid simultaneous, catastrophic impacts.

But now, senior Indian negotiator Ajay Mathur “says his country will cut back its use of coal, if sufficient cash for renewables emerges from a Paris deal,” the BBC has reported.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/12/09/3728782/india-paris-coal-renewables/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/12/09/3728782/india-paris-coal-renewables/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 10, 2015, 04:20:11 AM
Love this little gem:

Hey guys, let's take a five year holiday before the agreement comes into effect:

This Agreement shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date on which at least [50][60]
Parties to the Convention have  deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession [, but not earlier
than 1 January 2020].]


 ::)
Let's rest into shape.

Do I have to read the rest of that pdf? I'm sleepy.

Edit; Did browse through it but this article might be more interesting.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35051487 (http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35051487)
Observers were unsure as to how the parties would react to the new text.

"This is the first time the French fingerprints will be on the process, and that's a risky business," said Dr Diarmuid Torney from Dublin City University, who is an observer at these talks.

"We saw [this] earlier this year at a previous climate meeting in Bonn when the co-chairs tried to come up with a shorter text and the response from parties was to re-insert all their favourite parts back into the text. There could be fireworks."

Mr Fabius said that the remaining difficulties centred on differentiation, finance and the level of ambition.

Isn't it always?

Cop-Outs and Denial: COP21
http://youtu.be/lbXmSs9mPkQ (http://youtu.be/lbXmSs9mPkQ)
we must be smart enough to make a distinction between access to power and influence over power

you assholes have been here in twenty years saying the same thing
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 10, 2015, 03:57:05 PM
Folks, the Paris document was, from the beginning, to be agreed to in 2015 and implemented starting in 2020.  This is not a new development.  Countries can't change overnight! -- though of course change is happening already.  :)

http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/international/negotiations/future/index_en.htm (http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/international/negotiations/future/index_en.htm)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 10, 2015, 06:06:19 PM
Sigmentnow, your'e correct. And we do see a course change.
But too late in my opinion, I don't know how many times I've said that we should have started ten years ago, nowadays I must learn to say fifteen years ago.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 10, 2015, 07:13:10 PM
It's year 2100. Are there crocodiles in Sweden?

http://sverigesradio.se/sida/avsnitt/647008?programid=2054 (http://sverigesradio.se/sida/avsnitt/647008?programid=2054)

As world leaders meet in Paris to find a way to keep climate change under control, we wind the clock forward...

To help us imagine how the area around Stockholm City Hall - and beyond, might look 85 years from now, we take a stroll with Dr. Henrik Carlsen, a senior research fellow at Stockholm Environment Institute.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 10, 2015, 07:21:48 PM
Folks, the Paris document was, from the beginning, to be agreed to in 2015 and implemented starting in 2020.  This is not a new development.  Countries can't change overnight! -- though of course change is happening already.  :)

[url]http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/international/negotiations/future/index_en.htm[/url] ([url]http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/international/negotiations/future/index_en.htm[/url])


Agreed to by who? The EU and US? I guarantee none of the developing countries wanted to sign on to something like that. In fact, the vast majority have been arguing against this "5 year holiday" (not my wording).

Fact of the matter is: There is no ambition to meet 2C. Certainly not 1.5C. To even leave it in there and have developed countries "throw in their support" seems more like a repository for feels. We can't get developed countries to even get close to matching their voluntary commitments from 2009 wrt finance. Yet all I hear is "This time it's different."

We've been waiting since 1992 for this approach to deliver meaningful results. It hasn't. It's gotten us 23 years of failure. End of story.

Totally agree with Hansen on this meeting so far.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 10, 2015, 07:51:17 PM
Folks, the Paris document was, from the beginning, to be agreed to in 2015 and implemented starting in 2020.  This is not a new development.  Countries can't change overnight! -- though of course change is happening already.  :)

[url]http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/international/negotiations/future/index_en.htm[/url] ([url]http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/international/negotiations/future/index_en.htm[/url])


Agreed to by who? The EU and US? I guarantee none of the developing countries wanted to sign on to something like that. In fact, the vast majority have been arguing against this "5 year holiday" (not my wording).
...


Agreed to by all countries who signed the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol -- numbering 195 and 192, respectively.

In 1992, countries joined an international treaty, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, to cooperatively consider what they could do to limit average global temperature increases and the resulting climate change, and to cope with whatever impacts were, by then, inevitable.

By 1995, countries realized that emission reductions provisions in the Convention were inadequate. They launched negotiations to strengthen the global response to climate change, and, two years later, adopted the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol legally binds developed countries to emission reduction targets. The Protocol’s first commitment period started in 2008 and ended in 2012. The second commitment period began on 1 January 2013 and will end in 2020.
[url]http://unfccc.int/essential_background/items/6031.php[/url] ([url]http://unfccc.int/essential_background/items/6031.php[/url])


The United Nations Climate Change Conference, Durban 2011, delivered a breakthrough on the international community's response to climate change. In the second largest meeting of its kind, the negotiations advanced, in a balanced fashion, the implementation of the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, the Bali Action Plan, and the Cancun Agreements. The outcomes included a decision by Parties to adopt a universal legal agreement on climate change as soon as possible, and no later than 2015. The President of COP17/CMP7 Maite Nkoana-Mashabane said: "What we have achieved in Durban will play a central role in saving tomorrow, today."
[url]http://unfccc.int/meetings/durban_nov_2011/meeting/6245.php[/url] ([url]http://unfccc.int/meetings/durban_nov_2011/meeting/6245.php[/url])


The UN Climate Change Conference in Durban was a turning point in the climate change negotiations. In Durban, governments clearly recognized the need to draw up the blueprint for a fresh universal, legal agreement to deal with climate change beyond 2020, where all will play their part to the best of their ability and all will be able to reap the benefits of success together.
[url]http://unfccc.int/key_steps/durban_outcomes/items/6825.php.[/url] ([url]http://unfccc.int/key_steps/durban_outcomes/items/6825.php.[/url])

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 10, 2015, 09:19:22 PM
Draft delayed today.
But this came a minute ago.
Differentiation, finance and ambition are still in brackets (disagreement), says Fabius, of new text, which we’re expecting when we finishes talking.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 10, 2015, 09:30:00 PM
Meet The People Trolling The F*** Out Of The Paris Climate Talks
The awards begin each night with Ilic leading the crowd in the “Fossil of the Day anthem” to the tune of the Jurassic Park theme music.
...
Saudi Arabia has dominated the awards so far, but as of Wednesday, the U.S. was in second place.
...
Hmaidan said the awards aren’t just for jokes — in some cases they are actually an effective push for change. He pointed to Belgium, which won a Fossil award earlier in the talks. The award made headlines in Belgium, and over the following days the country became a more productive negotiator, Hmaidan said.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympleii/meet-the-people-trolling-the-fuck-out-of-the-paris-climate-t (http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympleii/meet-the-people-trolling-the-fuck-out-of-the-paris-climate-t)

Fossil of the Day Song Lyrics (in image form)
http://www.climatenetwork.org/image/fossil-day-song-lyrics (http://www.climatenetwork.org/image/fossil-day-song-lyrics)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 10, 2015, 09:43:31 PM
As we have already passed 1,5°C, should we be happy for a political victory in Paris?
Or the positive angle, maybe six years.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 10, 2015, 09:43:49 PM
Paris Climate Talks Are Starting to Resemble a Game of Civilization
Here’s why I think this group has formed: Supporting small island states by literally building them new and taller islands would be much cheaper in the long-run than providing support for the increasingly upwardly mobile major developing countries. Though India in particular occupies the moral middle ground in Paris, the emergence of the High Ambition Coalition has pushed it firmly on the defensive. Other players, like Australia, have been shunted to the sidelines.

The Guardian reports that the High Ambition Coalition has been forming in secret for months now, revealing itself publicly for the first time Wednesday. That may be because, in the latest draft of the Paris negotiating text, it will take only 50 or 60 countries to approve the overall deal. The High Ambition Coalition, by various accounts, may already have more than 90, with new members being added in real time.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/12/10/paris_climate_talks_are_like_a_turn_based_strategy_game.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/12/10/paris_climate_talks_are_like_a_turn_based_strategy_game.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 10, 2015, 09:54:04 PM
Here is the link to the new Paris draft agreement: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/da02.pdf (http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/da02.pdf)
...
Notes with concern that the estimated aggregate greenhouse gas emission levels resulting from the intended nationally determined contributions in 2025 and 2030 do not fall within least-cost 2  ̊C scenarios, and that much greater emission reduction efforts than those associated with the intended nationally determined contributions will be required in the period after 2025 and 2030 in order to hold the temperature rise to below 2  ̊C or 1.5  ̊C above pre-industrial levels;
...
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 10, 2015, 10:03:53 PM
In order to achieve the long-term global temperature goal set in Article 2 of this Agreement, Parties aim to reach the peaking of greenhouse house gas emissions as soon as possible, recognizing that peaking will take longer for developing country Parties, and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter towards reaching greenhouse gas emissions neutrality in the second half of the century on the basis of equity and guided by science in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication.


Blah, blah, blah.

1,5°C is absolutely at the extreme end. Impossibly extreme considering the above.
http://youtu.be/8bqpPAo0Bu4 (http://youtu.be/8bqpPAo0Bu4)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 11, 2015, 12:34:12 AM

Okay, thanks for the additional details there, Sigmet. I stand corrected on that point.

Problem I see here is... Kyoto was an near total failure and there were no binding requirements on the developing world. So, it's still quite literally a "5 year holiday" because we're (at a minimum) settling for 5 additional years of largely failed Kyoto policies. The G77 has been very vocal in calling for the removal of that bracketed phrase from the text.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 11, 2015, 06:31:02 AM
http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-summit-deal-idUKKBN0TT1HI20151210 (http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-summit-deal-idUKKBN0TT1HI20151210)
The EU has asked for that review every five years from the early 2020s. European Climate and Energy Commissioner Miguel Arias Canete said national plans for action should be reviewed every five years "so that when the treaty enters into force in 2021, we are able to raise the level of ambition".

"Without the five-year cycles, the agreement is meaningless," he told a news conference.
 
But China has balked at setting any conditions that would bring external pressure to step up its own measures before 2030.

Gao Feng, one of the Chinese negotiators, noted that Beijing had set out a national plan in June to start reducing its CO2 emissions by 2030. "I cannot say that in the middle, 2025, we would be in a position to change it," he said.

Fabius has been resolute in his desire to get a deal done, pressing delegates to work with only a few hours of rest in fear that delays could produce political drift.

"What is now important is to seek landing zones and compromise," he said, telling delegates they would have two-and-a-half hours to review the draft before returning to work for another all-night session.


A political pyrrhic victory. Let's see how today ends.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 11, 2015, 01:23:01 PM
Ambition of Paris climate talks rises by half a degree
With the unexpected support of the United States and Europe, the agreement, due to be completed within days, seems set to go beyond the current goal of limiting the rise in global temperatures to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6F) above pre-industrial levels.

Instead, the latest draft released late on Thursday, states a new goal to keep the rise "to well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius". It is the first draft that does not offer alternate options for the goal.

http://www.trust.org/item/20151210215936-xmz9f/ (http://www.trust.org/item/20151210215936-xmz9f/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 11, 2015, 04:15:11 PM
Regarding the quote I made yesterday from the draft text.
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1021.msg66973.html#msg66973 (http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1021.msg66973.html#msg66973)
Some comments from BBC's live coverage.

Hans Joachim Shellnhuber:
To have a chance of meeting the 2C [limit on] temperature rise, countries need to set decarbonisation plans for 2050.

The date was removed in yesterdays draft.

Kevin Andersson:
Calling for a peaking of CO2 levels 'as soon as possible' is not scientifically robust. The text is somewhere between dangerous and deadly for vulnerable nations.


Other comments.

Steffen Kallbekken:
CO2 reduction pledges must be reviewed frequently, biennially or every third year. If nations stick to the INDC pledges for 2025-2030 temperature rises will rise by between 2.7 and 3.7 degrees.


Joeri Rogelj:
There is an inconsistency between near-term and long-term ambition. We need robust stocktaking cycles holding nations to account for their CO2 reduction commitments every two to three years. The global budget of CO2 emissions that would restrict temperature rises to 1.5C is already exhausted.


Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 11, 2015, 08:08:40 PM
The six key road blocks at the UN climate talks in Paris
From a 1.5C or 2C limit, to climate aid and the public reporting of emissions, here are the main differences in the draft text.

Here's one:
Future improvements to the deal

Governments at the Paris meeting have come out with lofty ambitions, unlike other climate talks, and there is a sense of momentum towards an agreement. But what about the follow-through? Industrial countries in particular are pushing hard for public reporting of all countries emissions reductions, a so-called “stocktaking”, which would subject climate laggards to public shaming. The US and other countries are pushing for an early stocktaking in 2018. Developing countries are trying to push back the first inventory to 2024. Then there is “ratcheting”. Developed countries are pushing for governments to put forward tougher emissions plans at five-year intervals, in order to take advantage of advances in clean energy technology, and improve the chances of getting to zero emissions in the middle of the century. India and other developing countries want to put off those ratchet meetings to once a decade or so.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/10/the-six-key-road-blocks-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-paris (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/10/the-six-key-road-blocks-at-the-un-climate-talks-in-paris)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 11, 2015, 08:15:46 PM
Meanwhile, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, who is chairing the summit, promised a new text on Saturday morning at 08:00 GMT - and suggested it would be the final version, to be ratified at lunchtime.

The end.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 11, 2015, 08:17:16 PM
I like the video in this Skeptical Science article.  The narrator explains the terrifying global emissions numbers in an unwavering upbeat tone, leaving you to decide whether the situation is hopeless or merely... very challenging.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/TRTTDEquity.html (http://www.skepticalscience.com/TRTTDEquity.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 11, 2015, 08:59:11 PM
Definitely not hopeless, but not really much room for optimism either. I am interested to see what the final "take it or leave it" text will look like. Let's put it this way, better 3C than 4C or 5C. It'll be plenty bad at 3C, but 4 or 5 is likely a major mass extinction event.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 11, 2015, 09:46:03 PM
Paris climate deal ‘close to finish line’ but talks set to overrun
The latest version of a draft text, a slightly condensed 27 pages, retained a key demand made by low-lying and vulnerable states: to limit warming to less than 2C above pre-industrial levels and to seek to keep it to no more than 1.5C above.

But when it came to recognising irreversible effects, such as land loss and migration, the draft was a disappointment, campaign groups said. “The current options provide no hope for people who will suffer the impacts of climate change the hardest,” WWF said.
...
Key players in the negotiations, such as Brazil, insist a strong and durable climate agreement remains within reach. Izabella Teixeira, Brazil’s environment minister, said countries had stumbled in translating political goodwill into the dry language of diplomatic agreements.

But she said she was confident countries would eventually arrive at an agreement strong enough to avoid dangerous climate change.

“The agreement is done at the political level,” she said. “Everyone knows: OK, we can do this. What is not done yet is the language: how we can translate this common understanding about the next steps, and the progress to a flexible and transparent process, from political language into agreement language. This is the challenge we have today.”
...
Finding the exact language to unknot those problems as well as satisfy lawyers working for 196 countries – each with different economies and exposures to climate change – [is the] challenge.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/10/paris-climate-talks-deal-in-view-but-negotiations-likely-to-go-into-overtime (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/10/paris-climate-talks-deal-in-view-but-negotiations-likely-to-go-into-overtime)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 12, 2015, 02:48:08 AM
The Paris Climate Change Agreement Is Going to Be Highly Aspirational. That’s Exactly What We Need.
... The negotiations seem to be taking a “build it and they will come” approach, hoping to signal urgency to the global private sector that the era of fossil fuels must end very soon, rather than command national-level emission reductions via international law, as previous climate talks have tried, and failed, to accomplish.

The change in tack, as well as the exceedingly durable nature of the draft agreement—with five-year review cycles built to last a century—has provided significant optimism as the talks draw to a close. The latest draft also provides a provision to ensure essentially all major emitting countries are on board, though it would enable a hypothetical bloc of China and India to block the final plan entirely. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, though, because both India and China have separately signaled their intention to work closely with the United States and Europe on climate action during the months leading up to Paris. More likely, it will ensure whatever agreement emerges from Paris will be widely supported.
...
This debate is more than just a detail—it also informs the overall goal of how quickly the world can reduce its emissions. In order to achieve the newly bold temperature target that the Paris talks have rallied around, global carbon emissions must peak within the next five years—before the draft Paris agreement would even enter into force—and then rapidly decline thereafter. Wealthier countries with greater historical emissions—like the United States—would need to decline to near-zero emissions over the next 15 years, with the rest of the world following by midcentury. Poor countries simply will not be able to sustain that scale of effort without significant financial and technical help from rich countries.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/12/11/paris_climate_change_agreement_aspirational_in_a_good_way.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/12/11/paris_climate_change_agreement_aspirational_in_a_good_way.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 12, 2015, 04:26:27 AM
Well;
We already understand the importance of our forests so why
newly strengthened protection for the world’s forest

We already know why our current economic system supports fossil fuels so why
a call for all nations to end fossil fuel subsidies

We don't need wooly acronyms that noone will remember so why
CBDRILONCWRC, which stands for “Common but Differentiated Responsibility in Light of National Circumstances With Respective Capability”

We already have climate refugees due to drought, so why
address the growing risk of mass climate-induced migration

We already have a lot of people in the private sector who understand so why
hoping to signal urgency to the global private sector that the era of fossil fuels must end very soon

Are they just talking to themselves?

http://youtu.be/1EBw_da7BZk (http://youtu.be/1EBw_da7BZk)

Well I'm standing by the river
 But the water doesn't flow
 It boils with every poison you can think of
 And I'm underneath the streetlight
 But the light of joy I know
 Scared beyond belief way down in the shadows
 And the perverted fear of violence
 Chokes the smile on every face
 And common sense is ringing out the bell
 This ain't no technological breakdown
 Oh no, this is the road to hell

And all the roads jam up with credit
 And there's nothing you can do
 It's all just bits of paper flying away from you
 Oh look out world, take a good look
 What comes down here
 You must learn this lesson fast and learn it well
 This ain't no upwardly mobile freeway
 Oh no, this is the road
 Said this is the road
 This is the road to hell

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 12, 2015, 02:24:02 PM
Link to final text to be voted on: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf (http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf)

Reviewing now...
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 12, 2015, 03:51:40 PM
It's clear that if there's any decoupling going on, it's been between science and policy. At least they put it IN the report:

Notes with  concern  that  the  estimated  aggregate  greenhouse  gas  emission  levels  in 2025 and 2030 resulting  from the  intended nationally determined contributions do  not fall within  least-cost 2  ̊C scenarios but rather lead to a projected level of 55 gigatonnes in 2030,  and also  notes that  much  greater  emission  reduction  efforts  will  be  required  than those associated with the  intended nationally determined contributions in order to hold the increase  in  the  global  average temperature to below 2  ̊C above pre-industrial  levels  by reducing emissions to 40 gigatonnes or to 1.5  ̊C above pre-industrial levels by reducing to a level to be identified in the special report referred to in paragraph 21 below.

55Gt = 15GtC or basically RCP 8.5 at 2030. CO2 levels in RCP 8.5 are *drumroll* 448ppm or 479ppm CO2-eq with all other forcing agents (including aerosol reductions).


They invite the IPCC to do a special report in 2018 on impacts and emissions pathways for 1.5C:

Invites the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to provide a special report in 2018  on  the  impacts  of  global  warming  of  1.5  °C  above  pre-industrial  levels  and  related global greenhouse gas emission pathways.


The budget will be about blown already by the time 2018 rolls around. So, I'm not sure what they're expecting there. A chart with very sharp, straight lines to zero and negative emissions?
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 12, 2015, 03:56:59 PM
Further  decides that,  in  accordance  with  Article  9,  paragraph 3,  of  the  Agreement,
developed  countries  intend  to  continue  their  existing  collective  mobilization  goal  through
2025 in the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation; prior to 2025 the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement  shall  set  a  new  collective  quantified  goal  from  a  floor  of  USD  100  billion  per year, taking into account the needs and priorities of developing countries.


That's how the wording should be ALL over the document. At least that's a small piece of good news there. Get rid of the creative accounting and it'd be even better.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 12, 2015, 04:07:14 PM
Thanks Csnavywx, seems like we're aiming for geoengineering now. That's scary.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 12, 2015, 04:25:31 PM
Thanks Csnavywx, seems like we're aiming for geoengineering now. That's scary.

Well, there was some wording about "climate neutrality" in the last draft, which would have opened the door on geoengineering. Thankfully, it was replaced with "greenhouse gas neutrality" -- which doesn't explicitly open the door to it. Not off the table, of course, but at least it's not being invited directly into the room, so to speak.

For the 1.5C target, yeah, I'm not sure how they plan on getting that without geoengineering.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 12, 2015, 05:35:22 PM
@EricHolthaus: I'm reminded of @dwtitley's advice: "Be prepared for catastrophic success."
#ParisAgreement

https://twitter.com/ericholthaus/status/675695757270253569 (https://twitter.com/ericholthaus/status/675695757270253569)


(David Titley, Recovering weather forecaster. Director, PSU Center for Solutions to Weather & Climate Risk. Former Oceanographer of the Navy & Dir. Task Force Climate Change)

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/04/david_titley_climate_change_war_an_interview_with_the_retired_rear_admiral.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/04/david_titley_climate_change_war_an_interview_with_the_retired_rear_admiral.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 12, 2015, 05:46:37 PM
COP21 LIVE: Make or break time for Paris Outcome
1743 – Al Gore and Segolene Royal enter together. China’s Xie Zhenhua gives a thumbs up to EU commission Miguel Arias Canete. Everyone looks relaxed. You can follow the webcast here.

We understand the French presidency does not plan to beat about the bush. Laurent Fabius will ask if there are any objections, hoping to be greeted with deafening silence, then bring the gavel down to signify the text has been agreed.

UN climate chief Christiana Figueres, who has driven the process leading up to this summit, planned to wear purple on the day a deal was adopted. Here’s her outfit – I’m told it looks purpler in real life.

In anticipation of the deal going through, here’s our wrap of what it all means: slow death for fossil fuels.

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/12/12/cop21-live-make-or-break-time-for-paris-outcome/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/12/12/cop21-live-make-or-break-time-for-paris-outcome/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 12, 2015, 06:38:36 PM
A nice summary of the goals.

Analysis: The [final] Paris climate deal
The 31-page draft no longer has any brackets to indicate areas of disagreement on the text.
http://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-the-final-paris-climate-deal (http://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-the-final-paris-climate-deal)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on December 12, 2015, 06:39:41 PM
For someone who want to dwell in these past talks :
https://docs.google.com/document/d/19M59-wHuataEZh8f6joZ_Mvay3IZCbZfaxJKN-H_Bk0/edit?pli=1

There was 2 young new zelanders  recordings most of the talks... I won't ! but help yourself, if you please.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 12, 2015, 07:31:38 PM
Success!!!
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 12, 2015, 07:42:09 PM
Yep! Now the hard part begins.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on December 12, 2015, 08:30:21 PM
By what stretch of the imagination do we consider this a success? Success for whom?

Do the commitments that countries have made come any where close to matching the ambitious goals?

Are any of those commitments legally binding?
Are they in fact voluntary, ie very likely not to be upheld?

Do the models they are based on include all carbon feedbacks?

Do they assume that we can massively draw down atmospheric CO2 by magically snatching it out of the air and safely burying it in the ground?

James Hansen (not a man generally prone to profanity) has a term for this agreement: 'bullshit'

“It’s just bullshit for them to say: ‘We’ll have a 2C warming target and then try to do a little better every five years.’ It’s just worthless words. There is no action, just promises. As long as fossil fuels appear to be the cheapest fuels out there, they will be continued to be burned.”


http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud?CMP=share_btn_fb (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/12/james-hansen-climate-change-paris-talks-fraud?CMP=share_btn_fb)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on December 12, 2015, 08:32:34 PM
Other reaction:

Friends of the Earth International's spokesperson at the Summit in Paris, Asad Rehman, went further:

"The draft Paris agreement puts us on track for a planet three degrees hotter than today. This would be a disaster. The reviews in this agreement are too weak and too late.

The finance figures have no bearing on the scale of need. It's empty."


"The iceberg has struck,

the ship is going down

and the band is still playing to warm applause.


Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 12, 2015, 09:48:54 PM
@insideclimate: In Paris final hr, verb "shall" in key section changed to the word "should"—avoiding need for US Senate ratification https://t.co/27rao8ClaK (https://t.co/27rao8ClaK)

https://twitter.com/insideclimate/status/675773068170653697 (https://twitter.com/insideclimate/status/675773068170653697)


Nations Approve Historic Climate Treaty, but Road Ahead Not Easy
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/12122015/nations-approve-historic-global-climate-treaty-road-ahead-not-easy (http://insideclimatenews.org/news/12122015/nations-approve-historic-global-climate-treaty-road-ahead-not-easy)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 12, 2015, 10:24:08 PM
196 countries approve historic climate agreement
The deal was struck in a rare show of near-universal accord, as poor and wealthy nations from across the political and geographic spectrum expressed support for measures that require all to take steps to battle climate change. The agreement binds together pledges by individual nations to cut or limit emissions from fossil-fuel burning, within a framework of rules that provide for monitoring and verification as well as financial and technical assistance for developing countries.
...
The accord is the first to call on all nations—rich and poor—to take action to limit emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, with additional reviews required very five years to encourage even deeper pollution cuts. A major goal, official said, is to spur governments and private industry to rapidly develop new technologies to help solve the climate challenge.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/12/12/proposed-historic-climate-pact-nears-final-vote/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/12/12/proposed-historic-climate-pact-nears-final-vote/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 12, 2015, 10:31:14 PM
Tweets from U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.

@JohnKerry: World has chosen a smart, responsible path fwd. #COP21 agreement is the strongest, most ambitious global climate agreement ever negotiated.
https://twitter.com/johnkerry/status/675772310834417664

@JohnKerry: Addressing #climatechange will require fundamental change in the way we decide to power our planet. #COP21 agreement will help get us there.
https://twitter.com/johnkerry/status/675771956407369728

@JohnKerry: Thank you to all nations at #COP21 for hard work & dedication. Agreement is truly a global effort & signals we’re all in this together.
https://twitter.com/johnkerry/status/675771547102003201
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 12, 2015, 10:40:03 PM
Paris Agreement Ushers in End of the Fossil Fuel Era
The Paris agreement ensures that the 1.5 degree target, and the effort it would take to get there, will be at the center of discussions over climate change ambition for years to come—which is much better than the alternative: soul-crushing despair. To provide clarity, it commissions a fresh scientific synthesis, to be completed in 2018, to determine the scale and scope of emissions reductions necessary to hit that bold goal, as well as the climate impacts that may result if it is not achieved.

It all amounts to much more than close watchers of the process had hoped from the meeting. As 2015 winds down, latest temperature reports show it is all but guaranteed to become the hottest year in recorded history. But, a fresh analysis also shows that global greenhouse gas emissions also decreased, the first time that’s ever happened during a year in which the overall economy grew. That’s huge, and with the added push from the Paris agreement, it seems like the worst-case scenario for climate change may remain the stuff of science fiction, not fact.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/12/12/paris_climate_agreement_will_lower_emissions_and_usher_in_end_of_the_fossil.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/12/12/paris_climate_agreement_will_lower_emissions_and_usher_in_end_of_the_fossil.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on December 13, 2015, 06:07:31 PM
wili

Just tweeted

#COPout21 "The iceberg has struck,the ship is going down and the band is still playing to warm applause" https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1021.msg67050.html#msg67050

Hope it doesn't get AF a bad name.

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 14, 2015, 12:51:33 AM
We've known for months that the Paris agreement would not limit us to 2°C.  Nothing new there.  And you can't expect global carbon emissions to stop at 12:01am the day after the agreement is signed....  The accord is, however, an "enduring framework" on which 195 countries have agreed to continually ratchet up their efforts, and report on their progress.

But it's a good thing to express frustration that Paris didn't solve all aspects of the climate crisis.  We need more pressure on governments, and business -- and on everyone -- to take action, today!

10 Things We Learned from UN’s Top Climate Official
Christiana Figueres' Reddit "Ask Me Anything"
3)  "The 2 degrees Celsius temperature goal is achievable"

I have been pellucidly clear that the agreement in Paris is not going to reach a 2 degree limit on temperature rise as though that were something we can take off a magical shelf and put on the table. I have been equally clear that getting us on to the 2 degree pathway is entirely possible. This is why the Paris agreement will have two very important components with regard to emission reductions: First, it will harness all the national climate change plans which as a group, if fully implemented, already substantially reduce the business as usual growth in emissions. Second, in recognition that this first set of INDCs (the national climate action plans) is a departure point and not a destination, the Paris agreement will construct a path of ever-increasing emission reductions with periodic checkpoints of progress until we get to the 2 degree pathway.

[url]http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/10-messages-from-the-un-s-top-climate-official-reddit-ama/[/url] ([url]http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/10-messages-from-the-un-s-top-climate-official-reddit-ama/[/url])


All the Reasons the Paris Agreement is a Huge Freaking Deal for the Climate
The world collectively agreed to combat global warming with the signing of the first international climate treaty Saturday in Paris.

This is a historic moment. Breathe a sigh of relief everyone. This is good news.

It doesn’t mean the work is done — not by a long shot — and that’s surely something pundits, politicians, campaigners and scientists alike will go to great lengths to hammer home for the foreseeable future.

But it does mean that nearly 200 hundred countries have agreed to work together. What’s more, they’ve more or less agreed on the basis of science and that only came about after a monumental amount of time, energy, diplomacy, negotiation, steadfastness and compromise were all thrown into a giant airport hangar on the outskirts of Paris.

Such accomplishments are not come by lightly. This is as much an important victory for the climate as it is for international diplomacy. Way to go, world.

http://www.desmog.ca/2015/12/12/all-reasons-paris-climate-deal-huge-freaking-deal (http://www.desmog.ca/2015/12/12/all-reasons-paris-climate-deal-huge-freaking-deal)


Climate Accord Is a Healing Step, if Not a Cure
LE BOURGET, France — After the stomping and cheering died down, and the hugs and toasts ended, a question hung in the air as the climate conference came to a close: What does the new deal really mean for the future of the Earth?

Scientists who closely monitored the talks here said it was not the agreement that humanity really needed. By itself, it will not save the planet.

The great ice sheets remain imperiled, the oceans are still rising, forests and reefs are under stress, people are dying by tens of thousands in heat waves and floods, and the agriculture system that feeds seven billion human beings is still at risk.

And yet 50 years after the first warning about global warming was put on the desk of an American president, and quickly forgotten, the political system of the world is finally responding in a way that scientists see as commensurate with the scale of the threat.

“I think this Paris outcome is going to change the world,” said Christopher B. Field, a leading American climate scientist. “We didn’t solve the problem, but we laid the foundation.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/science/earth/climate-accord-is-a-healing-step-if-not-a-cure.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/science/earth/climate-accord-is-a-healing-step-if-not-a-cure.html)

More here:
http://www.dailyclimate.org (http://www.dailyclimate.org)

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 14, 2015, 01:41:51 AM
So, what's next?

Leaders Move to Convert Paris Climate Pledges Into Action
By May, the United Nations climate staff will update its estimate for the combined impact of the national pledges (now known as nationally determined contributions, the qualifying word “intended” having been dropped). Estimates of the first round of pledges suggested that, if carried out, they would still result in a rise of 2.7 to 3.5 degrees Celsius (4.9 to 6.3 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels — far above the newly adopted aspiration of an increase of just 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Those national plans must be revised every five years. Also every five years, starting in 2018, the United Nations will “take stock” of the pledges to see how much progress has been made in the aim of reaching peak carbon emissions “as soon as possible” and limiting the rise in temperature.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/14/world/europe/leaders-move-to-convert-paris-climate-pledges-into-action.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/14/world/europe/leaders-move-to-convert-paris-climate-pledges-into-action.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 14, 2015, 02:11:15 AM
By Michael E. Mann

The Power of Paris: Climate Challenge Remains, But Now We're on the Right Path
One cannot understate the importance of the agreement arrived at in Paris. For the first time, world leaders have faced up to the stark warnings that climate scientists have been issuing for years, instead of shrinking away with denial and delay. So while the commitments made in Paris aren't on their own enough to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations at safe levels, they are enough to begin bending the emissions curve towards a safe climate. Paris is a beginning of a process. It provides a framework for continued progress toward the goal of averting dangerous interference with our climate.

Put into more technical terms, the Paris agreement gets us roughly halfway to where we need to be. A future path of business-as-usual carbon emissions would likely warm the planet about 5 degrees Celsius (9 degrees Fahrenheit). The reductions agreed upon in Paris reduce that to about 3.5 degree Celsius (6.3 degrees Fahrenheit), i.e. halfway down to limiting to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) warming, the level of warming that many scientists studying the impacts of climate change consider to be unsafe.

Different groups have come up with slightly different numbers than these, but the end result is the same: Paris doesn't get us to a safe climate, but it gets us a substantial way there, close enough that we can now envision, in subsequent conferences, reaching an agreement for more stringent reductions that get us all the way there.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-e-mann/paris-climate-change_b_8799764.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-e-mann/paris-climate-change_b_8799764.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 14, 2015, 03:42:55 AM
By Bill McKibben

World leaders adopt 1.5 C goal — and we’re damn well going to hold them to it
Here’s the crucial plaintive paragraph from the preamble to the Paris climate agreement released today, written in the almost indecipherable bureaucratese that attends this international circus:

Emphasizing with serious concern the urgent need to address the significant gap between the aggregate effect of Parties’ mitigation pledges in terms of global annual emissions of greenhouse gases by 2020 and aggregate emission pathways consistent with holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C …

What it says is: The world is a doughy fellow who has promised to drop three suit sizes in time for his wedding, which is now only a month away. The world is an anxious student who has to ace the next morning’s test to pass the course but hasn’t yet started to study. The world has promised his kids a great raft of presents under the tree, but now it’s suddenly Christmas Eve and the shops have started closing.

http://grist.org/climate-energy/world-leaders-adopt-1-5-c-goal-and-were-damn-well-going-to-hold-them-to-it/ (http://grist.org/climate-energy/world-leaders-adopt-1-5-c-goal-and-were-damn-well-going-to-hold-them-to-it/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: oren on December 14, 2015, 07:08:55 AM
The good: many people have moved past the stage of wondering whether global warming exists, or of not even knowing it's an important subject, to realizing it exists and being happy that it's taken care of. Deniers will have a much harder time from now on. And maybe business people will be more optimistic and greedy about making money from renewable energy projects.

The bad: many people think the problem has been magically solved. Headlines I've seen in common newspapers say the Paris agreement "will limit warming to 2 deg and even to 1.5 deg". Headlines say the agreement is binding. That it starts immediately. etc. People might think the problem taken care of, and move on.

The ugly: we are already at 1 deg warming. The agreement starts in 5 years, and emissions take 10 years after being emitted for full effect. Meaning that warming until 2030 will follow the course it is currently on. 1.5 deg will be very close by then. Adopting 1.5 deg as a goal is pure PR BS, nothing more.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 14, 2015, 12:58:16 PM
...
The ugly: we are already at 1 deg warming. The agreement starts in 5 years, and emissions take 10 years after being emitted for full effect. Meaning that warming until 2030 will follow the course it is currently on. 1.5 deg will be very close by then. Adopting 1.5 deg as a goal is pure PR BS, nothing more.

Yes, it's a nice way to say, "We're really going to work on this.  Somehow."  But it's also a tacit admission that our efforts to date have been nowhere near enough.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 14, 2015, 01:02:31 PM
A Signal to Industry to Go Green in an Era of Carbon Reduction
Beyond the auto industry, the money is flowing. According to a recent Goldman Sachs study, the combined market size of low-carbon technologies like wind and solar power and electric and hybrid vehicles exceeded $600 billion last year, nearly equivalent to the United States defense budget.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/14/business/climate-accord-draws-mixed-reaction-from-business-leaders.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/14/business/climate-accord-draws-mixed-reaction-from-business-leaders.html)


From the comments:  "SUVs will be really cheap soon!"   :)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on December 14, 2015, 03:34:41 PM
I'm pleased that the most outspoken (=willing to tell the truth?) climate scientist in the UK, Kevin Andersen, has had some airtime on the BBC e.g. R4's Today.

My first thought: Is the BBC changing from being a bunch of climate delayers?

Answer: Not sure: The Best of Today podcasts (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02nrtvg/episodes/downloads) don't include
Speaking on the programme is Anote Tong, President of Kiribati, and Kevin Anderson, professor of energy and climate change at Manchester University.

but they do include
Will the US abolish the Confederate flag?
Gay priest reacts to church ban
'Huge rise' in newborns taken into care
Monday's business with Simon Jack


Anyway kevinandersen.info (http://kevinanderson.info/blog/the-paris-agreement-1010-for-presentation-410-for-content-shows-promise/) says

The Paris Agreement: 10/10 for presentation; 4/10 for content. Shows promise …

The Paris Agreement is a fitting testament to how years of diligent and meticulous science has ultimately weathered relentless and well-funded attempts to undermine its legitimacy. Building on this science base and under the inspiring auspices of the French people, the global community has come together as never before to tackle what is arguably the first truly globalised and self-induced challenge to humanity. 

However, whilst the 2°C and 1.5°C aspirations of the Paris Agreement are to be wholeheartedly welcomed, the thirty-one page edifice is premised on future technologies removing huge quantities of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere many decades from today. If such highly speculative ‘negative emission technologies’ prove to be unsuccessful then the 1.5°C target is simply not achievable. Moreover, there is only a slim chance of maintaining the global temperature rise to below 2°C.


That reminded me. I once had a phone call with Kevin Andersen because I had read a hard hitting articles of his about climate but, as I remember, even these didn't deal with the "missing feedback" issues.

The memory prompted me to put "remaining carbon budget" and "missing feedbacks" into Google to see the latest state-of-play. I was shocked that all of the 11 results were pieces by me or discussions I had taken part in. (Thanks to contributors here that helped.)

Is my Google search too tied to my terminology? - and there is any proper work on this out there?

"Proper work" means peer reviewed or from official sources? i.e. stuff that is backed up by credentials and has some credibility with policy makers.

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Timothy Astin on December 14, 2015, 08:33:42 PM
Geoff,

Probably your google search is too tied to your own browsing history! (The annoyance of "smart" search.)

A Google Scholar search with "2015 missing feedbacks climate change" leads to
a) the recent Phil Trans A Roy Soc volume 373, issue 2054, November 2015  on "feedbacks on climate in the earth system"
b) Schuur et al, 2015. Climate change and the permafrost carbon feedback. Nature 520, 171–179     (09 April 2015)
etc.



Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: A-Team on December 14, 2015, 10:57:51 PM
happy that it's taken care of ... the problem has been magically solved ... Paris agreement "will limit warming to 2 deg and even to 1.5 deg"... nobody has to do anything different ... the agreement is binding... it starts immediately ...  carbon capture tech  ... more trees too [on somebody else's ag land]... just shuffle yr stock portfolio out of coal by 2030...

You  know these folks are not serious when nobody breathes a word about livestock and diet. The fastest, easiest thing to do with the biggest, cheapest impact:

... sent me a post from United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), stating that raising livestock produces more greenhouse gases than the combined exhaust of the entire transportation sector. This means that the meat and dairy industries produce more greenhouse gases than all cars, trucks, trains, boats, and planes combined. Worldwide.

That’s 13 percent for the global transportation sector compared to 18 percent for livestock. Cows and other animals produce a substantial amount of methane from their digestive process. Methane gas from livestock has a global warming potential eighty-six times greater than carbon dioxide from vehicles. This makes it a vastly more destructive gas than carbon dioxide on a twenty-year time frame.

In 2009, Robert Goodland and Jeff Anhang, two environmental advisors to the World Bank Group, released an analysis on human-related greenhouse gases (pdf), concluding that animal agriculture was responsible not for 18 percent as the FAO stated, but was actually responsible for 51 percent of all greenhouse gases. Fifty-one percent. Yet all we hear about is burning fossil fuels.

This difference in the figures is due to factors that the FAO didn’t take into account, such as the massive loss of carbon sinks from clear-cutting rainforests for grazing in addition to the respiration and waste produced by animals. Goodland and Anhang used the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, the global standard for measuring emissions set by the World Resources Institute and World Business Council on Sustainable Development, to reach the figure of 51 percent. According to their calculations, animal agriculture is the number one contributor to human-caused climate change.

I also found out that raising animals for food consumes a third of all the planet’s fresh water, occupies up to 45 percent of the Earth’s land, is responsible for up to 91 percent of Amazon destruction, and is a leading cause of species extinction, ocean dead zones, and habitat destruction.

How is it possible I wasn’t aware of this? I prided myself on being up-to-date on environmental issues. I thought this information would be plastered everywhere in the environmental community. Why didn’t the world’s largest environmental groups, who are supposed to be saving our planet, have this as their main focus?

I went to the biggest organizations’ websites—350.org, Greenpeace, Sierra Club, the Climate Reality Project, Rainforest Action Network, Amazon Watch—and was shocked to see they had virtually nothing on animal agriculture. Why would they not have this information on there? What was going on?

I had to find out. I teamed up with fellow filmmaker Keegan Kuhn to see if we could get to the bottom of this ... Kip Andersen


documentary Cowspiracy: The Sustainability Secret
http://www.cowspiracy.com/ (http://www.cowspiracy.com/)

book Rethinking Our Diet to Transform the World
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1608876578 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1608876578)

https://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/Livestock%20and%20Climate%20Change.pdf (https://www.worldwatch.org/files/pdf/Livestock%20and%20Climate%20Change.pdf)

ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a0701e/a0701e.pdf (http://ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a0701e/a0701e.pdf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: sidd on December 15, 2015, 12:27:01 AM
I read the piece and disagree with Goodland and Anhang that livestock respiration and waste count the same as fossil carbon release. Agree that many meat eaters eat too much meat. There is an excellent article called "The Oil We Eat" from Harper's Magazine some time ago that lays it out much better than Goodland and Anhang do.

sidd
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bruce Steele on December 15, 2015, 03:15:33 AM
Skeptical Science recently did a nice job debunking that Worldwatch piece linked by A-Team

http://www.skepticalscience.com/how-much-meat-contribute-to-gw.html (http://www.skepticalscience.com/how-much-meat-contribute-to-gw.html)

I have an interest in reducing on farm energy use that the same Skeptical Science piece puts into context. A small portion of the overall ff use but I guess we all have our favorite petard to fall upon.
 
Yes reducing beef/ sheep consumption for Americans seems a reasonable goal but it is obviously not a panacea. It should be pointed out that standard farm practices are not designed to minimize energy consumption and better farm practices can make a contribution to reducing ff use and efficiency. The comment section on the Skeptical Science piece is well worth the read. 
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 15, 2015, 06:03:47 AM
All of this is hugely complex of course. There's only one simple solution, use less.

Unfortunately that solution is incompatible with todays society (and leaders), since the answer to all of our problems is more. More growth, more energy, more stuff, more food. MORE.
We need to change that mentality, I don't believe that will happen.
We can't take our wealth with us when we die, yet wealthy people have tried to do so for thousands of years.

So as I see it, everything written in Paris is nothing more than illusions. We can't continue to increase our energy demand and reach negative emissions without geoengineering.
We can't negotiate with nature.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on December 15, 2015, 10:14:31 AM
Timothy Astin

Thanks but..

"Climate change and the permafrost carbon feedback", Schurr et.al.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v520/n7546/full/nature14338.html (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v520/n7546/full/nature14338.html)

Although this article is very interesting and authoritative, having corresponded with one of the authors on permafrost carbon feedback a few years ago, it doesn't add much to what I know in broad terms.  However, it should tell me stuff with greater certainty and precision and will help in challenging the government organisations that have been dodging these issues for years. It says

The Earth system models analysed for the IPCC AR5 did not include permafrost carbon emissions, and there is a need for the next assessment to make substantive progress analysing this climate feedback. It is clear, even among models that are currently capable of simulating permafrost carbon emissions, that improvements are needed to the simulations of the physical and biological processes that control the dynamics of permafrost distribution and soil thermal regime.


OK, that's one feedback missing from the AR5 models but on my initial skim I can see  nothing about carbon budgets that indicates by how much the remaining carbon budgets are reduced.

The Royal Society stuff, "Discussion meeting issue ‘Feedbacks on climate in the Earth system’ organised and edited by Eric W. Wolff , John G. Shepherd, Emily Shuckburgh and Andrew J. Watson"  is at http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/373/2054 (http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/373/2054)

This lists several papers, whose titles don't seem to be about carbon budgets.

I'm not confident that the "remaining carbon budget" is a concept with 100% clarity (e.g. GWP20 or GWP100) but it has been widely used. I have even used it "Is Green Growth a fantasy", http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/is-green-growth-a-fantasy/. (http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/is-green-growth-a-fantasy/.)

"Remaining carbon budget" does get its way into the policy making process.

Can I ask again: Is there any proper work out there, showing the effect of feedbacks missing from the climate models on carbon budgets?

P.S. I think I might get more search results with "global carbon budget".
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: A-Team on December 15, 2015, 02:36:10 PM
debunking that Worldwatch piece on beef impacts

If only that were true. The fact is, we have lots and lots of climate activists and enviros whose lives are awash in internal contradictions -- giving up their steaks, their two-ton SUVs (for that one ski trip a year), and gratuitous airplane travel are all non-starters. American (and Euro) exceptionalism; wants vs needs. The real problem is them dark people in India wanting an hour a day of electric. From coal. Can you imagine!

Nothing quite tops the denial of beef production impacts by people who know better. I am reminded of the third monkey -- the one with its hands over its ears. Can't hear, won't hear: beef is worse than all the world's vehicles combined.

Dead zone again in the Gulf from all that fertilizer? Too bad, but I gotta have red meat but hey here is a $20 donation for the Sierra Club, mitigate my lifestyle.

Scientific reticence: hundreds of ongoing AGU2015 climate science talks but you are compelled to fly to San Francisco because the member-controlled professional association refuses to show the posters, slides or video sessions. Who among the speakers has objected to that (no one), even in the concurrent Paris conf year.

My observation is that even the outspoken ones eat steaks whenever they please. They get a pass because of good deeds elsewhere. The problem is too many people issuing themselves passes.

Giving up beef will reduce carbon footprint more than cars, says expert
PNAS … free full text, no registration [url]http://www.pnas.org/content/111/33/11996[/url] ([url]http://www.pnas.org/content/111/33/11996[/url])

Beef’s environmental impact dwarfs that of other meat including chicken and pork, new research reveals, with one expert saying that eating less red meat would be a better way for people to cut carbon emissions than giving up their cars.

The heavy impact on the environment of meat production was known but the research shows a new scale and scope of damage, particularly for beef. The popular red meat requires 28 times more land to produce than pork or chicken, 11 times more water and results in five times more climate-warming emissions. When compared to staples like potatoes, wheat, and rice, the impact of beef per calorie is even more extreme, requiring 160 times more land and producing 11 times more greenhouse gases.

Agriculture is a significant driver of global warming and causes 15% of all emissions, half of which are from livestock. Furthermore, the huge amounts of grain and water needed to raise cattle is a concern to experts worried about feeding an extra 2 billion people by 2050. But previous calls for people to eat less meat in order to help the environment, or preserve grain stocks, have been highly controversial.

“The big story is just how dramatically impactful beef is compared to all the others,” said Prof Gidon Eshel, at Bard College in New York state and who led the research on beef’s impact. He said cutting subsidies for meat production would be the least controversial way to reduce its consumption. “Remove the artificial support given to the livestock industry and rising prices will do the rest.”

Eshel’s team analysed how much land, water and nitrogen fertiliser was needed to raise beef and compared this with poultry, pork, eggs and dairy produce. Beef had a far greater impact than all the others because as ruminants, cattle make far less efficient use of their feed. “Only a minute fraction of the food consumed by cattle goes into the bloodstream, so the bulk of the energy is lost,” said Eshel. Feeding cattle on grain rather than grass exacerbates this inefficiency, although Eshel noted that even grass-fed cattle still have greater environmental footprints than other animal produce. The footprint of lamb, relatively rarely eaten in the US, was not considered in the study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Prof Tim Benton, at the University of Leeds, said “The biggest intervention people could make towards reducing their carbon footprints would not be to abandon cars, but to eat significantly less red meat,” Benton said. “Another recent study implies the single biggest intervention to free up calories that could be used to feed people would be not to use grains for beef production in the US.”

Prof Mark Sutton, at the UK’s Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, said: “The US and Europe alike are using so much of their land in highly inefficient livestock farming systems, while so much good quality cropland is being used to grow animal feeds rather than human food.”

Separately, a second study of tens of thousands of British people’s daily eating habits shows that meat lovers’ diets cause double the climate-warming emissions of vegetarian diets.

The study of British people’s diets was conducted by University of Oxford scientists and found that meat-rich diets - defined as more than 100g per day - resulted in 7.2kg of carbon dioxide emissions. In contrast, both vegetarian and fish-eating diets caused about 3.8kg of CO2 per day, while vegan diets produced only 2.9kg. The research analysed the food eaten by 30,000 meat eaters, 16,000 vegetarians, 8,000 fish eaters and 2,000 vegans.

More on the climate cost of cattle just on US public land (100 million acres with mammoth lease subsidy at $1.15 per acre per month per cow/calf pair) focusing on the belched methane (not considered above):

Cattle contribute to global climate change through the emission of methane they produce by enteric fermentation as part of their digestion.  I quantified the mass of this methane produced by cattle that graze on U.S. federal public lands managed by the BLM and U.S. Forest Service. I've now updated that 2008 essay in important ways by recalculating the methane production using the most recent government data about the extent of grazing on these lands. And Ive incorporated the most recent findings about the heat-trapping properties of methane, which are now regarded as being much greater than they were in 2008. Not included: soil's lessor sequestering of atmospheric carbon under grazing and under grazing exclusion. [url]http://www.mikehudak.com/Articles/PLR_Methane.html[/url] ([url]http://www.mikehudak.com/Articles/PLR_Methane.html[/url])

Amusing footnote:

During the presidential campaign of 1928, a circular published by the Republican Party claimed that if Herbert Hoover won there would be “a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage.” The promise of prosperity was derailed seven months after Hoover took the oath of office. The stock market crash of 1929 plunged the country into the Great Depression and people eventually lost confidence in Hoover.

In other words, in 1928, chicken not to mention beef, was not even on the horizon for most Americans during the height of the boom. They couldn't  afford a worn-out stewing chicken but somehow they got along without. Today that would be "a beef on every grill and a motorhome on every curb." Big climate footprint aspirational.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on December 15, 2015, 07:25:03 PM
Thanks for that, A-Team. We are much of the same mind.

One historical point, though. It surprised me to learn that, even when people were eating chicken only on Sunda' or just on other such special occasions, beef and pork consumption was actually much more common early last century than I would have thought. Check out the first graph in this article, which pretty well corresponds to other sources I've seen: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/02/chicken-vs-beef_n_4525366.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/02/chicken-vs-beef_n_4525366.html)

It's in countries like India and China where any kind of meat eating for the vast majority was a quite rare thing (or only tiny quantities) until quite recently. And of course Chinese hardly ever have any kind of dairy (at least as far as milk and its products go), and even in India, most people couldn't afford to have mild or ghee very often.

These have been the most populous countries in the world. And these patterns reflect those in most other countries in Asia, Africa and beyond.

Hence my point that most people in most places through most of history have not only been mostly vegetarian, but mostly vegan most of the time.

This is quite contrary to the usual assumption that vegetarianism and, even more, veganism is some bizarre aberration form normal human behavior.

It is high meat diets that are the big aberrations from most traditional diets in most cultures (unless your an Eskimo--a tiny sliver of a percentage of a percentage of humanity--the exception that proves the rule, so to speak).
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on December 15, 2015, 09:57:39 PM
Carbon trading in Paris Agreement has set us up for failure
http://www.theecologist.org/blogs_and_comments/commentators/2986673/carbon_trading_in_paris_agreement_has_set_us_up_for_failure.html (http://www.theecologist.org/blogs_and_comments/commentators/2986673/carbon_trading_in_paris_agreement_has_set_us_up_for_failure.html)

Hidden away in the pages of UN-speak that make up the Paris Agreement are the makings of global carbon market in which a host of exotic emissions derivatives can be freely traded, writes Steffen Böhm. And it's all going to be a huge and expensive distraction from the real and urgent task of cutting emissions.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bruce Steele on December 16, 2015, 03:22:48 AM
A-Team, The Worldwatch  article you linked is an opinion piece and you are entitled to any opinion you would like but the Skeptical Science debunking of the  piece and the 51% meat Co2 contribution numbers Worldwatch claims  is challenged with peer reviewed papers. Science verses opinion. The standards we judge denier sites by , cherrypicking, and no peer review , apply to both sides of the aisle.
 I also wonder whose quote you are using " debunking that Worldwatch piece on beef impacts "
If it is me then you are misquoting me, I would hope you might struggle for higher standards if it was an intentional misdirection.   
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on December 16, 2015, 11:10:50 AM
Bruce

I find it difficult to have a sensible conversation with someone who believes "Peer review good and scientific" any thing else c**p.

However can I point you to my comment above where I point out that, if there is peer reviewed work on my concern, (is there?), it has not reached public conciousness.

Indeed, there is a report today that has been headlined "Are vegetarians to blame for climate change? Researchers find lettuce is 'three times worse than BACON' for emissions (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3361663/Are-vegetarians-blame-climate-change-Researchers-lettuce-three-times-worse-BACON-emissions.html)"

Is far as I can see this is based on peer reviewed stuff by authors from Carnegie Mellon, based on the idea that luttuce is a carbon expensive method for getting your calories. I had believed that luttuce had negative calories - it takes more energy to digest than it provides. That makes it infinitely worse than bacon.

And of course, the CM stuff is pay walled.

Must rush now.  In the mean time see http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/nobeef-or-uk/ (http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/nobeef-or-uk/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Bruce Steele on December 16, 2015, 07:52:14 PM

"I find it difficult to have a sensible conversation with someone who believes "Peer review good and scientific" any thing else c**p."

Yes I find peer review in major journals an important asset to scientific discussions. If we are talking about the major themes of ice formation and melt, carbon cycle mechanisms or other discussions regularly covered on this blog it is an  imperative.
 If on the other hand we each get to dismiss scientific  literature as it impedes our personal worldview as "crap", each to his own choosing ,then we might as well go post on Fox.
 As regards energy policy I am interested in how to approach or achieve zero fossil fuel farming. I could care less whether that be animal or plant based.
   
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 17, 2015, 02:15:22 AM
Well, if Dear Leader said, "Plant trees!", you know it would happen....   ;D

North Korean delegates who attended the United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP 21, showed a great deal of interest in climate change issues.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2015/12/15/North-Korea-showed-interest-in-combating-climate-change-official-says/5781450208605/ (http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2015/12/15/North-Korea-showed-interest-in-combating-climate-change-official-says/5781450208605/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 17, 2015, 04:41:30 AM
Emissions rate per capita is 0.81, so they don't have to in DPRK. Maybe western leaders could persuade them to plant trees in at least one lane?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/Reunification_highway.jpg/640px-Reunification_highway.jpg)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on December 17, 2015, 10:00:28 AM
Sleepy

SHOULD SOUTH KOREANS PAY THE NORTHERNERS FOR POLLUTING LESS?

CO2 emissions per capita in tonnes per annum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita)

North Korea 3
South Korea 10.5

Populations in millions (http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/)

North Korea  25
South Korea  49.5

I've read somewhere that Hansen has proposed a carbon price of $1000 per tonne CO2(e?). That's probably too low but for the sake of argument...

Average individual fees in

North Korea: $3,000
South Korea: $10,500

Total national carbon pollution fees in $bn:

North Korea: 75
South Korea: 519.75
Total 594.75

If the total of pollution fees is set equal to the total dividend - as Hansen suggests, each of the 74.5m people in the Koreas gets a dividend of $7,983

The net payments (dividend less fee) would be for each citizen:

North Korea: +4,983
South Korea: -2,517

The polluters in the south should be paying those in the north that pollute less.

That said, North Korea's 3 tonnes a year is still too large.

(P.S. The UK is worse than either, if emissions are measured on a consumption basis. See Spin: UK footprint (http://dontlooknow.org/2015/10/20/good-news-our-footprint-has-shrunk/))




Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 17, 2015, 11:09:46 AM
Geoff, I used the numbers for 2011 which is 0,81, from here:
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/ndp030/nation.1751_2011.ems (http://cdiac.ornl.gov/ftp/ndp030/nation.1751_2011.ems)
Wikipedia only lists up until 2007.

Should the western world pay for everything emitted historically?
It was not too long ago that China passed Sweden per capita. 2009 or something like that, if my teflon memory doesn't let me down. What's the odds for Sweden to pass them again? We might do so, in a not too distant future.

Edit; I forgot to write that I think those who are responsible should pay. With this agreement we simply run away from our duties. Without some form of pricetag on carbon, in a world full of crony capitalism, we won't succeed. None of us.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on December 17, 2015, 07:09:46 PM
Thanks Sleepy

That's a useful source.

It took longer than it should have for me to realise the 0.81 was tonnes C. i.e. 2.97 tonnes CO2.

Not that it matters much for this argument but other greenhouse gasses don't seem to be counted and these figures are production based which makes "devloped" countries look better.

I've just been to a post-COP21 meeting chaired by Lord Stern. They were all amazed at the success.  I felt that they were behind the game. Perhaps it was a brilliant show on the politics - given the complexity but the laws of physics are greater than the laws of politics.

I try and say more when I have recovered and had some email exchanges.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 17, 2015, 08:40:18 PM
Yes, it seems to be the same everywhere, Sweden looks really nice with 1,5*3,667=5,5 tonnes? Then we land around ~50 Million tonnes for the nation. :)

But a study from Gothenburg (Chalmers) showed that a person with a low income is 6 tonnes, average income 8 and high income 10 tonnes. Our emissions due to consumption are also steadily increasing.

And then of course, we have our infamous lignite busniess abroad (Vattenfall) which emits 88,4 Million tonnes per year.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: JimD on December 18, 2015, 08:15:12 PM
This is what the Paris farce is really worth.

India still plans to double coal output by 2020 and rely on the resource for decades afterwards, a senior official said on Monday, days after rich and poor countries agreed in Paris to curb carbon emissions blamed for global warming....
...there were limitations to clean energy and coal would remain the most efficient energy source for decades, he said.


Meanwhile in the US sales of pickups and suv's has risen to 59% of total sales and average fuel mileage is in sharp decline after being flat for 2014.  Manufacturers are lobbying for relaxed regulations.

At least we have a handle on the situation....

http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2015/12/india-says-paris-climate-deal-wont.html (http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2015/12/india-says-paris-climate-deal-wont.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: sidd on December 19, 2015, 05:26:18 AM
Re: India, coal

India will not double coal output by 2020. I will go further, India will not double coal consumption, including imports by 2020. A brief look at the history of coal projects in India will show my reasoning.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 19, 2015, 07:11:38 AM
Humanity is having a hangover, the fastest treatment is another shot. Bottoms up, let's finish that bottle and have another one!

Shall I mowe my lawn on Christmas Eve? It's actually needed.
We're again looking at over +10°C for a few days to come, here in this wonderful arctic nation, where everyone's whining over not having a white Christmas, again.
Or, should I join the rest of the alcoholics at the oversized dinnertable, have some more shots and rejoice over useless gifts that only makes the Christmas trade happy?

We look forward to a new record in this Christmas season, let us also hope that the trade profitability follow and not be dragged down by a growing realistic and campaign seasonal sales," says Jonas Arnberg, chief economist at the Swedish Trade Federation, in a statement.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: folke_kelm on December 19, 2015, 10:25:59 AM
You sound by far too pessimistic Sleepy. My lawn is not growing, not because it is too hot, but because it is far too wet. I will slip too cut it, and when it is necessary we have rabbits who are well capable to do the job.
Take climate change with a little more optimism. I look forward to see crocodiles in the lake in front of my kitchen window. These are very good in the kitchen, very tasty, and not so difficult to catch. I do not know exactly, but i think it has been 20 million years since the last crocs have been seen in Sweden.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 19, 2015, 02:02:09 PM
Agreed Folke, it's not growing too much right now in the rain. ;)

But it has grown earlier. I might take a picture on Christmas Eve, comparing cut grass with uncut and post it here. And crocs are great, I would love to have them around too.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 19, 2015, 03:06:38 PM
Re: India, coal

India will not double coal output by 2020. I will go further, India will not double coal consumption, including imports by 2020. A brief look at the history of coal projects in India will show my reasoning.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=22652 (https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=22652)

Nevertheless, this is where they're aiming, according to the EIA (if you'd like a more authoritative source).

I'm a little skeptical they can go that fast, but their policy with coal has been changing lately, so you never know.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Csnavywx on December 19, 2015, 03:13:11 PM
IEA:

The  current  1 900 GW  of  installed  coal  capacity  globally  will  be expanded  as  capacity  under  development  in  Asia  exceeds  the  likely  retirements  in  Europe  and  the
United States.
   While   improving   renewable   technology   can   make   new   coal   plant investments unattractive, once a coal power plant is constructed and operating, given low fuel generation costs, it is  likely  to  run  for  a  long  time,  especially  in  places  with  power  shortages.  Therefore,  based  only  on variable  costs,  the  utilisation  of  the  existing  coal  fleet  can  be  constrained  only  by  very  cheap  gas,  a sizeable CO2 price, or a policy-driven renewable deployment that exceeds demand growth.

Well now, appears somebody has the retirement numbers. The last sentence is particularly potent: You aren't going to kill fossil fuels quickly by making them cheaper. Coal at $50/ton, gas at 1.80/MMBtu(!) and oil at $35/bbl is a recipe for climate disaster without a stiff carbon fee.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 19, 2015, 04:38:05 PM
http://zeenews.india.com/news/india/paris-agreement-is-indias-defeat-says-rajendra-singh_1836389.html (http://zeenews.india.com/news/india/paris-agreement-is-indias-defeat-says-rajendra-singh_1836389.html)
The world was looking upon Paris to force the US to commit itself to paying the damages that the three previous summits had imposed on it, but Washington managed to liberate itself from all its liability, said Singh who won the Stockholm Water Prize for 2015 for his efforts to improve water security in rural areas.

In fact, the whole `developed` world, led by the US, managed to make the `developing` and `least developed` countries acquiesce in ridding itself of its historical responsibility of causing climate change, he said.

Singh said there were 40,000 people attending the summit, but the real "decision makers" made up a `blue zone` of no more than 400.

Three hundred out of those 400 spoke the truth and the remaining 100 were there to grind their own axe, he said.

"Eventually, these 100 powerful people, assisted by at least 1600 `officials`, `experts`, scientists, etc., had their way. All others - 37,600 delegates - belonged to the `green zone` or `side zone` who had little voice," Singh said.

Even the one percent Indians, who are among the polluters, were on the side of the cunning movers and shakers from the developed countries.

Singh expressed dismay over the attitude of the government negotiators.

"The government only pitched for its right to use coal to provide for India`s energy needs. We clearly were completely out of touch with our own heritage and leadership and fell for the wiles of globlisation and commercialisation," Singh added.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on December 19, 2015, 08:10:36 PM
I attended LSE's Post COP21 Panel. Video of session is here  (http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/event/post-cop21-panel-debate/). At 1:09:30 in the video I got the first question in (as usual) but I made it too complex (as usual) and didn't get useful answers.

I tried to ask..
 
1. How do "missing feedbacks" affect the "remaining carbon budget"? (No answer)

2. If lots of people move into cities will th embodied carbon break the remaining carbon budget? (Stern said cities could be green.)

3. Isn't the UK cheating on our carbon emissions? e.g. We close steel works and our emissions reduce because we don't count the carbon from imported steel. (Stern said something about fugative emiissions but didn't mention cheating.)
 
When I overcome my embarrassment I will actually listen to this on the video and see if these recollections are correct.
 
I spoke to Stern afterwards and he recognised the difference between production and consumption emissions. I also spoke to Pete Betts, (the UK's negotiator in Paris?), he said he could find out about the missing feedbacks and the remaining carbon budget. Will post any reply here.

I now have a recording of Kevin Anderson on Radio 4 via an external device to keep a copy before it disappears (unlike "Will the US abolish the Confederate flag?") . Listening to it  I find Kevin's remarks rather mild but it did have strong twitter debate https://twitter.com/KevinClimate/status/676307620546945024 (https://twitter.com/KevinClimate/status/676307620546945024)
 
George Monbiot's summary is stronger (and suits me):
"By comparison to what it could have been, it’s a miracle. By comparison to what it should have been, it’s a disaster."
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2015/dec/12/paris-climate-deal-governments-fossil-fuels (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2015/dec/12/paris-climate-deal-governments-fossil-fuels)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 20, 2015, 11:48:53 PM
It looks like the New York Times, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, think that full US compliance to the CoP21 agreement will remain a pipe dream due to Congress's intransigence on this topic:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/20/business/energy-environment/to-achieve-paris-climate-goals-us-will-need-new-laws.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/20/business/energy-environment/to-achieve-paris-climate-goals-us-will-need-new-laws.html?_r=0)

Extract: "The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a big-business advocate, dismissed the goals set in Paris. “None of the commitments made, including those by the U.S., are binding, and many aren’t even complete,” the group said in a statement. “Moreover, Congress must appropriate any funds that the Obama administration has pledged.”

The administration has set ambitious goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the coming years, and it may well make some progress with the laws that are on the books. But so long as Congress and the White House are at loggerheads over climate policy, regulations that would prompt reforms throughout American business are likely to remain a pipe dream."

Edit: wili, I have corrected 'intransigence'.  Thanks
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on December 21, 2015, 06:29:23 AM
I think you mean 'intransigence'
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: A-Team on December 21, 2015, 12:54:01 PM
It's worth noting that the "U.S. Chamber of Commerce" despite its name is not a government agency and has no official status whatsoever but is simply one of thousands of lobbying groups with misleading names such as the "New York Federal Reserve Bank" which again is a private membership organization. The Chamber fronts for its largest remaining donors on their issues and does not poll the membership for its views -- only a fraction would support this particular initiative.

I'm not sure if the NYTimes still gets significant revenue from ads (or anything else ... not that it matters to Carlos Slim the largest shareholder) these days but the Chamber has never hesitated from carrot/stick in terms of placement/boycotting so the Times has never hesitated about third-party factualizing the inevitability of their perspective.

Ask yourself, if the Chamber had simply sent out a self-serving press release themselves, who would read it? What was this worth to the Chamber to have the NYTimes run an endorsement wrapper for the press release?
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 21, 2015, 03:43:58 PM
People Who Were Certain Climate Change Is Fake Are Now Certain That Paris Can’t Stop It
The most unintentionally revealing commentary on the Paris climate agreement came from National Review senior editor David Pryce-Jones. “I know next to nothing about the technicalities of the subject, but caught on television news bulletins great wafts of hot air,” he confessed. “It was highly enjoyable to hear President Obama claiming to be saving the planet that his foreign policy has done much to endanger … You don’t have to be a cynic to think that most countries, China and India in the lead, are never going to do anything that might harm their economic development, nor will rich countries commit economic suicide.” This was a real-time window into the conservative mind processing the Paris climate agreement, beginning from a point of frank incomprehension of (and lack of interest in) any specifics of the issue, and proceeding immediately to the conviction that the deal would fail.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/12/climate-change-isnt-real-also-cant-be-stopped.html# (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/12/climate-change-isnt-real-also-cant-be-stopped.html#)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 21, 2015, 08:41:40 PM
The link leads to a website for the "Breakthrough Energy Coalition" started by Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg and other innovators (& announced at CoP21).  While I wish these innovators well, I believe that climate change will cause a lot of damage before their research on sustainable energy has a meaningful impact on GHG concentrations:

http://www.breakthroughenergycoalition.com/en/index.html (http://www.breakthroughenergycoalition.com/en/index.html)
http://www.breakthroughenergycoalition.com/en/news.html (http://www.breakthroughenergycoalition.com/en/news.html)

Extract:
"Breakthrough Energy Coalition
THE WORLD NEEDS WIDELY AVAILABLE ENERGY that is reliable, affordable and does not produce carbon. The only way to accomplish that goal is by developing new tools to power the world. That innovation will result from a dramatically scaled up public research pipeline linked to truly patient, flexible investments committed to developing the technologies that will create a new energy mix. The Breakthrough Energy Coalition is working together with a growing group of visionary countries who are significantly increasing their public research pipeline through the Mission Innovation initiative to make that future a reality.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 21, 2015, 11:51:39 PM
Now that CoP21 is over, I think that it is good to re-visit the Climate Interactive Scoreboard after the agreement (see the link & two associated attached images, with the detail showing a 50% CL projection of about 3.75C by 2100, without including the speculative ratcheting of restrictions every 5-years):

https://www.climateinteractive.org/tools/scoreboard/ (https://www.climateinteractive.org/tools/scoreboard/)

However, I believe that even this 3.75C projected temperature increase by 2100 may err on the side of least drama for reasons including:
- The TCR (transient climate response) was recently linear; however, as the rate of emissions continue to increase TCR now begins to gradually become non-linear.
- The PDO/IPO may likely remain positive for the next one to two decades.
- Climate sensitivity may well increase faster than previously assumed.
- Forests (especially the Amazon Rainforest) may likely degrade significantly faster than previously expected.
- Wildfires will likely become more widespread and will burn more peat than previously expected.
- Masking factors (Aerosols, DSMs, VOCs, etc) and CO2 absorption mechanisms could well dissipate faster than expected.

(I could go on with the list but you get the drift).
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on December 22, 2015, 12:42:21 PM
As I previously almost promised. But I mowed my lawn today, instead of Christmas Eve.
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,323.msg67344.html#msg67344 (http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,323.msg67344.html#msg67344)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 22, 2015, 05:09:50 PM
Nations urged to improve climate pledges by April 2017
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/22/nations-urged-to-improve-climate-pledges-by-april-2017 (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/22/nations-urged-to-improve-climate-pledges-by-april-2017)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 26, 2015, 05:37:22 PM
Per the linked article, believing in the CoP21 goals requires living in the Pollyanna dream-world of negative emissions technology within the next several decades:

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/paris-climate-goals-emissions-drop-35938677 (http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/paris-climate-goals-emissions-drop-35938677)

Extract: "If governments are serious about the global warming targets they adopted in Paris, scientists say they have two options: eliminating fossil fuels immediately or finding ways to undo their damage to the climate system in the future.
The first is politically impossible — the world is still hooked on using oil, coal and natural gas — which leaves the option of a major cleanup of the atmosphere later this century.
Yet the landmark Paris Agreement, adopted by 195 countries on Dec. 12, makes no reference to that, which has left some observers wondering whether politicians understand the implications of the goals they signed up for.
"I would say it's the single biggest issue that has to be resolved," said Glen Peters of the Cicero climate research institute in Oslo, Norway.
Scientists refer to this envisioned cleanup job as negative emissions — removing more greenhouse gases from the atmosphere than humans put in it."
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on December 26, 2015, 06:44:24 PM
ALSR

Thanks for highlighting the fact that the Climate Interactive Scoreboard may be underpowered. Their FAQs acknowledge this (https://www.climateinteractive.org/tools/scoreboard/frequently-asked-questions/#question15) but I wonder if many of its users notice.

Was the Climate Interactive Scoreboard actually used in Paris to make predictions of temperature rises from the INDCs? I remember news reports saying something like "these INDCs mean this temperature rise".

You say
"some observers wonder[ed] whether politicians understand the implications of the goals they signed up for."
On the specific issue of the gap between models and reality, is there anyone, anywhere trying to bridge this gap (even with an informed guess) and explaining it to policy makers?

(I use ther term "policy makers" rather than "politicians" because it is my experience is that that, in the UK, much of the decision making is formed by officials in governemnt departments, who are not actually politicians.)

Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 27, 2015, 12:16:06 AM
ALSR

Thanks for highlighting the fact that the Climate Interactive Scoreboard may be underpowered. Their FAQs acknowledge this ([url]https://www.climateinteractive.org/tools/scoreboard/frequently-asked-questions/#question15[/url]) but I wonder if many of its users notice.

Was the Climate Interactive Scoreboard actually used in Paris to make predictions of temperature rises from the INDCs? I remember news reports saying something like "these INDCs mean this temperature rise".

You say
"some observers wonder[ed] whether politicians understand the implications of the goals they signed up for."

On the specific issue of the gap between models and reality, is there anyone, anywhere trying to bridge this gap (even with an informed guess) and explaining it to policy makers?

(I use ther term "policy makers" rather than "politicians" because it is my experience is that that, in the UK, much of the decision making is formed by officials in governemnt departments, who are not actually politicians.)


Geoff,
The topic of what policymakers/politicians understand/acknowledge about the reality/implications of climate change is difficult to discuss because there is a combination of ignorance and gamesmanship in play.  The best tool for examining the implications/reality of policymakers'/politicians' actions/inactions is currently the Accelerated Climate Model for Energy, ACME*, being developed by the US Government (preliminary results of which they share with their developed friends).  However, instead of using such tools to make suitable policy to deal with climate change, they (politicians from the developed countries) use such spooky ACME findings to frighten developing countries at CoP21 into not demanding too much, as the spooky ACME findings indicate that developing countries will suffer the most (if no agreement could be reached).  This reduces the likelihood that the developing countries will demand that the developed countries pay for carbon budget that they have used-up ahead of the developing countries.

Furthermore, politicians use other forms of gamesmanship such as saying: (a) that ratcheting up the CoP21 restrictions every five years will allow then to limit global mean temperature increases to 2.7C; and (b) that future negative emissions technology allows them to emit now and have their children pay later.

Best,
ASLR

* For information about ACME & accurate climate model projections see:
http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1053.0.html (http://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1053.0.html)

Edit: With a hat tip to Sleepy also see the following video on climate sensitivity discussing how Roy Thompson told the delegates at CoP21 that ECS is likely about 50% higher than previously expected (by AR5):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTPFvMbnDnE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTPFvMbnDnE)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on December 27, 2015, 07:07:19 PM
The following link focuses on UN Secretary Ban's role leading to the CoP21 agreement; which to me shows just how fragile (including the role of George W. Bush) the process was leading to achieve even this limited success:

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/bcea69729c7d4d2eab257b3d8978250d/ap-interview-climate-deal-caps-long-quest-un-chief (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/bcea69729c7d4d2eab257b3d8978250d/ap-interview-climate-deal-caps-long-quest-un-chief)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on December 29, 2015, 06:27:28 PM
Why zero is a better climate target than 2 degrees
One important element of the Paris climate accord has been somewhat overshadowed in all the press coverage. Before the whole thing fades from the news cycle, I want to take a moment to celebrate it.

I'm talking about the shared goal, endorsed by 195 nations, to reduce net global greenhouse gas emissions to zero by the end of the century.

Zero. Zilch. Nada. Let that roll around in your mindgrape for a moment. It has a ring to it. ...

http://www.vox.com/2015/12/21/10629172/climate-change-target-zero (http://www.vox.com/2015/12/21/10629172/climate-change-target-zero)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 02, 2016, 05:29:51 PM
World Bank Support to Cities to Expand – Key Pieces of the Puzzle in Addressing Climate Change
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- Much of the power to reduce climate emissions lies now with cities rather than national governments
- There is a window of opportunity to build climate-smart cities in developing countries, which account for 90% of urban growth
- The World Bank is increasing not just its financing in this area, but also its knowledge and capacity initiatives to help address urban infrastructure challenges

http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2015/12/07/cities-get-star-treatment-at-global-climate-conference-in-paris (http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2015/12/07/cities-get-star-treatment-at-global-climate-conference-in-paris)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 06, 2016, 04:03:21 AM
U.S.:  EPA looks to build on 2015 wins this year
In a blog post on the EPA website, administrator Gina McCarthy said the agency will look in 2016 to help implement the goals of the landmark international climate agreement reached in Paris last month.

The agency will finalize rules this year to cut carbon pollution from heavy-duty vehicles, she wrote, as well as a rule to limit methane leaks from oil and gas operations. The methane rule — which targets a pollutant with 25 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide — is seen as a major step President Obama can take to address climate change in his final year in office.

The EPA will also work with other countries to reduce the use of high-polluting refrigerant chemicals, a push the agency threw its weight behind in November.

The agency, she said, will also provide air quality and greenhouse gas monitoring assistance to other countries, as well as work with major companies to encourage financing for climate change mitigation efforts under the Paris climate deal.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/264695-epa-chief-outlines-2016-agenda (http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/264695-epa-chief-outlines-2016-agenda)
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Jim Hunt on January 07, 2016, 10:03:16 AM
A new blog post from Kevin Anderson:

The hidden agenda: how veiled techno-utopias shore up the Paris Agreement (http://kevinanderson.info/blog/the-hidden-agenda-how-veiled-techno-utopias-shore-up-the-paris-agreement/)

His "tentative reflections":

Here we are a fortnight or so on from Paris – and the dust has all but settled. Turn on the radio and the BBC is reporting on whether the UK should expand its London airport capacity at Gatwick or Heathrow. No reference to Paris, CO2 emissions or the plight of millions who will suffer the consequences of such decisions, but will only ever see aircraft streaking across the sky 35000 feet above. Next up, the BBC reports on how the UK’s Department of Energy and Climate Change, its Chief Scientific Advisor and the UK’s Environment Agency all enthusiastically support the development of indigenous shale gas – and yet all forget to mention that the UK Government has just reneged on its support for carbon capture and storage. Another high-carbon energy source at odds with Paris and 2°C carbon budgets is simply added to UK’s portfolio of North Sea oil and gas without even a squirm of unease from those authorities who should know better.

So where are we now? Future techno-utopias, pennies for the poor, more fossil fuels, co-opted NGOs and an expert community all too often silenced by fear of reprisals and reduced funding. It doesn’t need to be like this. Forget the vacuous content, it’s the wonderful spirit of the Paris Agreement and the French people on which we need to build – and fast! The pursuit of a low-carbon future could do much worse than be guided by the open concepts of liberté, égalité et fraternité.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on January 07, 2016, 10:33:26 AM
Thanks Jim, good one by Kevin Andersson. Another qoute.
Not surprisingly the vested interests won out – and whilst the headline goals of the Paris Agreement are to be welcomed, the five year review timeframe eliminates any serious chance of maintaining emissions within even carbon budgets for a slim chance of 2°C. Science and careful analysis could have offered so much more – but instead we are left having to pray that speculative negative emission technologies will compensate for our own hubris.

Here the drunken hubris part of our society is already screaming; -"Look, it's winter, no problems!" after a couple days of arctic temperatures breaking the negative end of the anomalies. People here are more occupied with discussing immigrants.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: TerryM on January 07, 2016, 11:19:27 AM
Apparently a very short honeymoon in Paris.
Terry
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 07, 2016, 09:48:34 PM
If a company wants to get around the Paris CoP21 pact, soon all they will have to do is to file a lawsuit to protect "loss of expected profit".

http://www.dailyclimate.org/tdc-newsroom/2016/jan/climate-change-ttp-ttip-international-trade-eu (http://www.dailyclimate.org/tdc-newsroom/2016/jan/climate-change-ttp-ttip-international-trade-eu)

Extract: "A powerful legal tool designed to protect foreign investors could undermine commitments made in Paris last month to reign in climate warming emissions.
The tool is tucked into two pending trade deals President Obama wants to finalize this year. The language is de rigueur for trade agreements and is designed to protect against what's known as "loss of expected profits."
TransCanada, citing this clause in the North American Free Trade Agreement, on Wednesday filed a $15 billion lawsuit against the United States for blocking its Keystone XL pipeline.
The language gives companies an avenue to challenge regulations that undermine investment plans, and it could chill or even curtail global efforts to trim carbon emissions.
Almost 200 countries pledged last month to cut global warming gases in an attempt to keep temperatures “well below” 2 C above pre-industrial times.
But under either trade pact, if a new air rule, for instance, creates disincentive for an international energy company to build a coal plant, it can sue the government for investment losses if the company can prove the policy was adopted after initial plans for the plant were made.
Both trade agreements limit "the ability of governments to put in place climate and other public interest policies" and give  "huge power" to big polluters," said Illana Solomon, director of the Sierra Club’s Responsible Trade Program. 
The two trade deals in question capture most of the world's economic might."

PS: I note that the title of this thread is overly hopeful as the Paris Pact is not a treaty.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 11, 2016, 04:30:41 AM
The linked SciAm article indicates that some scientists are promoting that when nations calculate the INDC's CO2eqiv that they use the GWP10 instead of GWP10 for methane:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-bad-of-a-greenhouse-gas-is-methane/ (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-bad-of-a-greenhouse-gas-is-methane/)

Extract: "At present, nations report methane emissions in terms of CO2 equivalents, using GWP100 as the conversion factor. This allows nations, such as the United States, that use natural gas to generate electricity to present a cleaner façade to the world than they have in reality, he said.
Payne and two other scientists wrote a letter to the U.S. delegation at the United Nations' climate change summit this month suggesting that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change require nations to use a 10-year global warming potential, or GWP10, in their emissions inventory. This would allow quicker curbs on methane, they wrote."

Edit: For those who do not know GWP10 for methane per Shindell (2009) it is 130 (see attached plot), so GWP10/GWP100 = 130/34 = 3.82.
Title: Re: UN Climate Treaty - Paris 2015
Post by: Anne on January 11, 2016, 09:06:18 AM
Posting this because it doesn't seem to have surfaced elsewhere on the forum. Odd choice of newspaper to communicate with the world at large? I like the Indy but it's hardly high circulation.
In a joint letter to The Independent, some of the world’s top climate scientists launch a blistering attack on the deal, warning that it offers “false hope” that could ultimately prove to be counterproductive in the battle to curb global warming.

The letter, which carries eleven signatures including professors Peter Wadhams and Stephen Salter, of the universities of Cambridge and Edinburgh, warns that the Paris Agreement is dangerously inadequate.

Because of the Paris failure, the academics say the world’s only chance of saving itself from rampant global warming is a giant push into controversial and largely untested geo-engineering technologies that seek to cool the planet by manipulating the Earth’s climate system.

The scientists, who also include University of California professor James Kennett, argues that “deadly flaws” in the deal struck in the French capital last month mean it gives the impression that global warming is now being properly addressed when in fact the measures fall woefully short of what is needed to avoid runaway climate change.

This means that the kind of extreme action that needs to be taken immediately to have any chance of avoiding devastating global warming, such as massive and swift cuts to worldwide carbon emissions – which only fell by about 1 per cent last year – will not now be taken, they say.

More, and text of letter here (http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/cop21-paris-deal-far-too-weak-to-prevent-devastating-climate-change-academics-warn-a6803096.html).
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 11, 2016, 01:56:57 PM
As ASLR has noted, the final Paris accord did not turn out to be, legally, a "treaty", so I have updated the title of this thread.  The U.N. refers to it as the Paris Agreement.   :)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 11, 2016, 06:47:29 PM
The linked article indicates that the oil majors were not surprised by the out-come of the Paris Agreement and that they do not expect to have any stranded (unused) assets, so climate change remains low on their list of priorities (say compared to the current low prices for crude oil):

http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060030392 (http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060030392)

Extract: ""My guess -- and I'm guessing -- is that climate change is pretty low down on their list," said Kauzlarich, now the co-director of George Mason University's Center for Energy Science and Policy. The American oil majors, he hypothesized, "are heaving a sigh of relief" that the deal wasn't more stringent.

Jeffers of Exxon said the company sees oil and gas playing "significant roles in the energy mix" in meeting growing demand until at least 2040.
"We don't see any stranded assets," he said. "We think all our assets will be required."
Alan Krupnick, senior fellow and co-director for the Center for Energy and Climate Economics at Resources for the Future, said major oil companies, "whether they're quiet or not," have incorporated climate regulations into their plans."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on January 18, 2016, 05:06:19 PM
A video full of sensible comments, with people like Jason Box, Kevin Anderson and others.
http://youtu.be/xR1WM6_akG4 (http://youtu.be/xR1WM6_akG4)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 18, 2016, 10:07:05 PM
The achieve any of the Paris Agreement goals, negative emissions technology, NET is needed.  The linked reference discusses the limits to the various NET approaches:

Pete Smith, Steven J. Davis, Felix Creutzig, Sabine Fuss, Jan Minx, Benoit Gabrielle, Etsushi Kato, Robert B. Jackson, Annette Cowie, Elmar Kriegler, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Joeri Rogelj, Philippe Ciais, Jennifer Milne, Josep G. Canadell, David McCollum, Glen Peters, Robbie Andrew, Volker Krey, Gyami Shrestha, Pierre Friedlingstein, Thomas Gasser, Arnulf Grübler, Wolfgang K. Heidug, Matthias Jonas, Chris D. Jones, Florian Kraxner, Emma Littleton, Jason Lowe, José Roberto Moreira, Nebojsa Nakicenovic, Michael Obersteiner, Anand Patwardhan, Mathis Rogner, Ed Rubin, Ayyoob Sharifi, Asbjørn Torvanger, Yoshiki Yamagata, Jae Edmonds, & Cho Yongsung et al. (2016), "Biophysical and economic limits to negative CO2 emissions", Nature Climate Change, Volume: 6, Pages: 42–50, doi:10.1038/nclimate2870


http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n1/full/nclimate2870.html (http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n1/full/nclimate2870.html)


Abstract: "To have a >50% chance of limiting warming below 2 °C, most recent scenarios from integrated assessment models (IAMs) require large-scale deployment of negative emissions technologies (NETs). These are technologies that result in the net removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. We quantify potential global impacts of the different NETs on various factors (such as land, greenhouse gas emissions, water, albedo, nutrients and energy) to determine the biophysical limits to, and economic costs of, their widespread application. Resource implications vary between technologies and need to be satisfactorily addressed if NETs are to have a significant role in achieving climate goals."

Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 19, 2016, 05:24:13 PM
ABU DHABI: French energy giant Engie, the owner of the Hazelwood brown coal power generator in Victoria, has launched a major public-private initiative that aims to ensure that 1,000GW of solar capacity is installed around the world by 2030.

The plan has been dubbed the Terrawatt initiative – the equivalent of one trillion watts of solar electricity, or one million megawatts – and it is the first significant engagement from the private sector to deliver on the ambitious climate target agreed in Paris in December by 195 governments.

The 1,000GW target might be below some of the more optimistic forecasts for 2030, particularly those by Greenpeace and others (and it should be noted that Greenpeace, which predicts up to 1,800GW of solar, has been the most accurate forecaster in the last 10 years).

But it is broadly in line – and in some cases even passes – with the target that institutions such as the International Energy Agency says is needed under its 450 scenario, which would achieve a 2C temperature cap. The Paris deal aims at “well below” 2C, and even to try and reach a 1.5C cap.

There has been some considerable doubt about whether the promises made in the Paris agreement will translate into action by individual government at policy level, and by the private sector in investment.

The fact that this initiative is driven by Engie – a major utility – makes it even more interesting. It might be dismissed as greenwash by some, and time will tell if it is or not. But by making such a major commitment on solar, its incoming president and CEO, Isabelle Kocher..., is nailing her colours to the mast.

Engie is a giant of a company, with operations in 70 countries and 150,000 employees, and – probably embarrassingly for its new focus on sustainable energy – it operates Hazelwood, the ageing generator that is labeled the dirtiest in the world. It is proving to be an embarrassment to a company hoping to be taken seriously on its commitment to a new energy future.

http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/hazelwood-owner-engie-launches-push-for-1000gw-of-solar-36363 (http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/hazelwood-owner-engie-launches-push-for-1000gw-of-solar-36363)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 21, 2016, 01:16:38 AM
The linked reference indicates that the 2C target adopted by the Paris Agreement, would mean much higher temperatures over land, even if this target is achieved, as the temperatures over the oceans increase more slowly:

Sonia I. Seneviratne, Markus G. Donat, Andy J. Pitman, Reto Knutti & Robert L. Wilby (2016), "Allowable CO2 emissions based on regional and impact-related climate targets", Nature, doi:10.1038/nature16542


http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature16542.html (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature16542.html)
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/extref/nature16542-s1.pdf (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/extref/nature16542-s1.pdf)

Abstract: "Global temperature targets, such as the widely accepted limit of an increase above pre-industrial temperatures of two degrees Celsius, may fail to communicate the urgency of reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. The translation of CO2 emissions into regional- and impact-related climate targets could be more powerful because such targets are more directly aligned with individual national interests. We illustrate this approach using regional changes in extreme temperatures and precipitation. These scale robustly with global temperature across scenarios, and thus with cumulative CO2 emissions. This is particularly relevant for changes in regional extreme temperatures on land, which are much greater than changes in the associated global mean."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 22, 2016, 08:31:27 PM
U.S.:  Court Rejects a Bid to Block the Clean Power Plan
By rejecting the petition on Thursday, a three-judge panel of the court required states to move forward with plans to shut down polluting coal plants and build new wind and solar sources.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/22/us/politics/court-rejects-bid-to-delay-obama-rule-on-climate-change.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/22/us/politics/court-rejects-bid-to-delay-obama-rule-on-climate-change.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 22, 2016, 08:50:06 PM
Getting 196 Countries To Agree On Climate Change Was ‘The Easy Part’
DAVOS, Switzerland -- For all those who thought settling the Paris climate agreement was enough to lead to a low-carbon economy, it’s time to wake up and smell the coffee.

This message comes from none other than Christiana Figueres, who was instrumental in bringing 196 countries together to agree on the framework to limit runaway global warming.

Figueres, the executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, said that while the talks were a success, "frankly, after 20 years of working towards that goal, that was the easy part."

Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, she said it was now imperative to move from good words to action.

"We need to understand the clear signal from Paris and the clear risks and work out what are we all going to do," Figueres said, adding that global carbon emissions need to peak within the next five to 10 years.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/christiana-figueres-paris-climate-agreement_us_569f7c39e4b0875553c25c52?159rizfr= (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/christiana-figueres-paris-climate-agreement_us_569f7c39e4b0875553c25c52?159rizfr=)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 25, 2016, 09:34:10 PM
The attached image from the linked Dec 7 2015 "Global Carbon Project" GCP Budget-2015 document, shows that if China, India, the USA & the EU follow their current Paris Pledges, the rest of the world will not be able to emit any carbon by 2030 if there is to be a 66% chance of staying below the 2C target:

http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/15/files/GCP_budget_2015_v1.pdf (http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/15/files/GCP_budget_2015_v1.pdf)


Edit: I believe that the numbers in the GCP Budget 2015 report err on the side of least drama.
Edit2: If I have not been clear, the GCP Budget report seems to be a lot of US Government sponsored happy talk that was delivered at Paris to boost moral and to distract delegates from the fact that measure global GHG concentrations continue to follow a BAU trend regardless of government accounting.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: JimD on January 25, 2016, 10:27:48 PM
ASLR

Edit: I believe that the numbers in the GCP Budget 2015 report err on the side of least drama.

To say the least.  Considering the numbers you and others are coming up with in the topic about Global Surface Air Temps about where we are today, the understated numbers from your chart above , the fact that there are a host of emissions that various countries hide (China and their actual coal consumption) or don't count (the US and its methane emissions from the fossil industries), the inevitable rise in natural emissions which are coming, deforestation continuing, etc....And the presumption that we are actually at the peak of emissions - I doubt that as the flattening we have seen in the last year is most likely attributable to the global economic slowdown as further bubbles can always be blown.

Bet we hit that situation closer to 2020 than 2030 if we have not already reached the point where staying below 2C is possible in a technical sense.  In a practical real world sense I have no doubt we have little chance of staying below 3C of rise.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 25, 2016, 10:42:44 PM
ASLR

Edit: I believe that the numbers in the GCP Budget 2015 report err on the side of least drama.

To say the least.  Considering the numbers you and others are coming up with in the topic about Global Surface Air Temps about where we are today, the understated numbers from your chart above , the fact that there are a host of emissions that various countries hide (China and their actual coal consumption) or don't count (the US and its methane emissions from the fossil industries), the inevitable rise in natural emissions which are coming, deforestation continuing, etc....And the presumption that we are actually at the peak of emissions - I doubt that as the flattening we have seen in the last year is most likely attributable to the global economic slowdown as further bubbles can always be blown.

Bet we hit that situation closer to 2020 than 2030 if we have not already reached the point where staying below 2C is possible in a technical sense.  In a practical real world sense I have no doubt we have little chance of staying below 3C of rise.

JimD,

In the GCP plot shown in Repy #542, the top curve labeled 66% chance of staying below 2C is not a projection of what is going to happen.  Rather it is an imaginary line indicating that if the EU, the USA, China & India follow the pathway for their current pledges, and they wanted to stay below a 2C increase, then they would need to convince (by force of arms?) the rest of the world to emit no more carbon than indicated by the grey area.  Which of course is a fantasy w.r.t. emissions, but my statement about the plot erring on the side of least drama, ESLD, means that all of the assumptions that the Global Carbon Project used to construct the plot also depend on wishful thinking.

Best,
ASLR
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 28, 2016, 12:29:09 AM
The linked article indicates that the success of the Paris agreement hinges on rapid upgrading of carbon accountancy; which will break if one tries to scale-up the current model:

Jeff Tollefson (2016), "Paris climate deal hinges on better carbon accountancy
Local expertise is required to provide detailed emissions reports", Nature, Volume: 529, Pages:450–451, doi:10.1038/529450a

http://www.nature.com/news/paris-climate-deal-hinges-on-better-carbon-accountancy-1.19237 (http://www.nature.com/news/paris-climate-deal-hinges-on-better-carbon-accountancy-1.19237)

Extract: "“The current model will break if you try and scale it up,” says Gillenwater. “We need more and better people and we need a different model.”"
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on January 28, 2016, 04:46:53 PM
Starting in May 2016 UN representatives will work to develop "rules, modalities and procedures" for a new UN carbon market, that will allow nations to earn money to help implement their Paris Pledges.   Such carbon markets (cap & trade) can be very challenging to manage correctly and numerous such plans have failed in the past.  A revenue neutral carbon pricing plan would be theoretically superior, but government officials love the idea that they can gather money, power and influence by selling carbon credits that are subject to corruption, rigging & manipulation.  We will see what happens:


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-28/global-carbon-market-faces-diplomatic-minefield-as-crude-slumps (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-28/global-carbon-market-faces-diplomatic-minefield-as-crude-slumps)

Extract: "Negotiators have given themselves less than a year to agree on rules for a universal market-based emissions-reduction system under the Paris climate pact. To get there, they have to overcome any objections from nations reliant on fossil fuels and create a framework that covers an unprecedented range of national emissions targets.
To make the market, climate diplomats will have to convince nations they need to consume less fossil fuel amid a commodity slump that has pushed crude to a 12-year low and left coal prices at the weakest since at least 2007. Envoys are seeking a universal system for all countries, not just rich ones, to fund clean-energy projects anywhere in the world, earning tradable credits they can use for emission-reduction targets at home.
“I don’t think this is going to be an easy walk,” said Georg Borsting, a UN climate negotiator for Norway for 20 years. “We’re establishing something that can live through shifts in energy prices. A few years from now you might have a very different landscape.”
Starting May 16 in Bonn, the UN’s Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice will consider how nations can install or expand their own carbon markets. The same body plans to have “rules, modalities and procedures” for a new UN market ready for approval at a meeting in Marrakesh, Morocco, Nov. 7, according to the UN’s website. Talks can be extended after that.
“The Paris deal provides the framework that allows for definition of exact rules and, ultimately, tighter emission-reduction targets,” Ingo Ramming, the London-based co-head of commodity solutions at Commerzbank AG, said by phone. “Now the real work starts.”"

Edit: I attached the associated image that shows that while they are negotiating the carbon market (cap & trade) now at 12-year low oil prices, the plan will not take effect until 2020, so until then cheap oil consumption will increase, and the Paris Pact will encourage oil prices to remain low until 2020 because oil production countries will want to sell as much oil before they are hit with carbon credits in 2020.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 28, 2016, 05:12:29 PM
France plans renewed climate diplomacy blitz to protect Paris deal
A proposed UN progress review in two years is critical she says. “If everything goes well we will have more mobilisation of countries by 2018.”

Equally important is delivery of long term climate plans up to 2050, a little-reported element of the Paris deal but one the French and the UN believe could turn the tide on fossil fuels.

China, France and the US have committed to working on long-term scenarios, while the EU is looking how it can fund research among member states.

A Deep Decarbonisation study published by the Paris-based IDDRI think tank last September said avoiding 2C was still possible – if governments moved fast this decade.

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/01/27/france-plans-renewed-climate-diplomacy-blitz-protect-paris-deal/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/01/27/france-plans-renewed-climate-diplomacy-blitz-protect-paris-deal/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 29, 2016, 08:39:15 PM
Keeping the World below 2° Is a $12.1 Trillion Investment Opportunity, BNEF Report Says
LONDON: Keeping the world below the 2 degrees Celsius pathway presents a US$12.1 trillion investment opportunity over the next 25 years, a new analysis states.

The report Mapping the Gap: The Road From Paris, presented today by Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) at the 2016 Investor Summit on Climate Risk hosted by Ceres, shows the opportunities and challenges of filling the ‘gap’ between the business-as-usual (BAU) investment in renewable energy and what is needed to avoid the worst effects of climate change.
...
In fact, if governments and business leaders take no additional steps to what they have planned today, the investment opportunity for tackling climate change is US$6.9 trillion, or US$277 billion per year.

The ‘gap’ between this scenario and what is needed to keep the world safe is US$5.2 trillion, or US$208 billion per year. To put the numbers in perspective, authors point out this is far less than the US$454 billion per year that people in the US ask every year to get their auto loans.

http://www.theclimategroup.org/what-we-do/news-and-blogs/keeping-the-world-below-2-degrees-is-a-121-trillion-investment-opportunity-bnef-report-says/ (http://www.theclimategroup.org/what-we-do/news-and-blogs/keeping-the-world-below-2-degrees-is-a-121-trillion-investment-opportunity-bnef-report-says/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 30, 2016, 07:31:43 PM
Climate Change 2016: Investors Vow To Pour Trillions Of Dollars Into Clean Energy Transition
The wave of optimism that followed last month’s climate change deal in Paris is wending its way down Wall Street. Investors and financiers meeting in New York this week vowed to harness their trillions of dollars in collective wealth to develop clean energy projects and curb the planet’s carbon emissions.

Whether they actually deliver on that promise could mean the difference between winning and losing the fight against climate change. Only with a dramatic spike in spending — and a total shift away from fossil fuel investments — can countries have a shot at avoiding dangerous levels of global warming, according to policy leaders and climate experts speaking at the Investor Summit on Climate Risk at the United Nations headquarters Wednesday.
...
The financial sector’s participation is considered critical for ensuring the goals of the Paris climate conference are actually achieved. Last December, the leaders of nearly 200 nations agreed to limit the rise of global average temperatures to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-Industrial levels.

To hit that target, the world must invest at least $12.1 trillion in renewable electricity — including solar and wind power, battery storage and energy efficiency — within the next 25 years, analysts at Bloomberg New Energy Finance said in a new report. So far, countries are on track to spend $6.9 trillion by 2040, resulting in an investment gap of $5.2 billion, by BNEF’s estimate....

http://www.ibtimes.com/climate-change-2016-investors-vow-pour-trillions-dollars-clean-energy-transition-2285080 (http://www.ibtimes.com/climate-change-2016-investors-vow-pour-trillions-dollars-clean-energy-transition-2285080)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on February 01, 2016, 10:39:41 PM
The linked article (and associated plot) show that there is not a chance in hell that Canada will meet the emissions targets that it pledged to meet at the Copenhagen climate talks in 2009.  We will see if it does better with its Paris Pact pledges:

https://news.vice.com/article/canada-admits-theres-no-chance-itll-reach-its-climate-change-targets-not-even-close

Extract: "The projection, released by Environment and Climate Change Canada, shows that Canada is expected to pump out the equivalent of 768 megatons of CO2 by 2020, and 815 megatons by 2030. Those projections also do not include emissions from the forestry sector.

That's nowhere near the targets Canada set for itself at the Copenhagen climate talks in 2009. There, Ottawa pledged to reduce its CO2 emissions by 17 percent over 2005 levels by 2020.

Instead, Canada will likely increase its CO2 emissions by roughly two percent. The numbers say that increase may be as high as five percent."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: TerryM on February 02, 2016, 06:13:29 AM
ASLR
Canada doesn't have a chance of making it's pledges as long as the tar sands are in operation. Trudeau closing them down would cause a civil war, with Ottawa being accused of "killing the west".


Unfortunately I think this applies in many countries where oil exports make up a large proportion of the economy. I've included a link that breaks down emissions by province, the comments section demonstrates that the deniers are still as shrill as ever.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/carbon-challenge-the-economic-cost-of-emissions-reduction/article28359647/ (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/carbon-challenge-the-economic-cost-of-emissions-reduction/article28359647/)


This isn't going to end well.
Terry
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on February 02, 2016, 10:57:57 AM
This isn't going to end well.

Terry,

Human nature for acquisition is bad enough, but denialism compounds the problem as all of the Paris Pact pledges are based on an assumed ECS value of 3C while more and more recent research is pointing closer to 4C.  How can one fix a problem if one cannot even admit that it is there?

Best,
ASLR
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: TerryM on February 02, 2016, 08:22:30 PM
ASLR
Was the purpose of the "Paris Pact" to solve the problem or to win the next poll?


Without a treaty, without punishment for non-compliance, without firm commitments to policies that are acted on NOW, the whole thing appears more an exercise in kicking the can than carefully removing the contents of the can & securing it's contents.


The present glut of crude has done far more damage to oil producing economies than environmental regulation, in it's most draconian iterations, could have done. The glut was engineered to destroy Russia's economy & collateral damage was expected, but accepted.


If the same acceptance had been made for the collateral damage that a drastical reduction in fossil fuel usage might entail, we would now be watching the Keeling Curve's reversal, a reduction in climate exacerbated weather, and  possibly could look forward to the slow regrowth of Arctic Sea Ice.


Terry
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on February 03, 2016, 04:28:45 PM
Terry,

From your linked article, not only are the tar sands a continuing problem, but also shale gas in British Columbia:

Extract: "British Columbia: Emissions in 2012: 60 MT, 21 per cent higher than in 1990."

Additionally, millions of area of forest in B.C. have been lost.

I agree that talk is cheap.

ASLR
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on February 03, 2016, 11:56:36 PM
I provide a few extracts from the linked interview with Naomi Klein about how climate change will make things meaner, even after considering the Paris Pact:

http://billmoyers.com/story/naomi-klein-climate-change-not-just-about-things-getting-hotter-its-about-things-getting-meaner/ (http://billmoyers.com/story/naomi-klein-climate-change-not-just-about-things-getting-hotter-its-about-things-getting-meaner/)


Extract: "So in terms of what to make of Paris, the truth is, I think that the deal that those politicians managed to negotiate, there was all this euphoria. I’ve never seen leaders congratulate themselves so fervently. [laughter] It was truly unseemly. “We are awesome!” Yeah. [laughter]

And I have to say that the reporting was far too deferential, far too credulous. There were headlines like, you know, this agreement marks the end of the fossil fuel era. And then a couple weeks ago there was a piece interviewing executives from all the major oil companies about whether they felt that the Paris agreement was going to impact their business model and all of them [who] agreed to talk said not at all. And Exxon said, “We don’t expect it to impact any of our assets” and specifically said, “We don’t believe this will lead to a single stranded asset.” And now, since we know that the fossil fuel companies have five times more carbon in their proven reserves than is compatible with a two-degree temperature target — and what’s in the agreement is that we should actually try to keep it to 1.5 degrees warming Celsius — if they’re saying it’s not going to impact their assets, what they’re saying is, “Look, this is a nonbinding, non-legally binding, non-enforceable agreement and we’re going to continue with business as usual as long as we can.”"
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on February 04, 2016, 06:16:41 AM
Yeah.
Everything is awesome
Everything is cool when you're part of a team
Everything is awesome
When you're living out a dream


That's President Business and his followers theme song.
I lost my dream with Paris, that we actually would agree on mitigating, with real goals firmly anchored in scientific findings.

Another part of our dream world, knocked on my door yesterday. JW.
I had a chat with them, as usual. They didn't want to talk about climate change of course, and they tried their usual version of creation. I told them that the only creationists on this planet that I see as more extreme than Jehova, are the young earth creationists who believe this planet is six thousand years old, you belive we humans were created six thousand years ago. That's nonsense.
We have one thing in common though, most things around us today has been created through scientific findings and engineered by humans, in one way or another. Our clothes, our shoes, our cars, even the leaflets and books you're carrying. Our computers, refrigerators, air conditioners and heat pumps. If you reject science you shouldn't use anything produced today.

It doesn't matter if it's capitalism or religion, or both at the same time. The capitalists still have their dream, as well as the creationists.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 05, 2016, 07:55:14 PM
Opponents Of Obama’s Climate Plan Take Fight To The Supreme Court
A group of 29 states, along with utility and energy companies, are trying to get the Supreme Court to block Obama’s Clean Power Plan — an attempt that environmental groups say is “highly unusual” and likely to fail.
...
“Some of the attacks are on the very elements of the plan that make it flexible and cost effective,” said Sean Donahue, counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund. “We feel the rule is very strong legally and factually.”

The environmental groups filed a response to the stay application with the Supreme Court Thursday. Eighteen states, along with multiple power companies and energy associations, also filed responses in support of the rule.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/02/04/3746375/stay-request-cpp-opponents/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/02/04/3746375/stay-request-cpp-opponents/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Clare on February 06, 2016, 06:04:50 AM
I provide a few extracts from the linked interview with Naomi Klein about how climate change will make things meaner, even after considering the Paris Pact:

[url]http://billmoyers.com/story/naomi-klein-climate-change-not-just-about-things-getting-hotter-its-about-things-getting-meaner/[/url] ([url]http://billmoyers.com/story/naomi-klein-climate-change-not-just-about-things-getting-hotter-its-about-things-getting-meaner/[/url])
"


Thanks, I think this interview is excellent, longish but V WELL worth reading.
Clare
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: JimD on February 06, 2016, 04:08:01 PM
More proof that no one is going to live up to this agreement.

There were so many topics this could land in.

Fears that some of Australia's most important climate research institutions will be gutted under a Turnbull government have been realised with deep job cuts for scientists.

Fairfax Media has learnt that as many as 110 positions in the Oceans and Atmosphere division will go, with a similarly sharp reduction in the Land and Water division.

Total job cuts would be about 350 staff over two years, the CSIRO confirmed in an email to staff, with the Data61 and Manufacturing divisions also hit.

The cuts were flagged in November, just a week before the Paris climate summit began, with key divisions told to prepare lists of job cuts or to find new ways to raise revenue.

"Climate will be all gone, basically," one senior scientist said before the announcement. […]

It is understood just 30 staff will be left in the Oceans and Atmosphere unit and they will not be working on climate issues related to basic data gathering..

..About 100 jobs are planned to go from units dedicated to research in areas including greenhouse gas levels, sea level rise, ocean temperatures, ocean acidification and assessing what is required to keep global warming to two degrees. The jobs would be replaced by new positions in other areas.

Dr Church, who has worked at CSIRO since 1978 and expects to lose his job, said the cuts would make it difficult for Australia to uphold its part of the Paris deal, which agreed there should be greater investment in climate research, including improved observations and early warning systems.



http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2016/02/australia-climate-science-to-be-gutted.html (http://www.desdemonadespair.net/2016/02/australia-climate-science-to-be-gutted.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: P-maker on February 06, 2016, 08:39:09 PM
Jim,

It is the same sad story in many other countries involved in "Mission Innovation". In Denmark we have experienced a simlilar "slashing" of research budgets for new energy technologies.

2015: 380 mio. DKK
2016: 180 mio. DKK
2017:   ?
2018:   ?
2019:   ?
2020: 580 mio. DKK (MI target)

It seems outright silly to fire good and experienced people now in order to build up new secretariats, research groups and coordination units in a few years. The University of Copenhagen for instance has just kicked out 500 members of staff due to budget constraints this year.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 07, 2016, 02:26:12 AM
After climate summit, this year's green bond issuance could exceed $50 billion
http://reuters.com/article/idUSL8N15H3H9 (http://reuters.com/article/idUSL8N15H3H9)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on February 10, 2016, 12:02:18 AM
As aircraft already meet the new UN CO₂ emission standards (to be implemented by 2023): "Aviation's first-ever carbon standards won't do much to slow global warming"

http://mashable.com/2016/02/09/new-carbon-emissions-standards-for-commercial-aircraft-are-anemic/ (http://mashable.com/2016/02/09/new-carbon-emissions-standards-for-commercial-aircraft-are-anemic/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 10, 2016, 02:42:54 AM
Supreme Court blocks Obama's climate rule for power plants
The Supreme Court has blocked President Obama's landmark climate rule for power plants, dealing a major blow to the president's climate agenda.

In an order released Tuesday night, the court said it is placing a stay on the Environmental Protection Agency's plan to cut carbon pollution from power plants while industry and state lawsuits move forward.

The court granted the request in a 5-4 vote on Tuesday night, saying the rule was on hold until the circuit court reviews it and Supreme Court appeals are exhausted. The court’s four liberal justices dissented from the decision.

The rule — the Clean Power Plan — is the main plank of Obama's climate change agenda. It’s designed to cut carbon pollution from the electricity sector by 32 percent over 2005 levels by 2030 by assigning states individual reduction targets based on their energy mix.
...
The order from the court is extraordinarily unprecedented. While court often block rules temporarily, lawyers on all sides said the Supreme Court has never done so when a lower court refused to.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/268843-supreme-court-blocks-obamas-climate-rule-for-power-plants (http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/268843-supreme-court-blocks-obamas-climate-rule-for-power-plants)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: TerryM on February 10, 2016, 02:57:21 AM
Sigmetnow


Your 'signature' has never been more appropriate!


Terry
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Pmt111500 on February 10, 2016, 04:39:20 AM
Very much to my unsurprise, the US supreme voted strictly along the political parties which elected the judges to office. I do not know what the relationship between humanitarian court and the us supreme is, does someone know? Could f.e. some eskimo sue the republican judges? Yes, I know, all of them would likely be dead before the case would be closed, but it's  still interesting to think, in theory. Or maybe this could be a topic for an international, but very boring, thriller book  8) ;D ::) . Who in their right mind would want to read about the internal thoughts of participants in a case like that??? http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/02/09/3747944/breaking-the-supreme-court-just-gave-the-finger-to-president-obamas-environmental-policies/ (http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/02/09/3747944/breaking-the-supreme-court-just-gave-the-finger-to-president-obamas-environmental-policies/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 10, 2016, 04:27:38 PM
On a more optimistic note....  ;)

Ahead of the official signing of the Climate Change Agreement in April in New York, the U.N. is inviting everyone to record a 30-second video on "what the agreement means for you and what you are going to do to support it," and share it on Twitter or other social media.
http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/what-does-the-paris-agreement-mean-for-you/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/what-does-the-paris-agreement-mean-for-you/)

Here is the tweet from Achim Steiner, the UN Under-Secretary-General and UNEP Executive Director:
https://twitter.com/asteiner/status/697419170787549184 (https://twitter.com/asteiner/status/697419170787549184)

And this is from Christiana Figueres, UNFCCC Executive Secretary:
https://twitter.com/cfigueres/status/697344010885529600 (https://twitter.com/cfigueres/status/697344010885529600)

And a report on what the Paris Agreement means for the UK:
https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/694477310494384128 (https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/694477310494384128)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 10, 2016, 04:45:21 PM
The US Supreme Court's decision increases the importance of the November presidential election to the planet's fate....

The good news is that Senator Bernie Sanders, the candidate speaking loudest on the need to address climate change, won big last night in the primary voting in the state of New Hampshire -- more than 20 points over challenger Hillary Clinton.  (And even Hillary has taken to addressing climate change more directly, mentioning "millions of clean energy jobs" in her concession speech last night.)

@SenSanders: The Supreme Court's decision is deeply disappointing. There's no time to spare in the fight to combat climate change

https://twitter.com/sensanders/status/697207157469659137
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on February 10, 2016, 05:19:50 PM

The good news is that Senator Bernie Sanders, the candidate speaking loudest on the need to address climate change, won big last night in the primary voting in the state of New Hampshire -- more than 20 points over challenger Hillary Clinton.


Sigmetnow,

If you do the math you will see that following the New Hampshire primary Clinton has 394 delegates while Sanders has 42 delegates (see attached tracker and linked website, and don't forget to count the superdelegates):

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-delegate-tracker/ (http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-delegate-tracker/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 10, 2016, 06:12:15 PM
Will John Roberts Destroy His Reputation And A Livable Climate At The Same Time?
The shocking decision by the five conservative Supreme Court justices to “stay” the EPA’s carbon regulations for power plants does not, by itself, destroy what’s left of the Court’s reputation — or even doom the EPA’s Clean Power Plan (CPP).

Heck, it doesn’t even mean that the United States won’t be able to hit the CO2 reduction target it pledged with the other nations of the world in the Paris Agreement. Indeed, I expect with or without the CPP, the U.S. is probably going to meet its Paris pledge, its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC), to cut greenhouse gas pollution 26 to 28% below 2005 levels in 2025 (see below).

The Court’s stay just stops the EPA from from starting to implement its “Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units” probably until the Court itself rules on it — assuming that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit rules for the EPA and then the Supreme Court agrees to hear the appeal.

Senior White House officials said on a media call Tuesday evening that this was a temporary procedural determination that does nothing to affect the soundness of the rule, nor the White House’s determination to proceed with the rule and to cut emissions. They expressed confidence that the administration’s climate targets were achievable, citing momentum in the renewable power sector.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/02/09/3747972/john-roberts-climate/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/02/09/3747972/john-roberts-climate/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 10, 2016, 06:26:59 PM

The good news is that Senator Bernie Sanders, the candidate speaking loudest on the need to address climate change, won big last night in the primary voting in the state of New Hampshire -- more than 20 points over challenger Hillary Clinton.


Sigmetnow,

If you do the math you will see that following the New Hampshire primary Clinton has 394 delegates while Sanders has 42 delegates (see attached tracker and linked website, and don't forget to count the superdelegates):

[url]http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-delegate-tracker/[/url] ([url]http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/2016-delegate-tracker/[/url])


But 2,382 delegates are needed for the Democrat nomination.  And superdelegates can vote for whomever they choose.  Can't call the election yet.

Even if Clinton wins, though, Sanders has pushed her to be stronger on climate issues.  And no doubt the voting public will continue to do so.   :)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 11, 2016, 06:50:04 PM
Laurent Fabius Sums Up Paris Agreement Strengths and Key Objectives for 2016
Remarks to COP21/CMP11 Bureau Meeting
http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/laurent-fabius-reflections-on-the-paris-conference-and-implications-for-2016/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/laurent-fabius-reflections-on-the-paris-conference-and-implications-for-2016/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 13, 2016, 12:39:06 AM
5 States Forging Ahead With Obama Power Plan, Court Hold or Not
At least five states will press ahead with efforts to curb emissions from power plants even after the U.S. Supreme Court issued a stay on President Barack Obama’s key climate change program.

Colorado, New York, California, Virginia and Washington said they’ll move ahead irrespective of the decision by the nation’s highest court to temporarily block the Clean Power Plan on Tuesday.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-10/5-states-forging-ahead-with-obama-power-plan-court-hold-or-not (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-10/5-states-forging-ahead-with-obama-power-plan-court-hold-or-not)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on February 13, 2016, 07:33:34 AM
This agreement resembles the western worlds mitigation efforts. Facade polishing, performed by super heroes. ;)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 13, 2016, 07:48:30 PM
Holding back the Clean Power Plan will not eliminate the other green efforts already underway.

Clean Power Advocates Downplay Supreme Court's Damage to Paris Accord
Despite their own warnings that a judicial stay to the Clean Power Plan would undermine the new climate treaty, environmentalists now say they are unfazed.
Last November, as Albright and Stern were filing their briefs, a Sierra Club report predicted that electricity producers would meet the Clean Power Plan's emission targets five years ahead of schedule. It was based on the club's "Beyond Coal" campaign objective of retiring and replacing half of the nation's remaining coal fired plants with clean electricity.

"It is not the case that the Clean Power Plan is driving all the change," Coequyt said. He said the early emission goals in the plan—those that would satisfy the Paris pledges in the coming decade—were "absolutely" within reach.

Indeed, the combination of tighter controls on other pollutants like mercury, competition from cheap natural gas, and booming investment in wind and solar are pushing coal aside already, long before the Clean Power Plan deadlines arrive.

Environmental groups say that emissions reductions are even more likely since Congress, in a budget deal with the White House, extended tax breaks for wind and solar power for a few more years.

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/12022016/clean-power-advocates-downplay-supreme-court-damage-paris-climate-accord-clean-power-plan (http://insideclimatenews.org/news/12022016/clean-power-advocates-downplay-supreme-court-damage-paris-climate-accord-clean-power-plan)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: oren on February 14, 2016, 07:14:53 AM
Keeping the World below 2° Is a $12.1 Trillion Investment Opportunity, BNEF Report Says
LONDON: Keeping the world below the 2 degrees Celsius pathway presents a US$12.1 trillion investment opportunity over the next 25 years, a new analysis states.

The report Mapping the Gap: The Road From Paris, presented today by Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) at the 2016 Investor Summit on Climate Risk hosted by Ceres, shows the opportunities and challenges of filling the ‘gap’ between the business-as-usual (BAU) investment in renewable energy and what is needed to avoid the worst effects of climate change.
...
In fact, if governments and business leaders take no additional steps to what they have planned today, the investment opportunity for tackling climate change is US$6.9 trillion, or US$277 billion per year.

The ‘gap’ between this scenario and what is needed to keep the world safe is US$5.2 trillion, or US$208 billion per year. To put the numbers in perspective, authors point out this is far less than the US$454 billion per year that people in the US ask every year to get their auto loans.

[url]http://www.theclimategroup.org/what-we-do/news-and-blogs/keeping-the-world-below-2-degrees-is-a-121-trillion-investment-opportunity-bnef-report-says/[/url] ([url]http://www.theclimategroup.org/what-we-do/news-and-blogs/keeping-the-world-below-2-degrees-is-a-121-trillion-investment-opportunity-bnef-report-says/[/url])


I highly doubt that $5 trillion is all that is needed to keep the world safe. I'll have a deeper look and try to find why.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: bosbas on February 14, 2016, 12:48:24 PM
This has the potential to unleash a new era. Finally the end of the super-conservative majority of SCOTUS?
Antonin Scalia, Justice on the Supreme Court, Dies at 79:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/14/us/antonin-scalia-death.html?_r=0 (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/14/us/antonin-scalia-death.html?_r=0)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 14, 2016, 02:09:24 PM
Brian H. Potts, energy and environmental law:

Yesterday I put the chances of the #CleanPowerPlan surviving judicial review at < 10%. With #Scalia's death, I now say it's > 75%.

https://twitter.com/brianhpotts/status/698710954641588224
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 14, 2016, 02:19:37 PM
Experts React to Supreme Court Stay of Clean Power Plan
http://climatenexus.org/experts-react-supreme-court-stay-clean-power-plan (http://climatenexus.org/experts-react-supreme-court-stay-clean-power-plan)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 15, 2016, 04:52:36 PM
From the Facebook comments: "It really says something when your death will make peoples' lives better."

What U.S Supreeme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s Death Means For Climate Change
Just days after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling clouded the future of a new United Nations climate pact, the passing of one of its justices has boosted the pact's chances of succeeding.

Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia died at a resort in Texas on Saturday. Scalia, 79, was the court’s conservative leader and his death means it is now more likely that key EPA rules that aim to curb climate pollution from the power industry will be upheld.

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/what-scalias-death-means-for-climate-change-20033 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/what-scalias-death-means-for-climate-change-20033)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Bruce Steele on February 15, 2016, 07:27:35 PM
Maybe a pact without teeth trumps the very realCo2 emissions reductions plan for coal fired power plants scuttled just one week ago by Scalia's ( last?) vote.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/10/us/politics/supreme-court-blocks-obama-epa-coal-emissions-regulations.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/10/us/politics/supreme-court-blocks-obama-epa-coal-emissions-regulations.html)

Getting a new court justice appointed within the next year is unlikely so the stay on  the plans to implement emissions regulations will also hold until it is again reviewed by a lower court. There will be enormous effort put into throttling that lower court decision one way or the other because delay benefits monetary interests. I would venture to guess that lower courts will attempt some radical rulings knowing the supreme court will split 4/4 for the next year +, but that's another story.   
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: RaenorShine on February 15, 2016, 07:55:16 PM
Going Beyond "Dangerous" Climate Change -  Lecture by Professor Kevin Anderson at the London School of Economics on 4 February 2016

Despite high-level statements to the contrary, there is little to no chance of maintaining the global mean surface temperature increase at or below 2 degrees Celsius. Moreover, the impacts associated with 2°C have been revised upward sufficiently so that 2°C now more appropriately represents the threshold between 'dangerous' and 'extremely dangerous' climate change.

Kevin Anderson will address the endemic bias prevalent amongst many of those building emission scenarios to underplay the scale of the 2°C challenge. In several respects, the modeling community is actually self-censoring its research to conform to the dominant political and economic paradigm. However, even a slim chance of 'keeping below' a 2°C rise now demands a revolution in how we consume and produce energy. Such a rapid and deep transition will have profound implications for the framing of society, and is far removed from the rhetoric of green growth that increasingly dominates the climate change agenda.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T22A7mvJoc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T22A7mvJoc)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 16, 2016, 04:46:30 PM
Deal on Aviation Emissions Sets Can’t-Miss Goals
The International Civil Aviation Organization, the United Nations’ aviation agency, approved the first-ever binding agreement to cover emissions for aircrafts. New efficiency standards will apply to all new commercial jets delivered after 2028, as well as existing jets produced from 2023.

The rub is that the long-awaited standard is lower than what the industry is on track to achieve anyway in the next decade.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/16/business/energy-environment/a-hollow-agreement-on-aviation-emissions.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/16/business/energy-environment/a-hollow-agreement-on-aviation-emissions.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on February 16, 2016, 06:17:27 PM
Last weeks freeze on the new Clean Power Plan leaves the matter in the hands of a liberal appeals court which is likely to uphold the new EPA rules, before routine appeals send the case back to the Supreme Court.  If the Supreme Court rule with a 4-4 tied vote then the appeals court ruling will stand and hopeful the Clean Power Plan will be upheld.

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/what-scalias-death-means-for-climate-change-20033 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/what-scalias-death-means-for-climate-change-20033)

Extract: "Last week, Scalia and four other justices ruled to “stay” the Clean Power Plan while litigation moves forward. The 5-4 ruling effectively put a freeze on the new EPA rules while the lawsuit is heard by a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C.

That appeals court is a liberal one, and it’s expected (but not guaranteed) to uphold the new EPA rules, before routine appeals send the case to the Supreme Court."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 17, 2016, 02:58:48 PM
President Obama’s special envoy for climate change has warned Republican presidential hopefuls including Donald Trump and Ted Cruz that any attempt to scrap the Paris climate agreement would lead to a “diplomatic black eye” for the US.

Speaking to journalists in Brussels, Todd Stern also said that a recent supreme court decision to block Barack Obama’s clean power plan would not affect US climate pledges, or plans to formally sign up to the Paris agreement later this year.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/16/todd-stern-warns-republicans-against-scrapping-paris-climate-deal (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/16/todd-stern-warns-republicans-against-scrapping-paris-climate-deal)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 19, 2016, 08:31:02 PM
Christiana Figueres to leave UN climate change role
UN’s chief climate diplomat and key player in Paris agreement says she will step down in July
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/02/19/christiana-figueres-to-leave-un-climate-change-role/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/02/19/christiana-figueres-to-leave-un-climate-change-role/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 21, 2016, 08:44:49 PM
Climate scientists face tight deadline to deliver 1.5C research
Researchers will have 18-21 months to flesh out understanding of tough global warming limit if – as expected – IPCC accepts call to produce a special report.
Adopted as an aspirational goal at last December’s Paris summit, the 1.5C threshold is seen as critical to protect vulnerable communities. But most available analysis focuses on the longer standing 2C target.

Accordingly, in the small print of the deal was a request to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for a special report on 1.5C, by 2018.

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/02/15/climate-scientists-face-tight-deadline-to-deliver-1-5c-research/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/02/15/climate-scientists-face-tight-deadline-to-deliver-1-5c-research/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on February 22, 2016, 02:50:50 AM
Climate scientists face tight deadline to deliver 1.5C research
Researchers will have 18-21 months to flesh out understanding of tough global warming limit if – as expected – IPCC accepts call to produce a special report.
Adopted as an aspirational goal at last December’s Paris summit, the 1.5C threshold is seen as critical to protect vulnerable communities. But most available analysis focuses on the longer standing 2C target.

Accordingly, in the small print of the deal was a request to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for a special report on 1.5C, by 2018.

[url]http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/02/15/climate-scientists-face-tight-deadline-to-deliver-1-5c-research/[/url] ([url]http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/02/15/climate-scientists-face-tight-deadline-to-deliver-1-5c-research/[/url])


At our current rate, we might (or might not) be at 1.5C by 2018
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 22, 2016, 02:39:25 PM
At our current rate, we might (or might not) be at 1.5C by 2018

That would be quite the wake-up call, wouldn't it?
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 22, 2016, 02:40:49 PM
New COP21 President Royal Visits UNFCCC
Pledges to Build Paris Agreement Momentum
The new President of the UN climate change process, French Minister of the Environment, Energy and the Sea Ségolène Royal, made her first visit today to the secretariat of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and underlined the need for continued momentum to build on the historic Paris Climate Change Agreement, which was reached in the French capital in December.

http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/s (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/unfccc-newsroom/s)égolène-royal-appointed-new-cop21-president/
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on February 22, 2016, 11:28:15 PM
Apparently, the future of the Clean Power Plan will not be decided until spring of 2017:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/22/despite-the-supreme-court-heres-why-the-white-house-says-well-cut-carbon-anyway/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/22/despite-the-supreme-court-heres-why-the-white-house-says-well-cut-carbon-anyway/)

Extract: " … on Monday administration officials took advantage of a new report to argue that the recent five-year extensions of wind and solar tax credits will cushion the blow and serve as a “bridge” to the Clean Power Plan.
Whether that is a bridge to nowhere depends on whether the Clean Power Plan survives the court system intact. That won’t be decided until spring of 2017 after an appeals court hears and decides, and the Supreme Court reviews, the case brought against the administration’s plan by a group of state governments and utilities."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on February 23, 2016, 03:17:51 AM
Per the linked SciAm article, virtually all CoP21 plans for mitigating climate change include the use of Carbon Capture and Storage, CCS.  However, the article points-up that due to the current low price of crude oil, virtually all current commercial CCS projects are being shut-down (and cheap crude oil is expected to last through 2017, which will make it difficult to restart this industry):

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cheap-oil-is-undermining-the-success-of-nearly-every-climate-cleanup-plan/ (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cheap-oil-is-undermining-the-success-of-nearly-every-climate-cleanup-plan/)

Extract: "A few months ago at the Paris climate talks, President Barack Obama and a panoply of world leaders talked at length about the importance of reducing carbon dioxide pollution associated with burning coal, the largest source of greenhouse gases. So far there is only one way to do that without pulling the plug on coal altogether: carbon capture and storage (CCS), a process by which CO2 is pulled from a smokestack before it escapes into the air and is then buried deep underground.
Nearly every plan to mitigate global warming includes CCS, yet few countries have adopted the technology because there is little incentive to make the costly investment. Decades ago, however, the U.S. found a clever way to make the method economically viable: tie CCS to oil recovery. And while the scheme seemed to work, low oil prices now are putting CCS—and therefore almost all climate cleanup plans—in jeopardy."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 24, 2016, 04:52:01 PM
https://twitter.com/khayhoe/status/702187450299338752 (https://twitter.com/khayhoe/status/702187450299338752)
Katharine Hayhoe:  "How did I miss this?! Awesome (and very readable) 9-page summary of the history of climate policy negotiations:"   THE FRAGILE FRAMEWORK:  Can nations unite to save Earth’s climate?
   http://www.nature.com/polopoly_fs/1.18861 (http://www.nature.com/polopoly_fs/1.18861)!/menu/main/topColumns/topLeftColumn/pdf/527427a.pdf
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 25, 2016, 01:13:16 PM
Hundreds Of Lawmakers Are Ganging Up Against The Clean Power Plan
Thirty-four senators and 171 representatives signed the amicus brief, including presidential candidates and senators Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Ted Cruz (R-TX). All signatories are Republicans, except Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a coal-dependent state.
...
The White House said the court filing is just the latest Republican “obstructionist” maneuver, according to published reports. “We remain confident that we will prevail on the merits when the plan gets it full day in court,” said White House spokesman Frank Benenati to the Associated Press.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/02/24/3753132/clean-power-plan-brief/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/02/24/3753132/clean-power-plan-brief/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 27, 2016, 02:38:26 PM
Are big loans to fossil fuel companies being concentrated into the few banks (Australia, Japan) that have not sworn off such activity?

Australia's biggest banks pump billions into fossil fuels despite climate pledges
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/26/australias-biggest-banks-pump-billions-into-fossil-fuels-despite-climate-pledges (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/26/australias-biggest-banks-pump-billions-into-fossil-fuels-despite-climate-pledges)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 27, 2016, 08:00:27 PM
Rising U.S. Emissions Make Paris Promises Elusive
The biggest red flag at the moment might not involve CO2 pollution from power plants. Emissions of carbon dioxide from electricity generation barely grew at all from 2013 to 2014, the data show.

An even more intractable problem is methane, a much more potent greenhouse gas in the short term. It's increasingly clear that the administration is not sure how much we are emitting.

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/26022016/rising-us-emissions-greenhouse-gases-make-paris-climate-ageement-promises-elusive (http://insideclimatenews.org/news/26022016/rising-us-emissions-greenhouse-gases-make-paris-climate-ageement-promises-elusive)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 27, 2016, 08:03:42 PM
Study: California Methane Leak Largest in U.S. History
The gas leak that forced the evacuation of 1,800 homes in the mountains above Los Angeles late last year was the largest methane leak in U.S. history and shows the climate risks of aging natural gas infrastructure, according to a study published Thursday in the journal Science.

The Aliso Canyon leak near the Porter Ranch neighborhood was so big that it emitted 97,100 tons of methane — the equivalent of the annual greenhouse gas pollution from 572,000 cars, according to the study, which used aircraft to measure methane concentrations in the atmosphere near Aliso Canyon during the leak.

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/california-methane-leak-largest-us-history-20077 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/california-methane-leak-largest-us-history-20077)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on February 28, 2016, 06:44:40 PM
Study Calls For Leaner ‘Carbon Budget’ to Slow Warming
The difference between the previous budget estimates and Rogelj’s is that many previous estimates accounted only for carbon dioxide, leaving out other greenhouse gases such as methane.
...
Regardless of which carbon budget policymakers subscribe to, current emissions trends are not remotely on track to meet any of them, Schmidt said.

“The imperative to reduce emissions is effectively unchanged,” he said.

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/leaner-carbon-budget-to-slow-warming-20075 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/leaner-carbon-budget-to-slow-warming-20075)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 01, 2016, 05:39:35 PM
EU set to emit 2bn tonnes more CO2 than Paris climate pledge
The EU is set to emit 2bn tonnes more CO2 than it promised at the Paris climate talks, threatening an agreement to cap global warming at 2C, a note from the European commission has revealed.

Carbon prices will rise too slowly to cut industrial emissions as much as needed, says a confidential note prepared for MEPs on the environment committee, which the Guardian has seen.

Lawmakers say that the shortfall could spur criticism from other countries that signed up to the Paris agreement, which aims for net zero emissions later this century.

But a correction in the pace at which carbon allowances are removed from the market - to raise their prices - could spark anger from coal-dependent EU countries such as Poland, which believes its industry would be unfairly hit.

The EU was “caught between a rock and a hard place” said the Green MEP Bas Eickhout, who sits on the environment committee.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/29/eu-set-to-emit-2bn-tonnes-more-co2-than-paris-climate-pledge (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/29/eu-set-to-emit-2bn-tonnes-more-co2-than-paris-climate-pledge)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 02, 2016, 02:10:15 PM
“The Old Normal Is Gone”: February Shatters Global Temperature Records
Keep in mind that it took from the dawn of the industrial age until last October to reach the first 1.0 degree Celsius, and we’ve come as much as an extra 0.4 degrees further in just the last five months. Even accounting for the margin of error associated with these preliminary datasets, that means it’s virtually certain that February handily beat the record set just last month for the most anomalously warm month ever recorded. That’s stunning.
...
Almost overnight, the world has moved within arm’s reach of the climate goals negotiated just last December in Paris. There, small island nations on the front line of climate change set a temperature target of no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius rise by the year 2100 as a line in the sand, and that limit was embraced by the global community of nations. On this pace, we may reach that level for the first time—though briefly—later this year. In fact, at the daily level, we’re probably already there.  We could now be right in the heart of a decade or more surge in global warming that could kick off a series of tipping points with far-reaching implications on our species and the countless others we share the planet with.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/03/01/february_2016_s_shocking_global_warming_temperature_record.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/03/01/february_2016_s_shocking_global_warming_temperature_record.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on March 02, 2016, 11:48:13 PM
The linked (open access) reference by Hansen & Sato (2016) analyzes decadal changes-shifts in the PDFs of seasonal and regional temperatures (note the 2 sigma shift in the summertime temperature PDF in the Middle East), and national responsibilities:

Hansen J. and Sato M. (March 2 2016), "Regional climate change and national responsibilities", Environmental Research Letters, Volume 11, Number 3 , doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/034009

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/034009 (http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/034009)

Abstract: "Global warming over the past several decades is now large enough that regional climate change is emerging above the noise of natural variability, especially in the summer at middle latitudes and year-round at low latitudes. Despite the small magnitude of warming relative to weather fluctuations, effects of the warming already have notable social and economic impacts. Global warming of 2 °C relative to preindustrial would shift the 'bell curve' defining temperature anomalies a factor of three larger than observed changes since the middle of the 20th century, with highly deleterious consequences. There is striking incongruity between the global distribution of nations principally responsible for fossil fuel CO2 emissions, known to be the main cause of climate change, and the regions suffering the greatest consequences from the warming, a fact with substantial implications for global energy and climate policies."

Caption for first image: "Figure 1. Frequency of occurrence of local temperature anomalies (relative to 1951–1980 mean) divided by local standard deviation (horizontal axis) for land areas shown on map. Area under each curve is unity. Numbers above the maps are percent of the globe covered by the selected region. 'Shift' and 'width' refer to the dashed curve fit to 2005–2015 data and are relative to the 1951–1980 base period."

Caption for second image: "Figure 2. Shifting bell curves that define the frequency of local temperature anomalies relative to the 1951–1980 base period for four regions, with definitions and nomenclature as in figure 1."

Caption for third image: "Figure 3. Shifting bell curves that define the frequency of local temperature anomalies relative to the 1951–1980 base period for four regions, with definitions and nomenclature as in figure 1."

See also:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-james-hansen/regional-climate-change-a_b_9367312.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-james-hansen/regional-climate-change-a_b_9367312.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 05, 2016, 01:31:43 AM
Chief Justice Rejects Effort to Block E.P.A. Limit on Power Plants
WASHINGTON — In a significant victory for the Obama administration, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. on Thursday refused to block an Environmental Protection Agency regulation limiting emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants from coal-fired power plants.

The Obama administration has put forth nearly half a dozen major rules aimed at cutting coal pollution, and critics, who have called them a “war on coal,” have sought to block them in the courts.

But Thursday’s decision is an indication that Justice Scalia’s death has altered the balance of power on the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court had voted, 5 to 4, on the climate change stay, issued Feb. 9. Justice Scalia was in the majority, and his vote in that case was one of the last he cast before he died.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/04/us/politics/supreme-court-chief-justice-john-roberts-epa-coal.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/04/us/politics/supreme-court-chief-justice-john-roberts-epa-coal.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 07, 2016, 02:05:44 PM
China's carbon emissions may have peaked already, says Lord Stern
Report co-authored by renowned climate change economist claims Chinese emissions have peaked years earlier than its leaders pledged
Carbon emissions may have peaked already in China, years earlier than its leaders pledged, according to a study co-authored by the world-renowned economist Lord Stern.

The country’s emissions have fallen, partly as a result of its globally relevant economic slowdown, and partly owing to government policies to pursue a low-carbon path and reduce the rampant air pollution in its major cities.

If this trend continues it would show that the country’s emissions have already peaked, said Fergus Green, lead author of the report from the LSE.

This would be a landmark in international efforts to tackle emissions and fight climate change, formalised in last December’s breakthrough international accord on climate change signed in Paris. At the summit China, the world’s second biggest economy and the largest emitter of greenhouse gases, agreed that its emissions should peak by 2030.

In the new report, Green and Stern argue that if China’s emissions have not already peaked, then they are very likely to do so within the next decade, bringing the world’s biggest emitter to its internationally agreed target years earlier than expected.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/07/chinas-carbon-emissions-may-have-peaked-already-says-lord-stern (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/07/chinas-carbon-emissions-may-have-peaked-already-says-lord-stern)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on March 08, 2016, 01:52:28 AM
The linked Robert Scribbler article & plot, and the subsequent references on TCRE, illustrate how challenging it will be to stay below 2C even if we start reducing GHG emission immediately, if TCRE is on the high side of its 0.8C to 2.5C ESLD range:


http://robertscribbler.com/2016/03/07/climate-change-why-2016-may-be-the-most-important-election-in-us-history/ (http://robertscribbler.com/2016/03/07/climate-change-why-2016-may-be-the-most-important-election-in-us-history/)

Caption for attached image: "Amount of warming this Century expected under differing emissions reduction and climate sensitivity scenarios. In the above graph TCRE stands for transient climate response to emissions. It’s basically how much warming you get short term as a result of accumulated greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere. Note that greenhouse gas emissions need to decline by more than 2 percent per year starting now if we are to have much confidence in avoiding 2 C warming this Century. It’s also worth noting that even a slow decline rate from near now likely locks in about 3 C warming this Century. Image source: Impact of Delay in Reducing CO2 Emissions."

See also:

https://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2015/12/02/sensitivity-to-cumulative-emissions/ (https://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2015/12/02/sensitivity-to-cumulative-emissions/)

Extract: "Something I’ve mentioned here quite regularly is the idea that warming depends roughly linearly on cumulative (total) emissions. This is slightly counter intuitive, in that warming depends logarithmically on atmospheric CO2 concentration. The reason is essentially that it incorporates climate sensitivity (which depends on changing atmospheric concentrations) and carbon cycle feedbacks, into a single quantity. It seems that the airborne fraction is expected to increase so as to compensate for the logarithmic dependence on atmospheric CO2 concentration. In others words, the expectation is that if we double how much we’ve emitted, we’ll more than double the human contribution to the atmospheric CO2 concentration.
There are a number of papers that have considered this and the general result is that it appears to be a reasonable relationship for most realistic future emission pathways, although it might over-estimate the warming from the highest emission pathway. The quantity is called the transient response to cumulative carbon emissions (TCRE) and is thought to have a range of 0.8 to 2.5oC per 1000GtC for real emission pathways, and 1 to 2oC per 1000GtC, for a 1% per year CO2 only emission pathway. The reason for the difference is simply that the real emission pathways include non-CO2 GHGs, while the TCRE is defined in terms of the CO2 emissions only."

&

Andrew H. MacDougall and Pierre Friedlingstein (2015), "The Origin and Limits of the Near Proportionality between Climate Warming and Cumulative CO2 Emissions", J. Climate, 28, 4217–4230, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00036.1 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00036.1)


http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00036.1 (http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00036.1)

Abstract: "The transient climate response to cumulative CO2 emissions (TCRE) is a useful metric of climate warming that directly relates the cause of climate change (cumulative carbon emissions) to the most used index of climate change (global mean near-surface temperature change). In this paper, analytical reasoning is used to investigate why TCRE is near constant over a range of cumulative emissions up to 2000 Pg of carbon. In addition, a climate model of intermediate complexity, forced with a constant flux of CO2 emissions, is used to explore the effect of terrestrial carbon cycle feedback strength on TCRE. The analysis reveals that TCRE emerges from the diminishing radiative forcing from CO2 per unit mass being compensated for by the diminishing ability of the ocean to take up heat and carbon. The relationship is maintained as long as the ocean uptake of carbon, which is simulated to be a function of the CO2 emissions rate, dominates changes in the airborne fraction of carbon. Strong terrestrial carbon cycle feedbacks have a dependence on the rate of carbon emission and, when present, lead to TRCE becoming rate dependent. Despite these feedbacks, TCRE remains roughly constant over the range of the representative concentration pathways and therefore maintains its primary utility as a metric of climate change."

&

Andrew H. MacDougall (2016), "The Transient Response to Cumulative CO2 Emissions: a Review", Current Climate Change Reports 2, 39-47, DOI: 10.1007/s40641-015-0030-6


http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs40641-015-0030-6 (http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs40641-015-0030-6)


Abstract: "The transient climate response to cumulative CO2 emissions (TCRE) is a metric of climate change that directly relates the primary cause of climate change (cumulative CO2 emissions) to global mean temperature change. The metric was developed once researchers noticed that the cumulative CO2 versus temperature change curve was nearly linear for almost all Earth system model output. Here, recent literature on the origin, limits, and value of TCRE is reviewed. TCRE appears to emerge from the diminishing radiative forcing per unit mass of atmospheric CO2 being compensated by diminishing efficiency of ocean heat uptake and the modulation of airborne fraction of carbon by ocean processes. The best estimate of the value of TCRE is between 0.8 to 2.5 K EgC−1. Overall, TCRE has been shown to be a conceptually simple and robust metric of climate warming with many applications in formulating climate policy."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 08, 2016, 01:32:56 PM
Obama administration pays out $500m to climate change project
The Obama administration has made a first installment on its $3bn pledge to help poor countries fight climate change – defying Republican opposition to the president’s environmental plan.

The $500m payment to the Green Climate Fund was seen as critical to shoring up international confidence in Barack Obama’s ability to deliver on the pledges made at the United Nations’ climate change conference in Paris in late 2015.

Obama is expected to announce a number of joint climate initiatives when Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau visits Washington this week, sources familiar with the plans said.

The White House is also working with United Nations officials to encourage countries to formally approve the Paris climate agreement ahead of a signing ceremony on 22 April.

At least 55 countries, representing at least 55% of global climate emissions, must ratify the agreement before it formally takes effect.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/07/obama-administration-pays-out-500m-to-climate-change-project?CMP=twt_a-environment_b-gdneco (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/07/obama-administration-pays-out-500m-to-climate-change-project?CMP=twt_a-environment_b-gdneco)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on March 08, 2016, 11:27:56 PM
Obama & Trudeau are promising to work together to fight climate change:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/08/barack-obama-and-justin-trudeau-to-join-forces-on-climate-change (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/08/barack-obama-and-justin-trudeau-to-join-forces-on-climate-change)

Extract: "Barack Obama and Justin Trudeau will commit to work together to fight climate change and protect an Arctic experiencing the mildest winter ever recorded, sources familiar with the initiatives said.

The two leaders were expected to announce a number of common climate measures at a meeting at the White House this week, from a 45% cut in methane emissions from the oil and gas industry to protections for a rapidly warming Arctic."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 09, 2016, 07:25:57 PM
More on the upcoming Obama-Trudeau agreement.  This article's focus is on how things have changed from Stephen Harper's term in office.

A Brief History Of Canada’s Stunning About-Face on Climate Change
Newly elected Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and President Obama are expected to sign onto a joint climate change strategy during Trudeau’s upcoming visit to Washington. The agreement, to be approved this week, will likely touch on automotive fuel standards and include measures to spur the adoption of electric vehicles.

This is notable for two reasons. First, crude oil is Canada’s largest export, and the United States is Canada’s biggest customer. That Trudeau is working with Obama to cut petroleum consumption on both sides of the border, even as plummeting oil prices spur a downturn in Canada’s economy, is nothing short of remarkable.

Second, a bilateral agreement to cut carbon pollution would almost certainly not have been possible even a year ago. For the last decade, Trudeau’s predecessor, Stephen Harper, undermined climate action seemingly at every turn, genuflecting to Canada’s most powerful and politically influential industry — oil. Since Trudeau’s Liberal Party swept to power in October, Canada has seen a stunning about-face on climate policy.

During his tenure, Harper made no attempts to regulate carbon pollution through cap-and-trade or a carbon tax. He muzzled scientists, cut research funding, targeted environmental groups, and secretly committed government money to advocating for the export of tar sands oil. To environmentalists, Harper was a villain. Climate Action Network Europe ranked Canada among Russia, Iran, and Saudi Arabia in its 2015 Climate Change Performance Index, a rating of countries’ climate policies.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/03/09/3757245/canada-energy-history/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/03/09/3757245/canada-energy-history/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on March 09, 2016, 07:33:17 PM
The linked reference uses empirically informed levels of strategic reasoning to calibrate model simulations of international negotiations on climate change.  First, the research shows that when a tipping point threshold has been clearly identified then it is easier to achieve an international agree such as the Paris Pact; thus using inversion the fact that the Paris Pact was achieved is an indication that clear evidence of an impending tipping point was presented to the negotiators at CoP21.  Second, the research shows that "policy elites" (like those in the EU & the USA) often use higher degrees of strategic reasoning to try to beggar their neighbors when negotiating national emission levels within such agreements; which indicates that it will likely be extremely difficult to ratchet-up additional emission restriction; which increases the probability for climate catastrophe this century:

Vilhelm Verendel, Daniel J. A. Johansson & Kristian Lindgren (2016), "Strategic reasoning and bargaining in catastrophic climate change games", Nature Climate Change, Volume: 6, Pages: 265–268, doi:10.1038/nclimate2849

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n3/full/nclimate2849.html (http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n3/full/nclimate2849.html)

Abstract: "Two decades of international negotiations show that agreeing on emission levels for climate change mitigation is a hard challenge. However, if early warning signals were to show an upcoming tipping point with catastrophic damage, theory and experiments suggest this could simplify collective action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. At the actual threshold, no country would have a free-ride incentive to increase emissions over the tipping point, but it remains for countries to negotiate their emission levels to reach these agreements. We model agents bargaining for emission levels using strategic reasoning to predict emission bids by others and ask how this affects the possibility of reaching agreements that avoid catastrophic damage. It is known that policy elites often use a higher degree of strategic reasoning, and in our model this increases the risk for climate catastrophe. Moreover, some forms of higher strategic reasoning make agreements to reduce greenhouse gases unstable. We use empirically informed levels of strategic reasoning when simulating the model."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 11, 2016, 04:11:12 AM
Obama and Trudeau Pledge New Climate Action to Protect the Arctic
In a joint statement, Obama and Trudeau pledged to work together to boost investment in clean energy; establish a pan-Arctic marine protection network and low-impact Arctic shipping corridors; limit greenhouse gas emissions, including methane; and pursue a number of other initiatives designed to slow global warming and speed up protection of the fragile Arctic. As Mashable reports, the emerging North American alliance on climate change comes after decades of rancor between the two countries on the environment—but depending on who wins the White House this November, the partnership may not last long.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/03/10/barack_obama_and_justin_trudeau_announce_new_climate_and_arctic_initiatives.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/03/10/barack_obama_and_justin_trudeau_announce_new_climate_and_arctic_initiatives.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: jbg on March 15, 2016, 01:40:56 PM

I highly doubt that $5 trillion is all that is needed to keep the world safe. I'll have a deeper look and try to find why.
I highly doubt that the $5 trillion would not just wind up in the Swiss bank accounts of Third World autocrats.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 15, 2016, 11:16:40 PM
Zero carbon emissions target to be enshrined in UK law
The UK will enshrine in law a long-term goal of reducing its carbon emissions to zero, as called for in last year’s historic Paris climate deal.

Responding to former Labour leader Ed Miliband’s call to put the target into law, energy minister Andrea Leadsom told parliament on Monday: “The government believes that we will need to take the step of enshrining the Paris goal for net zero emissions in UK law. The question is not whether but how we do it.”

The UK is already legally bound by the Climate Change Act to reduce emissions 80% by 2050, but a law mandating a 100% cut would mark a dramatic increase in ambition. The final 20% is seen as the most difficult to cut, as it would have to come from sectors such as farming, which are not as easy to decarbonise as power plants.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/14/zero-carbon-emissions-target-enshrined-uk-law (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/14/zero-carbon-emissions-target-enshrined-uk-law)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 17, 2016, 08:38:23 PM
Poland Hardens Opposition to Stricter European Climate Policies
Poland adopted a resolution against stepping up European Union climate ambitions, hardening its opposition to stricter emission policies before negotiations about how the bloc’s 28 member states should share the burden of cutting pollution in the next decade.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-15/poland-hardens-opposition-to-stricter-european-climate-policies (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-15/poland-hardens-opposition-to-stricter-european-climate-policies)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 19, 2016, 08:08:52 PM
UN Names Angry Birds Character "Red" to Tackle Climate Change
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/names-angry-birds-character-red-tackle-climate-change-37765228 (http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory/names-angry-birds-character-red-tackle-climate-change-37765228)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 23, 2016, 05:10:13 PM
FlightPath 1.5 Launches 100 Days after COP21
Leading environmental organizations today launched FlightPath 1.5, an international campaign aimed at solving the defining global climate change issue of 2016: reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the airline industry.

The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the United Nations (UN) decision-making body charged with regulating aviation emissions, takes up the issue in September. If it fails to take bold steps, aviation emissions are projected to triple by 2050. Aviation, a top-ten global polluter, was not directly addressed in the landmark COP21 Paris climate agreement agreed to 100 days ago today.

In response to the growing urgency to address aviation emissions, FlightPath 1.5 is focused on ensuring that ICAO and its 191 Member States adopt a meaningful new agreement in 2016. The time window for action is tight: October 7, 2016 is the last day of the two-week ICAO Assembly, and the next Assembly won’t happen again for another three years. Inaction by ICAO threatens to directly undermine efforts to limit planetary warming to no more than 1.5°C. The Paris Agreement set the 1.5°C target to avoid a climatic tipping point of irreversible climate impacts.

http://blueandgreentomorrow.com/2016/03/22/flightpath-1-5-launches-100-days-cop21/ (http://blueandgreentomorrow.com/2016/03/22/flightpath-1-5-launches-100-days-cop21/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on March 31, 2016, 05:49:34 PM
The linked reference indicates that ESLD thinking with regards to methane & nitrous oxide emissions from anthropogenic land use (largely farming), will make achieving the CoP21 target even harder to achieve than a continuous WWII type of effort (which is currently not planned):

Hanqin Tian, Chaoqun Lu, Philippe Ciais, Anna M. Michalak, Josep G. Canadell, Eri Saikawa, Deborah N. Huntzinger, Kevin R. Gurney, Stephen Sitch, Bowen Zhang, Jia Yang, Philippe Bousquet, Lori Bruhwiler, Guangsheng Chen, Edward Dlugokencky, Pierre Friedlingstein, Jerry Melillo, Shufen Pan, Benjamin Poulter, Ronald Prinn, Marielle Saunois, Christopher R. Schwalm & Steven C. Wofsy (10 March 2016), "The terrestrial biosphere as a net source of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere", Nature, Volume: 531, Pages: 225–228, doi:10.1038/nature16946

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v531/n7593/full/nature16946.html (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v531/n7593/full/nature16946.html)

Abstract: "The terrestrial biosphere can release or absorb the greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), and therefore has an important role in regulating atmospheric composition and climate. Anthropogenic activities such as land-use change, agriculture and waste management have altered terrestrial biogenic greenhouse gas fluxes, and the resulting increases in methane and nitrous oxide emissions in particular can contribute to climate change. The terrestrial biogenic fluxes of individual greenhouse gases have been studied extensively, but the net biogenic greenhouse gas balance resulting from anthropogenic activities and its effect on the climate system remains uncertain. Here we use bottom-up (inventory, statistical extrapolation of local flux measurements, and process-based modelling) and top-down (atmospheric inversions) approaches to quantify the global net biogenic greenhouse gas balance between 1981 and 2010 resulting from anthropogenic activities and its effect on the climate system. We find that the cumulative warming capacity of concurrent biogenic methane and nitrous oxide emissions is a factor of about two larger than the cooling effect resulting from the global land carbon dioxide uptake from 2001 to 2010. This results in a net positive cumulative impact of the three greenhouse gases on the planetary energy budget, with a best estimate (in petagrams of CO2 equivalent per year) of 3.9 ± 3.8 (top down) and 5.4 ± 4.8 (bottom up) based on the GWP100 metric (global warming potential on a 100-year time horizon). Our findings suggest that a reduction in agricultural methane and nitrous oxide emissions, particularly in Southern Asia, may help mitigate climate change."


See also:
https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-food-production-overwhelm-efforts-combat-climate-change.html (https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-food-production-overwhelm-efforts-combat-climate-change.html)
Extract: "Each year our terrestrial biosphere absorbs about a quarter of all the carbon dioxide emissions that humans produce. This a very good thing; it helps to moderate the warming produced by human activities such as burning fossil fuels and cutting down forests.
But in a paper published in Nature today, we show that emissions from other human activities, particularly food production, are overwhelming this cooling effect. This is a worrying trend, at a time when CO₂ emissions from fossil fuels are slowing down, and is clearly not consistent with efforts to stabilise global warming well below 2℃ as agreed at the Paris climate conference.
To explain why, we need to look at two other greenhouse gases: methane and nitrous oxide."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on March 31, 2016, 07:12:50 PM
ASLR,

Would you agree that an increase in vertical farming could reduce food-related greenhouse gas emissions?

Vertical Farming Could Cut 20% off Global Emissions
https://urbanverticalproject.wordpress.com/2015/12/03/vertical-farming-could-cut-20-of-global-emissions/ (https://urbanverticalproject.wordpress.com/2015/12/03/vertical-farming-could-cut-20-of-global-emissions/)


The Rise of Vertical Farms

- Farming is ruining the environment, and not enough arable land remains to feed a projected 9.5 billion people by 2050.
- Growing food in glass high-rises could drastically reduce fossil-fuel emissions and recycle city wastewater that now pollutes waterways.
- A one-square-block farm 30 stories high could yield as much food as 2,400 outdoor acres, with less subsequent spoilage.
- Existing hydroponic greenhouses provide a basis for prototype vertical farms now being considered by urban planners in cities worldwide.

http://www.nature.com/scientificamerican/journal/v301/n5/full/scientificamerican1109-80.html (http://www.nature.com/scientificamerican/journal/v301/n5/full/scientificamerican1109-80.html)

I appreciate your thoughts on this.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 01, 2016, 04:49:20 PM
ASLR,

Would you agree that an increase in vertical farming could reduce food-related greenhouse gas emissions?

...

I appreciate your thoughts on this.


Sigmetnow,

While I would agree that if contentiously applied vertical farming could be beneficial for relatively rich cities like New York, London, Tokyo, etc. But with rapid population growth concentrated in the developing world (Nigeria, India, etc.) I do not think that these developing countries will have sufficient resources to implement vertical farming on a widespread bases.  Therefore, on average I still believe that food production will push the CoP21 scenarios towards higher radiative forcing than assumed.

Again, I think that limited use of this technology can & should be developed, but it can only be one limited beachhead in a continuous WWII level of effort (currently not planned by CoP21) required to effectively address climate change.

Best,
ASLR

See also:

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/03/us-increase-meat-consumption-europe-less-meat-sustainability (http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/03/us-increase-meat-consumption-europe-less-meat-sustainability)

Extract: "The USDA has predicted that 2016 will be the biggest year in a decade in Americans' consumption of beef. We'll eat an estimated 53.4 pounds, nearly half a pound more per person than last year."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 01, 2016, 04:55:10 PM
First we had shale gas developments, then coal to syngas development in China, and now we are likely to have natural gas development from methane hydrates in countries like Japan and New Zealand (within the next few decades).  While often marketed as a bridge to a sustainable energy future, due to leaks methane can have a stronger radiative footprint than coal.  We need to learn to leave fossil fuels in the ground, not to show how clever we are in developing new technology to develop non-conventional fossil fuel energy sources (which also make us richer so we consume more):


http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/8422140/Ice-gas-holds-huge-potential (http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/8422140/Ice-gas-holds-huge-potential)

Extract: "Yesterday, in a world first, Japan said it had extracted natural "ice" gas from methane hydrates beneath the sea off its coasts in a technological coup. All the gas hydrates around the coast could meet the country's gas needs for the next century and radically change the world's energy outlook.
Tokyo hoped to bring the gas to market on a commercial scale within five years, with the immediate discovery potentially holding the equivalent of 11 years of gas imports.
New Zealand's potential methane hydrate deposits are similar to those in Japan.

New Zealand has some of the biggest methane hydrate deposits in the world, with the potential to meet all New Zealand's needs and create a gas export for decades.
The largest gas hydrate province is on the Hikurangi Margin east of the North Island, with up 5 to 50 trillion cubic feet, compared with the Maui gasfield's 4 tcf at time of discovery."

Edit: I note that the Hikurangi Margin is current venting significant amounts of methane, as the associated seafloor is moving.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: TerryM on April 01, 2016, 11:13:04 PM
ASLR


Do you have a link for the Hikurangi Margin emissions? If depths are as indicated in your link, methane escaping to the atmosphere through that much sea water is quite unusual.


Thanks
Terry
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 02, 2016, 12:14:15 AM
ASLR


Do you have a link for the Hikurangi Margin emissions? If depths are as indicated in your link, methane escaping to the atmosphere through that much sea water is quite unusual.


Thanks
Terry


Terry,

I believe that the methane emissions are episodic when the local seafloor slides; and the following link, and quote, references just possible methane hydrate emission source of the coast of New Zealand in just 200m of water:


http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/10039610/Methane-field-discovered-off-Gisborne-coast (http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/10039610/Methane-field-discovered-off-Gisborne-coast)

Quote: "A "huge network" of frozen methane and methane gas has been discovered in ocean sediments 20 kilometres to 50km off Gisborne.
A joint New Zealand-German research team found 99 gas flares in a 50-square kilometre area, venting in columns up to 250 metres high, the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa) said.
Methane was also found building up beneath a large landslide and being released along the landslide margin, and there were indications of large areas of methane hydrates - ice-like frozen methane - below the sea floor.
The discoveries were made by a 16-member team using state-of-the-art seismic and echosounder technology on board the Niwa research vessel Tangaroa.
The concentration of sea floor gas vents was the densest known off the New Zealand coast, and the vents were in much shallower water than usual.
Venting usually happened around a depth of 800m on large ridges in the middle of the continental slope, Niwa marine geologist and voyage leader Dr Joshu Mountjoy said.
In this case venting was going on along the edge of the shelf in as little as 200m of water.
The work is part of a larger project focused on the interaction between gas hydrates and and slow-moving active landslides. The area surveyed was known to have large active landslides, up to 15km long and 100m thick.
Researchers were also hoping to understand whether some methane was reaching the atmosphere, rather than being mixed up in the water column and consumed by biological processes as normally happened, Mountjoy said.
"Methane is a very effective greenhouse gas and seabed methane release has the potential to dramatically alter the earth's climate," he said.
"As ocean temperatures change the methane hydrate system has the potential to become unstable."
It would be interesting to find out whether global warming was changing the ocean system off Gisborne and causing more methane expulsion than previously. Higher ocean temperatures could change conditions so ice could turn back into a gas.
It remained to be seen whether the area off Gisborne was sensitive to climate change, Mountjoy said.
"We may be entering into a situation where global climate change is influencing the methane hydrate system."
The researchers were also trying to understand what caused the large, slow landslides in the area.
In a recently submitted scientific paper they proposed the landslides might be the sea floor equivalent of glaciers, with frozen methane rather than water ice. Alternatively pressurized gas could be causing landslides to move down slope."

See also the attached image of the methane gas leaks and the information at the following link:

http://www.niwa.co.nz/news/joint-new-zealand-german-3d-survey-reveals-massive-seabed-gas-hydrate-and-methane-system (http://www.niwa.co.nz/news/joint-new-zealand-german-3d-survey-reveals-massive-seabed-gas-hydrate-and-methane-system)

Also, to state the obvious, if the water depth is about 200-m and the column of methane bubbles in the water are about 250m tall, then a significant about of methane must be reaching the atmosphere.

Also see:
https://eos.org/project-updates/investigations-of-shallow-slow-slip-offshore-of-new-zealand (https://eos.org/project-updates/investigations-of-shallow-slow-slip-offshore-of-new-zealand)

Extract: "
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 04, 2016, 04:05:31 AM
UN’s Paris climate deal could enter into force this year
The Paris Climate Agreement could become operational by the end of 2016.

This would be well before many of the diplomats who negotiated it (and the journalists who covered it) would have expected, but it is the inescapable conclusion of a careful reading of the deal and accompanying documents.

While the official mandate under which countries negotiated the Agreement stated that it was to “come into effect and be implemented from 2020” – and while numerous draft versions contained language that would have delayed entry into force until that date – the final version of the Agreement contains no such restriction.

Instead, as adopted, states agreed simply that it will enter into force thirty days after at least 55 countries, representing at least 55% of global emissions, ratify it.

Taken together, China and the United States account for nearly 40% of global emissions.

If both ratify the Agreement this year – and they announced on Thursday that that they will each take “respective domestic steps” to do just that – entry into force will require only a further 53 countries (out of a remaining 193) representing a further 17% of global emissions.

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/04/01/uns-paris-climate-deal-could-enter-into-force-this-year/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/04/01/uns-paris-climate-deal-could-enter-into-force-this-year/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: wili on April 04, 2016, 05:22:15 AM
"entry into force will require only a further 53 countries (out of a remaining 193) representing a further 17% of global emissions."

Presumably this is based on averaging all the emissions, but surely it would only take a much smaller number of high emitters to complete that last 17%: the EU (28 nations) would probably do it, with some combination of the top two or three of any of the next five top emitters: India, Russia, Indonesia, Brazil, Japan...
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 04, 2016, 10:21:11 AM
"entry into force will require only a further 53 countries (out of a remaining 193) representing a further 17% of global emissions."

Presumably this is based on averaging all the emissions, but surely it would only take a much smaller number of high emitters to complete that last 17%: the EU (28 nations) would probably do it, with some combination of the top two or three of any of the next five top emitters: India, Russia, Indonesia, Brazil, Japan...

First, the pact says you have to have both at least 55 countries adopting and these adopting countries need to represent 55% of global emissions.

Second, it is not clear to me what "enter into force" means for a voluntary pact.

Third, it is not clear to me what constitutes "global emissions"; e.g. are tropical rainforest wildfires counted; and what GWP do they use for methane to calculate CO2-e?
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 04, 2016, 09:40:40 PM
Major Companies Back Obama’s Climate Regulations In Court
Four big companies have joined the legal battle in favor of the Obama administration’s signature climate change regulations that would curb emissions from coal-fired power plants.

Software maker Adobe, candy company Mars, furniture giant IKEA, and insurance behemoth Blue Cross Blue Shield filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., in support of the Clean Power Plan, which aims to reduce climate change-causing pollution.
...

“(We) believe the Clean Power Plan, when fully implemented, would not cause business harm to (our) operations as large energy consumers and purchasers,” the four companies wrote in their submission to the court. “Swift and full implementation of the Clean Power Plan will directly benefit” the companies’ operations.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/companies-climate-regulations_us_56fee2fee4b083f5c607c33d (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/companies-climate-regulations_us_56fee2fee4b083f5c607c33d)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 05, 2016, 02:28:18 AM
@UNFCCC:
Our new guide to everything u wanted to know about the #ParisAgreement & didn't dare to ask
 https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/717009597794529281 (https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/717009597794529281)

UN Climate Change
Paris Agreement
http://newsroom.unfccc.int/paris-agreement/the-paris-climate-change-agreement-and-associated-decisions-a-guide-to-its-purpose-and-structure/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/paris-agreement/the-paris-climate-change-agreement-and-associated-decisions-a-guide-to-its-purpose-and-structure/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 06, 2016, 02:00:18 AM
Catholic institutions support Clean Power Plan
Citing a moral obligation to care for the natural world and all inhabitants of the earth, 30 Catholic and faith-based institutions filed an amicus brief with a federal appeals court in support of the Clean Power Plan.

The brief argues that the Environmental Protection Agency has the duty to protect human health from harmful pollution in ways outlined in the plan, which establishes federal limits on carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants.

The brief said evidence of the human cause of climate change is “undeniable.”

http://catholicphilly.com/2016/04/news/national-news/catholic-institutions-join-brief-supporting-clean-power-plan/ (http://catholicphilly.com/2016/04/news/national-news/catholic-institutions-join-brief-supporting-clean-power-plan/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 07, 2016, 02:44:11 AM
Banks Pledge $7 Billion to Scale Up Clean Energy Investment
“By providing $8 billion in commitments, we can help to advance new investment opportunities in clean energy, as well as other sustainable development goals and achieve the necessary scale for a positive impact on climate change.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-06/banks-pledge-7-billion-to-scale-up-clean-energy-investment (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-06/banks-pledge-7-billion-to-scale-up-clean-energy-investment)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 07, 2016, 04:11:49 PM
US and Canada continue climate alliance with move to curb methane emissions
Meeting represents one of the last chances to grow on climate partnership agreed on by Justin Trudeau and Barack Obama before US president leaves office
The US and Canadian leaders enjoyed a mind meld on climate change, according to Gina McCarthy, who heads the Environmental Protection Agency.

“We have real kindred spirits in Canada right now, and a tremendous interest on the part of prime minister Trudeau and president Obama to really work together,” McCarthy told a breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.

Obama and Trudeau agreed last month to cut methane emissions from the oil and gas industry by up to 45% from 2012 levels by 2025. The understanding was a break with the pro-energy policies of Stephen Harper, the former prime minister, who had lobbied heavily for the Keystone XL pipeline.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/06/us-canada-obama-trudeau-climate-change-methane-emissions (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/06/us-canada-obama-trudeau-climate-change-methane-emissions)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: ghoti on April 08, 2016, 12:28:57 AM
I listened to interviews with both the EPA administrator and the Minister of Environment and Climate Change as well as presentations they made later in the day. My first reaction was frustration because this seemed like so little and they both seemed to put into terms of promoting the oil and gas industry.

Then I finally realized the brilliance of the proposed methane reductions. They get to seem like they are promoting the oil industry while actually ensuring its decline.

Enforcing reduction of fugitive emission of methane is very much like enforcing mercury, SO2 and NO2 reductions from coal power plants. People will see it as the right thing to do. Once the costs of eliminating mercury, SO2 and NO2 are included coal became uneconomical and that's without even adding a price on the carbon. Forcing the oil and gas  industry to cut fugitive emission of methane  by 45% is one way of internalizing the negative costs of methane.

I am convinced this is in effect adding a carbon price on oil without ever calling it that. This additional cost will render more of the unconventional oil plays uneconomical. It will reduce the profitability of existing oil and gas production driving the downstream price up and reducing the amount available for future investment.

As well if they actually manage to get fugitive emission down as planned it is a huge reduction in existing GHG pollution.

Very crafty!
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 09, 2016, 02:18:02 AM
April 22 Paris Agreement Signing in New York
The Paris Climate Change Agreement opens for signature on 22 April 2016 during a high-level ceremony convened by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in New York, marking an important international push on the way to the agreement’s timely entry into force.

Over 130 countries have confirmed to United Nations headquarters that they will attend the signing ceremony, including some 60 world leaders, amongst them President Francois Hollande of France

http://newsroom.unfccc.int/paris-agreement/april-22-paris-agreement-signing-ceremony-in-new-york/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/paris-agreement/april-22-paris-agreement-signing-ceremony-in-new-york/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 10, 2016, 10:32:03 PM
The linked article (& associated peer reviewed paper) indicate that merely investing in renewable and/or nuclear power, without large investments in Negative Emissions Technologies, NET, will be insufficient to achieve the CoP21 goal of staying below a 2C increase (above pre-industrial):

http://phys.org/news/2016-04-renewables-nuclear-substitute-carbon-dioxide.html (http://phys.org/news/2016-04-renewables-nuclear-substitute-carbon-dioxide.html)

Extract: "In a paper published in Nature Climate Change, leading climate physicist Professor Myles Allen, from the Oxford Martin Programme on Resource Stewardship, argues that investment in technologies to capture and dispose of carbon dioxide is vital to stabilise climate, especially at temperatures 'well below 2 degrees Celsius', as called for in Paris, and that 'spare no expense' approaches to cutting emissions in the short term may even be counterproductive. "


Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 10, 2016, 11:11:48 PM
World Bank to spend 28% of investments on climate change projects
The World Bank has made a “fundamental shift” in its role of alleviating global poverty, by refocusing its financing efforts towards tackling climate change, the group said on Thursday.

The world’s biggest provider of public finance to developing countries said it would spend 28% of its investments directly on climate change projects, and that all of its future spending would take account of global warming.

At last year’s landmark conference on climate change in Paris, the World Bank and its fellow development banks were made the linchpins of providing financial assistance to the poor world, to enable countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to the effects of global warming.
...

John Roome, senior director for climate change at the World Bank, told journalists: “This is a fundamental shift for the World Bank. We are putting climate change into our DNA. Climate change will drive 100 million more people into poverty in the next 15 years [unless action is taken].”

At least $16bn a year, from across the World Bank group, which includes other development and finance institutions, will be directed to climate change projects, including renewable energy and energy efficiency. The group will aim to mobilise $13bn in extra funding from the private sector within four years, for instance through joint funding programmes. By 2020, these efforts should amount to about $29bn a year, nearly a third of the $100bn a year in climate finance promised by rich countries to the poor as part of global climate change agreements.

As part of the institution’s new strategy, it will help to fund the construction of enough renewable energy to power 150m homes in developing countries, and build early warning systems of climate-related disasters – such as storms and floods – for 100 million people.

The bank will also target “smart” agriculture systems, which use less water and energy and retain soil fertility, and will help countries develop their transport and urban infrastructure to produce much less carbon. All projects considered for funding – including health, education and other development priorities – will be screened for their vulnerability to the impacts of climate change.

The World Bank has attracted strong criticism in the past for backing the construction of high-emissions infrastructure, chiefly coal-fired power stations, and had already made moves away from such investments. Roome refused to rule out fossil fuel investments in the future, but said they would be subject to strict criteria, to do with their necessity, ensuring the most efficient technology was used, and investigation of alternatives. For instance, he said, gas could provide a “transition” away from high-carbon fuels for countries struggling to build new renewable energy capacity.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/07/world-bank-investments-climate-change-environment (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/07/world-bank-investments-climate-change-environment)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 11, 2016, 05:05:46 PM
The linked article discusses the efforts of a new U.N. panel trying to determine how to limit GMST rise to 1.5C (because the consequences of reaching this limit are high); while other scientists are concerned that it may already be too late to achieve this high ambition goal.

http://www.globalpost.com/article/6758329/2016/04/11/un-panel-study-cap-global-warming-may-be-out-reach (http://www.globalpost.com/article/6758329/2016/04/11/un-panel-study-cap-global-warming-may-be-out-reach)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 11, 2016, 05:44:36 PM
Germany, Austria call for higher EU 2030 climate ambition
Environment ministers criticise ‘very weak’ European Commission response to Paris climate pact – but other states defend existing target
Germany, Austria, Portugal and Luxembourg are leading calls for the EU to increase its 2030 climate targets in light of December’s Paris agreement.

At a webcast meeting of environment ministers on Friday, they criticised the European Commission for advising no change was needed.

Several others spoke of the need to fully participate in the 5-yearly reviews of national climate plans set out in the UN text.

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/03/04/germany-austria-call-for-higher-eu-2030-climate-ambition/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/03/04/germany-austria-call-for-higher-eu-2030-climate-ambition/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 11, 2016, 08:19:45 PM
How Obama’s fast move to join the Paris climate agreement could tie up the next president
In late March, when the United States and China jointly declared that they’d be moving to immediately sign and then join the Paris climate agreement “as early as possible this year,” it was seen as the latest show of joint leadership by the two largest emitters.

But there’s another possible implication that went largely unnoticed. If the nations of the world, led by its two biggest contributors to climate change, jump through all the hoops needed to bring this agreement into force before President Obama leaves office, the next U.S. president could have a difficult time — or at least, a long wait — if he or she wanted to get out of it.

The Paris agreement does not state or limit when it can go into effect — it simply depends on when enough countries formally sign and join it. If that occurred while Obama is still in office, “then the next president could not withdraw until sometime in 2019, and the withdrawal would not be effective until sometime in 2020,” said Daniel Bodansky, a scholar of international environmental law at Arizona State University and a former attorney at the State Department focused on climate change.
...
But for the agreement to take effect, two steps must be taken. First, nations must formally sign the agreement — which they can do starting on April 22, when a signing ceremony is being held at the United Nations’ headquarters in New York. The United States and China have pledged to sign immediately then, along with some 130 other countries.

Second, nations must also take further steps to implement the agreement at home, before going back to the U.N. and depositing what are called their “instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.” After signing, “then they each go through their respective domestic processes to formally ratify, or approve, there’s a whole string of alternate verbs that are used depending on one’s process,” says Elliott Diringer, executive vice president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions.

The United States has said that the Paris agreement is not, in its eyes, a formal, legally binding treaty, which means that it doesn’t have to be ratified by the Senate. Thus, the formal process is likely to amount to a presidential order or statement, Diringer said.

When at least 55 countries, who account for at least 55 percent of global emissions, have all moved to join the agreement in this way, the Paris agreement then enters into force after a 30 day wait period. According to data just released by the U.N., the U.S. and China accounted for around 38 percent of emissions, meaning that if the two act swiftly, it will be much easier to meet the emissions threshold. Other big emitters who could then help substantially in getting to 55 percent include Russia (7.5 percent), India (4.1 percent), Japan (3.79 percent), and Brazil (2.48 percent).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/04/11/obamas-fast-move-to-join-the-paris-climate-agreement-could-tie-up-the-next-president/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/04/11/obamas-fast-move-to-join-the-paris-climate-agreement-could-tie-up-the-next-president/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 11, 2016, 08:29:47 PM
Never mind the record high temperatures or sea level rise predictions.  What's scaring the world into quickly ratifying the Paris climate agreement?  A possible U.S. Republican presidency! 
Thanks, Trump!   ;)

Nations seek rapid ratification of Paris climate deal, four-year lock
Many nations are pushing for swift ratification of a Paris agreement to slow climate change and lock it in place for four years before a change in the White House next year that might bring a weakening of Washington's long-term commitment.

More than 130 nations with 60 leaders including French President Francois Hollande are due to sign December's pact at a U.N. ceremony in New York on April 22, the most ever for a U.N. agreement on an opening day, the United Nations said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-paris-idUSKCN0X70A6 (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-paris-idUSKCN0X70A6)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 14, 2016, 11:32:24 PM
Ms Figueres thinks that the CoP21 Paris Pack is 10 years too late:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2016/0414/Paris-climate-deal-on-target-two-years-ahead-of-schedule (http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2016/0414/Paris-climate-deal-on-target-two-years-ahead-of-schedule)

Extract: ""We are two minutes to midnight on climate change. If you ask me, the Paris agreement is 10 years too late," said Ms. Figueres, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 15, 2016, 11:06:40 PM
The head of the World Bank Group believes that the CoP21 Paris Pact can only be realized if strong carbon pricing plans are implemented worldwide shortly after the pact is put into effect.


http://www.bna.com/world-bank-head-n57982069907/ (http://www.bna.com/world-bank-head-n57982069907/)


Extract: "Fulfilling the promise of the Paris Agreement is possible only “if we move forward with carbon pricing [and] take very focused action on reducing the cost of renewables [and] if we pair that with investment opportunities for institutional investors so that they can actually get a higher return out of investing in what they believe in” such as renewable energy, he said."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 16, 2016, 11:54:18 PM
The linked CarbonBrief article summarizes the findings of a 3-day IPCC meeting in Nairobi, including the timing & details of AR6 & subsequent reports, and some special reports on the 1.5C goal, oceans and cryosphere and food security:

http://www.carbonbrief.org/the-ipccs-priorities-for-the-next-six-years-1-5c-oceans-cities-and-food-security (http://www.carbonbrief.org/the-ipccs-priorities-for-the-next-six-years-1-5c-oceans-cities-and-food-security)

Extract: "At a three-day meeting in Nairobi this week, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) made a few important decisions, including what the topics for its next “special reports” should be.
Climate impacts at 1.5C, the oceans and cryosphere, and food security will all be getting special treatment in the next few years.

As in previous years, the next big IPCC report – the sixth assessment report (AR6) –  will be released in three stages, the IPCC chair, Dr Hoesung Lee, confirmed today.
The three working groups – broadly covering the physical science, adaptation, and mitigation – will be published between 2020 and 2021. The synthesis report, which is meant to link all three working groups into one concise storyline, will be published in 2022.
Lee told a press conference in Nairobi this morning (see video below) the timing of the synthesis report is deliberate, so that it would be “in good time” for the global stocktake that nations will be undertaking in 2023, as agreed at COP21 in December.
The IPCC will also consider publishing its big reports every five years, rather than every six or seven."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 18, 2016, 07:59:03 PM
The linked article entitled: "Does premature Paris climate deal risk a painful birth?", discusses how the early (2018?) ratification of the CoP21 agreement could cause a number of difficulties and misunderstandings:

http://in.reuters.com/article/us-global-climatechange-politics-analysi-idINKCN0XF1IX (http://in.reuters.com/article/us-global-climatechange-politics-analysi-idINKCN0XF1IX)

Extract: "The Paris accord will enter into force when at least 55 countries representing at least 55 percent of global emissions ratify or formally join it in another way.

But while major emitters, notably China and the United States, have said they will pursue steps to adopt the agreement as early as possible, domestic politics may make that a challenge.

In some countries, including the United States, leaders are expected to use their executive authority to accede to the Paris deal. But in others, it will have to be discussed in parliament or congress and, in some cases, will require new legislation, Abeysinghe noted.
 
"For some of our countries, sensitizing the parliaments and the parliamentarians itself is a big challenge. The concern our countries have is that it will take time for them to ratify," she said."

See also:
http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060035780 (http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060035780)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 19, 2016, 02:25:53 AM
Fossil fuels could be phased out worldwide in a decade, says new study
The worldwide reliance on burning fossil fuels to create energy could be phased out in a decade, according to an article published by a major energy think tank in the UK.

Professor Benjamin Sovacool, Director of the Sussex Energy Group at the University of Sussex, believes that the next great energy revolution could take place in a fraction of the time of major changes in the past.

But it would take a collaborative, interdisciplinary, multi-scalar effort to get there, he warns. And that effort must learn from the trials and tribulations from previous energy systems and technology transitions.

In a paper published in the peer-reviewed journal Energy Research & Social Science, Professor Sovacool analyses energy transitions throughout history and argues that only looking towards the past can often paint an overly bleak and unnecessary picture.

Moving from wood to coal in Europe, for example, took between 96 and 160 years, whereas electricity took 47 to 69 years to enter into mainstream use.

But this time the future could be different, he says – the scarcity of resources, the threat of climate change and vastly improved technological learning and innovation could greatly accelerate a global shift to a cleaner energy future.

The study highlights numerous examples of speedier transitions that are often overlooked by analysts. For example, Ontario completed a shift away from coal between 2003 and 2014; a major household energy programme in Indonesia took just three years to move two-thirds of the population from kerosene stoves to LPG stoves; and France's nuclear power programme saw supply rocket from four per cent of the electricity supply market in 1970 to 40 per cent in 1982.

Each of these cases has in common strong government intervention coupled with shifts in consumer behaviour, often driven by incentives and pressure from stakeholders.

http://phys.org/news/2016-04-fossil-fuels-phased-worldwide-decade.html (http://phys.org/news/2016-04-fossil-fuels-phased-worldwide-decade.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 19, 2016, 03:30:04 PM
@UNFCCC:  Investor groups representing $24 trill in assets urge leaders to fast-track #ParisAgreement bit.ly/1qCHv61
https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/722358187341586433 (https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/722358187341586433)

Global Investor Groups Urge World Leaders to Sign and Accede to the Paris Climate Agreement Rapidly
http://www.ceres.org/press/press-releases/global-investor-groups-urge-world-leaders-to-sign-and-accede-to-the-paris-climate-agreement-rapidly (http://www.ceres.org/press/press-releases/global-investor-groups-urge-world-leaders-to-sign-and-accede-to-the-paris-climate-agreement-rapidly)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 19, 2016, 03:47:35 PM
Bloomberg:  Paris Climate Pact: Too Little, Too Late?
Global officials gather to sign a treaty that new evidence affirms is already out of date.
As officials converge this week on the United Nations for the signing ceremony, ominous reports in the four months since the deal have buttressed the doubters: Global warming may hit geological hyperspeed within decades. NASA is projecting that 2016 will break the annual heat record for the third year running; Greenland's ice sheet is experiencing springtime melt weeks earlier than average; and much of West Antarctica is at risk of slipping into the Southern Ocean by 2100, adding a meter to global sea levels. Coastal cities home to millions of people may be underwater during the lifetimes of those born today.

The pact “might not be enough, especially in terms of sea-level rise,” said Rob DeConto, a geoscientist at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. DeConto co-wrote the Nature study in March warning of Antarctica's fate. “We really need to go to zero emissions as soon as possible.”
...
Luckily, the Paris accord includes a five-year review process, which allows negotiators to tighten their national commitments over time. And there's no way to quantify how the treaty's indirect effects—political capital for activists, changes in consumer energy choices, a renewed push for technological advances—may create opportunities to nudge emissions lower.

The other good news, if you can call it that, is that the gloomy data of 2016 doesn't make things worse. It just affirms what many already suspected: Paris is not enough.

“No single study is going to cause us to be all, ‘Stop the press! Revise the Paris Agreement!’”

The latest hot papers may not add much to the big picture, which Nordhaus described in his 2013 book Climate Casino as stunning in its simplicity: “It is that the average temperature of the earth changes with the relative concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-19/paris-climate-pact-too-little-too-late (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-19/paris-climate-pact-too-little-too-late)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 19, 2016, 04:23:40 PM
While it hurts me to link to articles by climate skeptics; nevertheless, it is worth understanding the up-hill road that even an inadequate Paris Pact must follow.  With thinking like that expressed in these two linked article, it is difficult to see how the world will get off from its current BAU pathway:

http://www.newsweek.com/climate-change-obama-making-promises-he-cant-keep-449148 (http://www.newsweek.com/climate-change-obama-making-promises-he-cant-keep-449148)

Extract: "The “optimistic” outlook from the State Department relies on incentivized land-use changes to increase the carbon sink by some 25 percent over the next 10 years. According to EPA numbers, over the past five years the size of the US carbon sink hasn’t changed at all.
All of this —the stayed Clean Power Plan, growing methane emissions, and overly optimistic projections—undermine the viability of Obama’s pledge. Add to the mix energy efficiency measures which don’t work as well as advertised, low gas prices and a growing economy that is still tightly linked to fossil fuels, and you arrive at the unimpeachable conclusion that we are not going to come close to meeting the emissions pledges made by the president."


http://www.wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-climate-change-and-war-1461021491 (http://www.wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-climate-change-and-war-1461021491)

Extract: "From April 13 testimony by Robert H. Scales, a retired Army major general, before the U.S. Senate Committee on Environmental and Public Works regarding the Obama administration’s linking of climate change and national security:
The common spark for all wars is jealousy and greed amplified by centuries-long animosities and political ambitions. The catalyst for war is the ignorance of leaders that leads them to misjudge. Humans start wars believing they will be profitable, short, glorious and bloodless. These truths never change. None are affected in the least by air temperature.
But the myth of climate change as an inducement to war continues to curry favor among Washington elites. One source for connecting war to temperature comes from the political closeness between environmentalists and the antiwar movement. Their logic goes like this: “Global warming is bad. Wars are bad. Therefore they must be connected.” Remember, prior to the 1991 Gulf War, environmentalists warned of a decade of global cooling that would come from burning Kuwaiti oil fields. . . .
Because the administration has elevated climate change to the status of a primary threat, the military has become an unwitting agent for propagandizing the dangers of climate change to the American people. . . .
The administration’s contention that climate change is a national-security threat would be just another example of mindlessly applied political correctness if it were not for the potential impact of this silliness on our actual security."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 19, 2016, 04:35:40 PM
The linked report indicates that the USA GHG emissions increased in 2014 as compared to 2013 (see graph), in a period when sustainable energy sources in the USA were growing rapidly.  Does this mean that as cheap low-cost sustainable energy comes increasingly on-line that we will just use more energy?

https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html (https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html)

See also:
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/04/19/3770317/greenhouse-emissions-higher/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/04/19/3770317/greenhouse-emissions-higher/)

Extract: "Led globally by China, the United States is the second-largest greenhouse gas emitter in the world, as it accounts for almost 15 percent of all emissions. But over the last decade, there has been a growing momentum in low-carbon alternatives for the energy sector. According to the EPA, the U.S. is generating three times as much wind power, and 30 times as much solar power, as when President Obama took office. However, last year the country invested 20 percent less money in renewable energy than in 2014, according to study put together by the Frankfurt School and United Nations Environment Program."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 20, 2016, 04:30:12 PM
The linked report "revisits" the 1972 Limits to Growth report by the Club of Rome and finds that since 1972 we have remained on a BAU pathway, and that the most important task at hand is to respond quickly:

Tim Jackson and Robin Webster (April 2016), "Limits Revisited", Creative Commons, CC BYNC-
ND 4.0

http://limits2growth.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Jackson-and-Webster-2016-Limits-Revisited.pdf (http://limits2growth.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Jackson-and-Webster-2016-Limits-Revisited.pdf)

Extract: "Four and a half decades after the Club of Rome published its landmark report on Limits to Growth, the study remains critical to our understanding of economic prosperity. This new review of the Limits debate has been written to mark the launch of the UK All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on the Limits to Growth.

There is unsettling evidence that society is still following the ‘standard run’ of the original study – in which overshoot leads to an eventual collapse of production and living standards. Detailed recent studies suggests that production of some key resources may only be decades away.

Certain other limits to growth – less visible in the 1972 report – present equally pressing challenges to modern society. We highlight, in particular, recent work on our proximity to ‘planetary boundaries’ and illustrate this through the challenge of meeting the Paris Agreement on climate change. We also explore the economic challenge of a ‘secular stagnation’."


See also:
https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/parliamentary-group-warns-that-global-fossil-fuels-could-peak-in-less-than-10-years-f0400914ed96#.32i19ayu4 (https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/parliamentary-group-warns-that-global-fossil-fuels-could-peak-in-less-than-10-years-f0400914ed96#.32i19ayu4)

Extract: "A report commissioned on behalf of a cross-party group of British MPs authored by a former UK government advisor, the first of its kind, says that industrial civilisation is currently on track to experience “an eventual collapse of production and living standards” in the next few decades if business-as-usual continues.

“There is unsettling evidence that society is tracking the ‘standard run’ of the original study — which leads ultimately to collapse. Detailed and recent analyses suggest that production peaks for some key resources may only be decades away.”"
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 20, 2016, 06:41:43 PM
The linked article discusses just one of many currently planned conventional oil developments, that if produced would unhinge the Paris Pact agreement:

http://climateanalytics.org/latest/bps-new-planned-oil-venture-is-the-worlds-next-great-carbon-bomb-and-would-annihilate-australias-carbon-budget (http://climateanalytics.org/latest/bps-new-planned-oil-venture-is-the-worlds-next-great-carbon-bomb-and-would-annihilate-australias-carbon-budget)

Extract: "Climate Analytics was commissioned by The Wilderness Society (Australia) to look at very conservative estimates for the massive new venture off the Great Australian Bight, where BP hold four of the nine prospects in the oilfield.
While BP hasn’t revealed how much oil it estimates is in the resource, a smaller partner in the venture, Bight Petroleum, has estimated there are nine billion barrels of oil in the two prospects it holds. Other companies involved in the venture are Chevron, Santos, and Murphy Oil.
But even then, if burned in Australia, these oil stocks would amount to one third of Australia’s remaining 2˚C carbon budget to 2050, and produce emissions three times that of Australia’s national C02 emissions from fossil fuels (oil, coal, gas) in 2013.
“Our calculations are based on a fraction of what is in this reserve: it could be four times this amount,” said the report’s author and CEO of Climate Analytics, Bill Hare.
“Adding additional oil reserves to the world’s energy system, as proposed by BP, is inconsistent with the global temperature and the emission limits the Australian Government agreed to in Paris last year. It would simply create the pressure for higher emissions – unless the intention is to not meet the warming limits agreed there."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 21, 2016, 01:20:00 AM
Eric Holthaus:  This is it, folks. We have btw 4-11yrs to peak global emissions, or risk env/econ collapse.
https://twitter.com/ericholthaus/status/722915953231564801 (https://twitter.com/ericholthaus/status/722915953231564801)

Paris Agreement Pledges Must Be Strengthened in Next Few Years to Limit Warming to 2°C
https://www.climateinteractive.org/analysis/deeper-earlier-emissions-cuts-needed-to-reach-paris-goals/ (https://www.climateinteractive.org/analysis/deeper-earlier-emissions-cuts-needed-to-reach-paris-goals/)

We Already Know 2016 Will Be the Warmest Year on Record—and It’s Only April
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/04/20/record_temperatures_again_in_march.html (http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/04/20/record_temperatures_again_in_march.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 22, 2016, 04:26:14 PM
In my opinion the linked article errs on the side of least drama, but nevertheless it brings into focus the amount of very hard work required before the Paris Pact gains traction:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jan-christoph-minx/paris-climate-accord-politics_b_9749268.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jan-christoph-minx/paris-climate-accord-politics_b_9749268.html)

Extract: "Viewed from a distance, the agreement has left the world with little more than a new institutional setup and some hollow commitments to cap the global temperature rise at “well below” 2 degrees Celsius. Environmentalists claim that far too little climate action is gaining traction on the ground."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 22, 2016, 09:20:59 PM
Corporations Move to Curb Global Warming
CEOs and investors hail the Paris Agreement as the start of a new era to combat climate change
The deal 195 nations finalized in December in Paris may be the most important climate agreement ever reached, but pockets of corporate leaders, financial regulators and money managers remember it for another reason: a shift in how the business community views global warming.

“For the first time, we’re seeing a genuinely changed landscape for the private sector,” said Edward Cameron, head of policy at We Mean Business, a group of investors and companies urging a shift from fossil fuels. “What we see now is growing momentum out of Paris.”

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/corporations-move-to-curb-global-warming/ (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/corporations-move-to-curb-global-warming/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 23, 2016, 02:41:40 AM
Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
.@CFigueres receives the Legion of Honor, highest French distinction for her crucial work for #COP21 #ParisAgreement
https://twitter.com/franceonu/status/723604984693186560
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 23, 2016, 02:57:10 AM
Countries signing the Paris Agreement at the United Nations today.

175 States have signed the #ParisAgreement & 15 States deposited instruments of ratification
https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/723605348909723649 (https://twitter.com/unfccc/status/723605348909723649)

http://newsroom.unfccc.int/paris-agreement/175-states-sign-paris-agreement/ (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/paris-agreement/175-states-sign-paris-agreement/)

The list:
http://newsroom.unfccc.int/media/632121/list-of-representatives-to-high-level-signature-ceremony.pdf (http://newsroom.unfccc.int/media/632121/list-of-representatives-to-high-level-signature-ceremony.pdf)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 23, 2016, 02:23:15 PM
Video of the live conversation between UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon at the UN Paris Agreement signing -- and Bertrand Piccard, piloting the Solar Impulse 2 plane over the middle of the Pacific Ocean, "flying, day and night, without fuel."
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=r1EVfr0diZY
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 23, 2016, 04:21:59 PM
China and U.S. pledge to ratify Paris climate deal this year
UNITED NATIONS, April 22 (Reuters) - China and the United States, the world's top producers of greenhouse gas emissions, pledged on Friday to formally adopt by the end of the year a Paris deal to slow global warming, raising the prospects of it being enforced much faster than anticipated.

The United Nations said 175 states took the first step of signing the deal on Friday, the biggest day one endorsement of a global agreement. Of those, 15 states also formally notified the United Nations that they had ratified the deal.

Many countries still need a parliamentary vote to formally approve the agreement, which was reached in December. The deal will enter into force only when ratified by at least 55 nations representing 55 percent of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.

China and the United States together account for 38 percent of global emissions.

"China will finalize domestic legal procedures on its accession before the G20 Hangzhou summit in September this year," China's Vice Premier Zhang Gaoli told the U.N. signing ceremony, attended by some 55 heads of state and government.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who signed the deal with his 2-year-old granddaughter Isabelle on his lap, said the United States "looks forward to formally joining this agreement this year." President Barack Obama will formally adopt the agreement through executive authority.

The deal commits countries to restraining the global rise in temperatures to "well below" 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels. But even if the pact is fully implemented, promised greenhouse gas cuts are insufficient to limit warming to an agreed maximum, the United Nations says.

The first three months of 2016 have broken temperature records and 2015 was the planet's warmest year since records began in the 19th century, with heat waves, droughts and rising sea levels.

"The era of consumption without consequences is over," U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Friday. "We must intensify efforts to decarbonize our economies. And we must support developing countries in making this transition."

'REASON FOR HOPE'

Many developing nations are pushing to ensure the climate deal comes into force this year, partly to lock in the United States if a Republican opponent of the pact is elected in November to succeed Obama, a Democrat.

Once the accord enters into force, a little-noted Article 28 of the agreement says any nation wanting to withdraw must wait four years, the length of a U.S. presidential term.

The deal also requires rich nations to maintain a $100 billion a year funding pledge beyond 2020, providing greater financial security to developing nations to build their defenses to extreme weather and wean themselves away from coal-fired power.

http://news.trust.org/item/20160422160252-0gki3/ (http://news.trust.org/item/20160422160252-0gki3/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 23, 2016, 08:07:08 PM
The linked article discusses how the world many not be able to achieve the Paris Pact goals due to a lack of available funding:

http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/apr/22/climate-change-study-poor-countries-4tn-2030-avert-catastrophe-paris-agreement (http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/apr/22/climate-change-study-poor-countries-4tn-2030-avert-catastrophe-paris-agreement)

Extract: "As Paris climate change agreement is signed in New York, developing country negotiators highlight gulf between ambition and funding.
Developing countries must raise more than $4tn (£2,456bn), or roughly the entire annual budget of the US, to implement their climate change pledges by 2030, according to new research.
But much more money will have to be found by the world’s poorest countries to hold global temperatures enough to avoid catastrophic climate change, say British and Australian researchers who have analysed the financial implications of the pledges made to the UN last December and the money so far offered by rich countries.
As 170 countries meet on Friday in New York to sign the Paris agreement and potentially set the world on a low-carbon development path from 2020, developing country negotiators called for a reality check, saying there was a vast financial gap between the world’s climate change ambition and the reality of funding the emissions reductions needed to avoid catastrophic warming."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 23, 2016, 09:09:57 PM
Scientists compare climate change impacts at 1.5C and 2C

“On current emissions, the carbon budget for 1.5C will effectively be blown in about four and a half years....”

http://www.carbonbrief.org/scientists-compare-climate-change-impacts-at-1-5c-and-2c (http://www.carbonbrief.org/scientists-compare-climate-change-impacts-at-1-5c-and-2c)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: TerryM on April 23, 2016, 09:23:54 PM
Does anyone know whether Ukraine is still considered a Developed Country?
I don't mind my taxes supporting the Maldives, Hati or any number of poor (but deserving?) nations, but I might object strongly to providing a neo-nazi failed state with funds that they will certainly spend on military hardware.
Terry
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: crandles on April 24, 2016, 01:30:07 PM
Scientists compare climate change impacts at 1.5C and 2C

“On current emissions, the carbon budget for 1.5C will effectively be blown in about four and a half years....”

[url]http://www.carbonbrief.org/scientists-compare-climate-change-impacts-at-1-5c-and-2c[/url] ([url]http://www.carbonbrief.org/scientists-compare-climate-change-impacts-at-1-5c-and-2c[/url])


(http://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1.5C-vs-2C-final-843x1024.jpg)

just 40cm SLR by 2100 relative to 2000 under a 1.5C scenario.
average of 4mm per year and 2013 5AR thinks we are currently at 3.2mm per year (2.8 - 3.6)

25% increase in rate maybe a little more because it doesn't happen instantly. That is pretty much negligible acceleration that they think is baked in ?? ???

Perhaps they expect a little more acceleration but then with temperatures steady at 1.5C above pre-industrial the rate starts to level off, despite ice sheet instabilities?

Compared to Hansen's 3m possibly as soon 2050,

(average rate over 35 years is 27 times faster than current rate so 2050 rate may be something like a 100 fold increase over current rate)

the difference seems somewhat stark.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 24, 2016, 04:22:14 PM
just 40cm SLR by 2100 relative to 2000 under a 1.5C scenario.
average of 4mm per year and 2013 5AR thinks we are currently at 3.2mm per year (2.8 - 3.6)

25% increase in rate maybe a little more because it doesn't happen instantly. That is pretty much negligible acceleration that they think is baked in ?? ???

Perhaps they expect a little more acceleration but then with temperatures steady at 1.5C above pre-industrial the rate starts to level off, despite ice sheet instabilities?

Compared to Hansen's 3m possibly as soon 2050,

(average rate over 35 years is 27 times faster than current rate so 2050 rate may be something like a 100 fold increase over current rate)

the difference seems somewhat stark.


Thanks for pointing-out some of the differences between the AR5 projections (that policymakers seem to be relying on) and reasonable dissenting positions such as those presented by Hansen et al (2016).  However, as the stakes are actually quite high (if Hansen et al 2016 are approximately correct), let me briefly add some hopefully clarifying input on the probability that researchers such as Hansen may be approximately correct:

- First, it is NOAA that indicated that sea level could rise by 3m in the 2050-2060 timeframe due to instabilities in the WAIS, based on new field observations in the austral summer of 2015-16 as indicated in the linked article (I note that historically Hansen has projected 5m of SLR by 2100, but currently he cites a range of possible values and acknowledges that there is some uncertainty in the specifics):

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2016/04/12/405089.htm (http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2016/04/12/405089.htm)

- Second, in the first attached image Gavin Schmidt provides a projection for the likely 2016 GMST anomaly (above pre-industrial) which has a mean value of approximately 1.32C, and a high end value of just under 1.5C (so we may well be closer to the limits than some people are thinking).

- Third, the rate of ice sheet meltwater contribution to sea level rise is marked accelerated by the combination of cliff failures and hydrofracting as shown in the second attached image (from Pollard et al 2015, which shows paleo-evidence that under conditions much like our own today the WAIS (alone) has contributed about 5m of sea level rise in about a century); which is driven by both EEI (Earth Energy Imbalance) and GMST (Global Mean Surface Temp) anom.

With such high stakes, it only seems rational to err on the side of precaution.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on April 27, 2016, 01:29:03 PM
Remaining carbon Budgets may be even smaller

Scientists compare climate change impacts at 1.5C and 2C

“On current emissions, the carbon budget for 1.5C will effectively be blown in about four and a half years....”

[url]http://www.carbonbrief.org/scientists-compare-climate-change-impacts-at-1-5c-and-2c[/url] ([url]http://www.carbonbrief.org/scientists-compare-climate-change-impacts-at-1-5c-and-2c[/url])

Sigmetnow, I originally missed this article - thanks.

I've just redone some similar calculations (Following the Carbon Brief piece in November 2014) as a postscript to “Is green growth a fantasy? (http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/is-green-growth-a-fantasy/)”.

Carbon Brief may have two things missing. Firstly the carbon budget should be reduced to account for greenhouse gasses other than CO2. The World Resources Institute says (http://www.wri.org/blog/2013/09/world%E2%80%99s-carbon-budget-be-spent-three-decades):

“one can argue for an even smaller budget and additional emissions constraints because non-CO2 gases are not included in 1 trillion tonne C figure. For example, short-lived greenhouse gases, such as methane, are not included in – nor necessarily appropriate for – the 1 trillion tonne C budget approach because they play a secondary role in influencing long-term warming.

However, when non-CO2 forcings are taken into account, the budget is reduced and that budget may depend on the scenario studied. For example, according to one scenario studied in the IPCC AR5 (RCP 2.6), when non-CO2 greenhouse gases are considered, the budget drops much lower to 790 PgC.”

That means that the effect of other greenhouse gasses reduces the overall budget to 79% of the original. The remaining carbon budgets are measured in terms of CO2 so, as a rough estimate they should be reduced by roughly 21%. This now gives…

The remaining carbon budget for a 66% chance of avoiding 1.5˚C becomes …

21 tonnes CO2 per person: 4 years to 1.5˚C

The remaining carbon budget for a 66% chance of avoiding 2.0˚C becomes…

85 tonnes CO2 per person: 16 years to 2.0˚C

The other issue is the "missing feedbacks" in the CMIP5 climate models, which consequently may have overestimated the budgets. I am waiting for a promised reply from DECC on this.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on April 27, 2016, 05:04:11 PM
New York signing marks a new age in climate cooperation
Fortunately, the Paris Agreement was drafted with increased ambition in mind and with a clear obligation to marshal our efforts to keep warming within 1.5C.

We don’t doubt the challenges to staying within that limit, but the national pledges made before Paris were never meant to be an end point, merely opening bids. The review process will ensure that governments can respond to more complete climate science, and our ever-improving technological capability to reduce emissions cost-effectively.

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/04/25/new-york-signing-marks-a-new-age-in-climate-cooperation/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/04/25/new-york-signing-marks-a-new-age-in-climate-cooperation/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on April 29, 2016, 07:16:20 PM
The linked article cites faster than expected economic growth in the Eurozone; which will almost certainly increase GHG emissions:

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/apr/29/eurozone-economy-grows-faster-than-expected-ecb (http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/apr/29/eurozone-economy-grows-faster-than-expected-ecb)

Extract: "The eurozone economy grew faster than expected in the first three months of 2016, but inflation in the single currency bloc has fallen back into negative territory, putting more pressure on the European Central Bank to keep deflation at bay."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 03, 2016, 05:34:59 PM
While I concur with Joe Romm (in the linked article) that Bill Gates is wrong to oppose carbon pricing; that does not mean that we can trust Romm's, Climate Interactive's (see the attached image showing what optimistic technical assumptions they made to get to 3.5C by 2100), nor the CoP21 solutions to climate change either.  It is good to be positive, but it is counterproductive to be Pollyannaish about the truth of where we are going (we could very well be at 1.5C by the end of 2016):

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/05/02/3770561/bill-gates-wrong-carbon-tax-2/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/05/02/3770561/bill-gates-wrong-carbon-tax-2/)

Extract: "To paraphrase what I wrote last week, I hope readers see how absurd it is to assert that the rich countries could plausibly expect to zero out CO2 by 2050 using technologies that do not exist today. The reality of the climate challenge is that only technologies that can be deployed at trillion-dollar scale in the next three decades can contribute to such a goal. But the technology development and deployment cycle is simply far too long for a technology that doesn’t exist today to plausibly make a vital contribution to cutting CO2 by mid-century.
Indeed, Climate Interactive has put together a (very optimistic) scenario for new technology that makes this point. If we had breakthrough technology miraculously pop out of the R&D pipeline really fast (by 2020) and then miraculously enter the market at half the price of new coal plants and then miraculously achieve mass penetration decades faster than every other major energy source in history — it still has essentially no impact on emissions reduction by 2050:
BOTTOM LINE: Gates is just wrong about everything here. He is wrong that energy miracles are needed by the industrialized countries to achieve CO2 levels in 2050 consistent with beating the 2°C target. He is wrong that achieving that target requires focusing on R&D rather than deployment. He is wrong that there is some sort of consensus to that effect. He is wrong that a carbon price isn’t important in achieving the rapid reduction the rich countries need. He is wrong to make it seem like boosting energy efficiency is not as vital a strategy as reducing carbon intensity."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 04, 2016, 01:21:32 AM
Koch Brothers Struggling to Block Climate Action in State Legislatures
Of the 50 state bills introduced this year to obstruct the CPP, 56% already have died. Another 34% of those bills are languishing and we expect most of them to expire when state legislatures adjourn. Polluter interests lost ground in West Virginia, whose legislature passed a bill that improves its ability to act on the Clean Power Plan. The Koch brothers did score a recent victory in their home state of Kansas to stop the state’s work on the CPP, but it’s not a huge loss because the state had already suspended the process anyway. Additionally, the wind industry in Kansas still plans to expand generation despite Clean Power Plan setbacks, because the state has incredible wind energy resources.

The Clean Power Plan is on a solid legal foundation, and is likely to be upheld. The stay issued by the Supreme Court only hits the pause button on CPP implementation deadlines, and has no bearing on the legal merits of the case. Many governors want to use this extra time wisely to develop the best possible pathway to reduce carbon pollution, so they can hit the ground running when the CPP deadlines are reinstated. Governors generally want to preserve the freedom and flexibility to act in the best interests of their state and these polluter-linked state legislative maneuvers would undermine those best interests. The legislative schemes range from requiring excessive legislative approval for a governor’s plan to EPA, to mandating a work stoppage for CPP planning.
https://www.nrdc.org/experts/aliya-haq/koch-brothers-struggling-block-climate-action-state-legislatures (https://www.nrdc.org/experts/aliya-haq/koch-brothers-struggling-block-climate-action-state-legislatures)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 05, 2016, 05:16:40 PM
The linked article warns that the election of Donald Trump as president of the USA would be a set-back for the CoP21 pact:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/04/donald-trumps-election-will-derail-paris-climate-deal-warns-its-architect (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/04/donald-trumps-election-will-derail-paris-climate-deal-warns-its-architect)

Extract: "Without naming Trump, the former French foreign minister Laurent Fabius told an audience in London: “Think about the impact of the coming US presidential elections. If a climate change denier was to be elected, it would threaten dramatically global action against climate disruption.”

He said: “We must not think that everything is settled.”

In response to a speech by Barack Obama at the opening of the Paris climate summit, Trump said: “I think one of the dumbest statements I’ve ever heard in politics, in the history of politics as I know it, which is pretty good, was Obama’s statement that our No 1 problem is global warming.”"
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 08, 2016, 04:57:25 PM
The former head of the IPCC says that we should prepare for the worst:

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/governments-should-study-worst-case-warming-20325 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/governments-should-study-worst-case-warming-20325)

Extract: "Nations should be considering the potential impact of temperature rises of as much as 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 Fahrenheit), said Robert Watson, former head of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 08, 2016, 07:49:40 PM
Hillary Clinton Plans To Have A 'Climate Map Room' In The White House, Podesta Says
If she’s elected president, Hillary Clinton intends to equip the White House with a situation room just for climate change, inspired by the Map Room where Franklin D. Roosevelt managed World War II, her campaign chairman, former White House Chief of Staff John Podesta, said Friday.

Podesta was one of nine veterans of seven previous administrations who spoke Friday at a Stanford University conference on “Setting the Climate Agenda for the Next U.S. President.” He cited a technologically sophisticated Climate Map Room as an example of planning for resilience—the capacity of the country to withstand and adapt to climate-change effects.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2016/05/08/hillary-clinton-plans-a-climate-map-room-in-the-white-house-podesta/ (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2016/05/08/hillary-clinton-plans-a-climate-map-room-in-the-white-house-podesta/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 08, 2016, 09:17:02 PM
Rich countries have pledged billions in climate aid. Why has progress been so slow?
When the world’s poor countries demanded action during the failing United Nations–led climate negotiations in Copenhagen in 2009, the US government responded with a promise: It would help raise $100 billion a year by 2020 to assist efforts to cope with climate change in the global south.

Out of that commitment has slowly grown a peculiar but potentially important institution known as the Green Climate Fund. The fund has nowhere near $100 billion to spend, but, if all goes according to plan, it will deliver significant aid to impoverished nations that are threatened by a warming planet.

The idea behind the fund is simple: The world’s rich nations, led by the US and Europe, are responsible for most of the greenhouse gases that cause climate change, but the burdens of a warming planet fall most heavily on poor countries. Consequently, the fund takes from the rich and give to the poor — like Robin Hood, but with the legal and political backing of the UN.

The GCF intends to support clean energy, low-carbon cities, low-emission agriculture, forestry and climate adaptation. Tunisian economist Héla Cheikhrouhou, the fund’s first executive director, has said that its goal is nothing less than to help poor countries overcome "the twin threats of climate change and poverty."

What by no means is clear is whether the GCF can achieve those goals — or even how the fund, with its unwieldy governance structure, will answer a series of fundamental questions about how it intends to do business. That’s where things get complicated — and contentious. Should the fund make grants, low-interest loans, market-rate loans or equity investments? Should the money go to governments, businesses or nonprofits? Should the fund support efforts to clean up fossil fuels, in particular capture and sequester carbon dioxide from coal plants?

http://www.vox.com/2016/5/8/11600940/green-climate-fund (http://www.vox.com/2016/5/8/11600940/green-climate-fund)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 09, 2016, 08:23:30 PM
How would phasing out U.S. federal leases for fossil fuel extraction affect CO2 emissions and 2°C goals?
This paper examines the implications for U.S. fossil fuel production and global CO2 emissions of ceasing to issue new federal leases for fossil fuel extraction and not renewing existing leases for resources that are not yet producing.

Avoiding dangerous climate change will require a rapid transition away from fossil fuels. By some estimates, a phase out of global fossil fuel consumption and production – particularly coal and oil – will need to be nearly complete within 50 years. Given the scale of such a transition, nations may need to consider a broad suite of policy approaches that aim not only to reduce fossil fuel demand – the current focus – but also constrain fossil fuel supply growth.

This paper examines the potential emissions implications of a supply-side measure under consideration in the U.S.: ceasing to issue new leases for fossil fuel extraction on federal lands and waters, and avoiding renewals of existing leases for resources that are not yet producing. The analysis finds that under such a policy, U.S. coal production would steadily decline, moving closer to a pathway consistent with a global 2°C temperature limit. Oil and gas extraction would drop as well, but more gradually, as federal lands and waters represent a smaller fraction of national production, and these resources take longer to develop.

Phasing out federal leases for fossil fuel extraction could reduce global CO2 emissions by 100 million tonnes per year by 2030, and by greater amounts thereafter. The emissions impact would be comparable to that of other major climate policies under consideration by the Obama administration. These findings suggest that policy-makers should give greater attention to measures that slow the expansion of fossil fuel supplies
https://www.sei-international.org/publications?pid=2937 (https://www.sei-international.org/publications?pid=2937)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 12, 2016, 06:57:45 PM
What the world needs now for climate action: Specifics, direction and scale
Climate negotiators will have to give substance to important elements of the new global deal on climate change if they want to deliver on their promise to try to keep warming under 1.5° Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures. The meeting in Bonn, Germany is the first opportunity for governments to add content to key elements of the climate agreement since its adoption in Paris last year.
 
This first formal meeting after the Paris agreement is where governments must demonstrate they will deliver on the promises made, says Samantha Smith, leader of WWF’s Global Climate and Energy Initiative.
 
“The Paris Agreement commits countries to their best efforts to keep warming under 1.5° Celsius above pre-industrial times. 1.5° Celsius of warming is the line in the sand for many vulnerable countries, communities and ecosystems. To fulfil this commitment countries urgently need to increase their national efforts to cut emissions, particularly through scaling up renewable energy, getting rid of dirty fossil fuels, protecting forests and delivering climate finance,” says Smith.
 
Current national commitments put us on a path to a global temperature rise of at least 3°Celsius, unless we increase climate action, including, but not limited to, conserving forests and reducing emissions from land use.

http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?267390/What-the-world-needs-now-for-climate-action-Specifics-direction-scale (http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?267390/What-the-world-needs-now-for-climate-action-Specifics-direction-scale)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 12, 2016, 08:13:18 PM
BREAKING: EPA Finalizes Methane Rule For New Oil And Gas Operations
The Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday issued its final rule for methane emissions from the oil and gas industry.

The rule limits methane emissions from new oil and gas infrastructure and requires operators to submit to semi-annual or quarterly monitoring, depending on the type of operation. In addition, the agency took another step toward drafting a rule that would apply to existing oil and gas operations.

“They will help keep the nation on track to help the us cut emissions from the oil and gas sector,” EPA administrator Gina McCarthy said on a call with reporters Thursday. The new rule will reduce emissions by 11 million tons per year of CO2 equivalent by 2025, she said.

The Obama administration has a goal of reducing methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by 40 to 45 percent from 2012 levels by 2025. Natural gas is 80 percent methane, while oil extraction processes also often release methane trapped underground. In 2012, 30 percent of the country’s methane emissions came from oil and gas operations.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/05/12/3777605/methane-rule-finalized/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/05/12/3777605/methane-rule-finalized/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 15, 2016, 04:18:20 PM
The US Energy Information Administration, EIA, recently issued a report that indicates that even with the Paris Pact in place fossil fuels are likely to dominate our energy use through 2040 (see image):

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/global-2040-forecast-slight-fall-fossil-fuels-20340 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/global-2040-forecast-slight-fall-fossil-fuels-20340)

Extract: "Despite the urgency to cut greenhouse gas emissions as climate change bears down on the globe, fossil fuel use is not likely to change much in the coming decades. Though renewable energy will grow quickly though 2040, gasoline and diesel will still move most of the world’s vehicles, and coal will still be the largest single source of carbon emissions.
Those are the conclusions of a forecast released by the federal government on Wednesday for how the world will use energy and what its carbon dioxide emissions will be over the next 25 years."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: sidd on May 15, 2016, 08:04:37 PM
the EIA is a great source of historical statistics. Unfortunately EIA forecasts are lousy.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 16, 2016, 04:21:07 AM
The linked article discusses how satellite observations indicate that both methane and carbon dioxide atmospheric concentrations are continuing to increase despite global efforts to reduce emissions.  Particularly, the upcoming Sentinel -5P observations will be critical to verify whether progress is actually going to be achieved for controlling methane emissions (such as advertised by the Paris Pact):

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Methane_and_carbon_dioxide_on_the_rise (http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Methane_and_carbon_dioxide_on_the_rise)

Extract: "Satellite readings show that atmospheric methane and carbon dioxide are continuing to increase despite global efforts to reduce emissions.

The upcoming Sentinel-5P mission for Europe’s Copernicus programme is set to continue data collection on methane and other components of atmospheric chemistry by scanning the whole globe every day.
“For the future, Sentinel-5P will be very important, in particular because of its very dense, high-resolution observations of atmospheric methane, which have the potential to detect and quantify the emissions of important methane emission hot spots such as oil and gas fields,” noted Michael Buchwitz, who also leads the Greenhouse Gases project under ESA’s Climate Change Initiative."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 16, 2016, 01:53:38 PM
the EIA is a great source of historical statistics. Unfortunately Fortunately EIA forecasts are lousy.

Fixed that for you.   ;D
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 16, 2016, 04:50:38 PM
Per the linked article, Oxfam has reported that the Paris Pact fails to provide adequate financing to poor countries to adequately address climate change:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/paris-climate-agreement-report-oxfam-a7030446.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/paris-climate-agreement-report-oxfam-a7030446.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 16, 2016, 04:51:40 PM
the EIA is a great source of historical statistics. Unfortunately Fortunately EIA forecasts are lousy.

Fixed that for you.   ;D

I do not know that it is a good idea to count your chickens before they hatch ;)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 16, 2016, 06:15:20 PM
The linked article discusses the "negative emissions" game that scientists and policy makers are playing.  This is a very dangerous game to be playing:

https://www.skepticalscience.com/10-ways-neg-emissions-slow-climate-change.html (https://www.skepticalscience.com/10-ways-neg-emissions-slow-climate-change.html)

Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 17, 2016, 04:40:22 PM
The linked article indicates that (without magic bullets) the need for agriculture to feed an increasing world population will prevent the Paris Pact from achieving its goals:

Wollenberg, E., Richards, M., Smith, P., Havlík, P., Obersteiner, M., Tubiello, F.N., Herold, M., Gerber, P., Carter, S., Reisinger, A., van Vuuren, D., Dickie, A., Neufeldt, H., Sander, B.O., Wassmann, R., Sommer, R., Amonette, J.E., Falcucci, A., Herrero, M., Opio, C., Roman-Cuesta, R., Stehfest, E., Westhoek, H., Ortiz-Monasterio, I., Sapkota, T., Rufino, M.C., Thornton, P.K., Verchot, L., West, P.C., Soussana, J.-F., Baedeker, T., Sadler, M., Vermeulen, S. and Campbell, B.M. (2016), "Reducing emissions from agriculture to meet the 2°C target", Global Change Biology, doi:10.1111/gcb.13340

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.13340/abstract (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.13340/abstract)

Abstract: "More than 100 countries pledged to reduce agricultural greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Richards et al., 2015a) in the 2015 Paris Agreement of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Yet technical information about how much mitigation is needed in the sector versus how much is feasible remains poor. We identify a preliminary global target for reducing emissions from agriculture of ~1 GtCO2e/yr by 2030 to limit warming in 2100 to 2°C above pre-industrial levels. Yet plausible agricultural development pathways with mitigation co-benefits deliver only 21 to 40% of needed mitigation. The target indicates that more transformative technical and policy options will be needed, such as methane inhibitors and finance for new practices. A more comprehensive target for the 2°C limit should be developed to include soil carbon and agriculture-related mitigation options. Excluding agricultural emissions from mitigation targets and plans will increase the cost of mitigation in other sectors or reduce the feasibility of meeting the 2°C limit."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 17, 2016, 06:52:38 PM
the EIA is a great source of historical statistics. Unfortunately Fortunately EIA forecasts are lousy.

Fixed that for you.   ;D

I do not know that it is a good idea to count your chickens before they hatch ;)

Particularly with human behavior.  Sooooo unpredictable.  :)

How many Model 3 orders did you expect?
Elon Musk: Maybe 1/4 to 1/2 of what happened. No one at Tesla thought it would be this high before part 2 of the unveil.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/716344348107878401

Demand for the company’s new energy storage products is “really crazy,” with firm orders “well in excess of a billion dollars’ worth of Powerpacks and Powerwalls…we are sold out of what we could make in 2016 at this point.”
"And that's with no marketing, no advertising, no sales force to speak of really. Not trying to sell it.....
- Elon Musk, Tesla 2Q 2015 earnings report conference call
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 17, 2016, 09:04:29 PM
New England scrambles to find clean energy to replace aging nuclear plants.

“Action is needed on existing policies . . . to further diversify our energy portfolio and meet the goals set forth in the Global Warming Solutions Act.”
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/05/15/carbon-emissions-rising-new-england-power-plants/9WfbtQMJEMBszzxPzf2OLO/story.html (http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/05/15/carbon-emissions-rising-new-england-power-plants/9WfbtQMJEMBszzxPzf2OLO/story.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 18, 2016, 01:48:04 AM
Court showdown over Obama's Clean Power Plan delayed until the fall
But by delaying the hearing, the court could also speed up the entire litigation process, since it precludes any parties from appealing a ruling to the court’s full panel of judges.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/280080-climate-rule-case-postponed-3-months (http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/280080-climate-rule-case-postponed-3-months)


Everything You Need To Know About Why The DC Circuit Delayed Arguments On Obama’s Climate Plan
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/05/17/3778827/cpp-oral-arguments-punted/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/05/17/3778827/cpp-oral-arguments-punted/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on May 18, 2016, 03:31:41 AM

Per the linked article, if elected Donald Trump says that he would renegotiate America's role in the Paris Pact:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-climate-exclusive-idUSKCN0Y82NW (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-climate-exclusive-idUSKCN0Y82NW)

Extract: "Republican presidential contender Donald Trump said on Tuesday he would renegotiate America’s role in the U.N. global climate accord, spelling potential doom for an agreement many view as a last chance to turn the tide on global warming.

A pull-out by the world’s second biggest carbon-emitting country would hobble the deal reached in Paris last December by nearly 200 nations, who for the first time in more than two decades found a common vision for curbing greenhouse gas emissions."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 18, 2016, 03:48:10 AM
Negotiators Try to Figure Out What the Paris Climate Agreement Means
Climate negotiators from around the world met yesterday for the first time since brokering the Paris climate deal to start filling in some of the gaps left in that landmark agreement.

The midyear U.N. meeting in Bonn, Germany, was much lower-profile than the confab on the outskirts of the French capital in December. And the agenda was more mundane.
...
More than 175 countries have endorsed the Paris deal since it opened for signature last month in New York. But its goals rest on more than 60 unmet decisions on issues like emissions reporting, how national and collective progress will be assessed, and other “homework” items Bonn will begin to turn in.
...
Besides working to facilitate early entry into force for the Paris deal—which takes effect when 55 countries totaling at least 55 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions have joined—the presidents called for parties to “respect the balance that was found and to continue working together so as to strengthen action, support and ambition.”

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/negotiators-try-to-figure-out-what-the-paris-climate-agreement-means/ (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/negotiators-try-to-figure-out-what-the-paris-climate-agreement-means/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 19, 2016, 12:05:16 AM
Ignore the latest Trump bluster.  That's what the negotiators in Bonn are doing.   :)

Trump threat falls on deaf ears at UN climate talks
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/05/18/trump-threat-falls-on-deaf-ears-at-un-climate-talks/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/05/18/trump-threat-falls-on-deaf-ears-at-un-climate-talks/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 23, 2016, 01:02:32 PM
Trump cannot derail global climate deal
Donald Trump’s statement that he would want to renegotiate the Paris Agreement on climate change if he is elected US president is “meaningless”, one seasoned British climate expert says.

“Donald Trump doesn’t appear to know much about anything except headlines”, Tom Burke told the Climate News Network. “He knows less than most of the political leaders I’ve dealt with in the last 40 years. This is meaningless posturing.”
...
“This is a vacuous piece of posturing, a message to his potential supporters on the political right”, he said. “If the media interrogated Trump rigorously, people would recognise him as a soap bubble.

“Who would he renegotiate the Agreement with? He can’t renegotiate on his own, and the rest of the world is moving on.”

http://climatenewsnetwork.net/trump-cannot-derail-global-climate-deal/ (http://climatenewsnetwork.net/trump-cannot-derail-global-climate-deal/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 27, 2016, 01:07:43 AM
This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things: U.S. Energy Bill Now Full Of Horrible Environmental Provisions
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/05/26/3782311/enviros-frown-on-house-energy-bill/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/05/26/3782311/enviros-frown-on-house-energy-bill/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on May 28, 2016, 03:26:08 AM
Giving themselves almost ten years to beat back the fossil fuels lobby (and re-educate Republicans in the U.S.).   :-\


G7 nations pledge to end fossil fuel subsidies by 2025
The G7 nations have for the first time set a deadline for the ending most fossil fuel subsidies, saying government support for coal, oil and gas should end by 2025.

The leaders of the UK, US, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the European Union encouraged all countries to join them in eliminating “inefficient fossil fuel subsidies” within a decade.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/27/g7-nations-pledge-to-end-fossil-fuel-subsidies-by-2025 (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/27/g7-nations-pledge-to-end-fossil-fuel-subsidies-by-2025)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: ghoti on May 29, 2016, 06:26:37 PM
Setting a deadline so far in the future is effectively saying we won't cut subsidies. None of these leaders will be in office then so they are clearing showing they have no desire to act. They'll let the next leader deal with it.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 04, 2016, 04:27:51 PM
The U.S. government should buy coal plants, shut them down and pay to retrain their employees
There is another alternative — which I’ll call Plan A — that would avoid the considerable litigation risks of the Clean Power Plan and achieve more quickly and with greater certainty a reduction in emissions at least equal to those of the Clean Power initiative. Under Plan A, the federal government would buy or, if necessary, seize under eminent domain all existing U.S. coal plants and close them over 10 years. Such a use of federal authority is well-established and would not be subject to serious legal challenge. (Plant owners could dispute the amount of compensation offered but not the public purpose of federal action intended to protect the environment.) Plan A would include fair, market-based compensation for coal-plant shareholders and generous severance, relocation and job-training programs for employees, who should not be asked to bear the burdens of emissions reductions. Once authorized by Congress, Plan A could be carried out before the legality of the Clean Power Plan was finally adjudicated and long before it could be implemented. Moreover, since Plan A would set a firm deadline for coal plants to close, it would provide a strong incentive for wind, solar and other renewables to replace the lost coal capacity at rates that are already competitive with coal.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-federal-government-should-buy-coal-plants-shut-them-down-and-pay-to-retrain-their-employees/2016/06/03/eb08ebf4-0bdd-11e6-8ab8-9ad050f76d7d_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-federal-government-should-buy-coal-plants-shut-them-down-and-pay-to-retrain-their-employees/2016/06/03/eb08ebf4-0bdd-11e6-8ab8-9ad050f76d7d_story.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on June 04, 2016, 10:24:41 PM
The linked reference indicates that what constitutes the best accounting procedure for short-live climate pollutants (like methane and black carbon) depends on what radiative forcing pathway we follow; which depends on how well the Paris Pact is implemented:

Myles R. Allen, Jan S. Fuglestvedt, Keith P. Shine, Andy Reisinger, Raymond T. Pierrehumbert & Piers M. Forster (2016), "New use of global warming potentials to compare cumulative and short-lived climate pollutants", Nature Climate Change, doi:10.1038/nclimate2998

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2998.html (http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2998.html)

Abstract: "Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have requested guidance on common greenhouse gas metrics in accounting for Nationally determined contributions (NDCs) to emission reductions. Metric choice can affect the relative emphasis placed on reductions of ‘cumulative climate pollutants’ such as carbon dioxide versus ‘short-lived climate pollutants’ (SLCPs), including methane and black carbon. Here we show that the widely used 100-year global warming potential (GWP100) effectively measures the relative impact of both cumulative pollutants and SLCPs on realized warming 20–40 years after the time of emission. If the overall goal of climate policy is to limit peak warming, GWP100 therefore overstates the importance of current SLCP emissions unless stringent and immediate reductions of all climate pollutants result in temperatures nearing their peak soon after mid-century, which may be necessary to limit warming to “well below 2 °C”. The GWP100 can be used to approximately equate a one-off pulse emission of a cumulative pollutant and an indefinitely sustained change in the rate of emission of an SLCP. The climate implications of traditional CO2-equivalent targets are ambiguous unless contributions from cumulative pollutants and SLCPs are specified separately."

See also:
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/scientists-seek-new-measure-for-methane-20413 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/scientists-seek-new-measure-for-methane-20413)


Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 05, 2016, 09:20:21 PM
(Still needs a companion bill to be passed by the state senate.)

New York Assembly Approves Climate Bill That Would Cut Emissions to Zero
The bill, endorsed by a broad coalition, is also notable for its emphasis on environmental and economic justice, advocates say.
The New York State Assembly approved the nation's most ambitious climate change bill Wednesday. The vote came hours after a broad coalition of environmental justice, climate activist, conservation and labor groups took to the State Capitol in Albany urging lawmakers to swiftly pass the bill before the legislative session ends on June 16.

The legislation requires the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from major sources to zero by 2050. That would demand a near total decarbonization of its economy, and it would put New York among the world's leaders on forceful climate action. To achieve it, the bill gives the state until 2030 to get at least 50 percent of its electricity from clean energy.

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/01062016/new-york-climate-change-legislation-zero-emissions-2050 (http://insideclimatenews.org/news/01062016/new-york-climate-change-legislation-zero-emissions-2050)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 06, 2016, 01:48:15 PM
How Obama Is ‘Trump-Proofing’ His Climate Pact
“It’s not policy—ultimately it’s about markets,” says Ethan Zindler, an analyst with Bloomberg New Energy Finance. He argues that the United States will achieve the target even without Obama’s Clean Power Plan because gas is cheap and is expected to stay that way, because renewables have gotten much cheaper—and will continue to drop in price—and the renewable energy tax credits that Congress just passed are now on the books for the next five years.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/06/obama-trump-climate-change-213942 (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/06/obama-trump-climate-change-213942)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: timallard on June 06, 2016, 03:40:54 PM
Consider emissions matter not right now as a priority, a heresy to state.

It's based on a realization of the geologic context everyone is aware of, that is we're now in a paleontological "excursion" caused by a large carbon "perturbation" the effects of which last 200,000-years start-to-finish.

We obviously need to zero emissions asap yet after we do so nothing happens, this is proof we exited normal climatic controls by storing too much too fast into the oceans and atmosphere, a 10-petagram bomb last year alone.

Try to consider the volcanic equivalent, to heat the planet during the PETM took ~50,000-years before the oceans went anoxic and HS was produced to cause the mass-extinction; we put up more carbon already.

So, CO2 remains the same for a couple of centuries after emissions drop while excess oceanic CO2 out-gasses and the heating, wherever it stopped at most think 4-5C continues at that level for many thousands of years then slowly drops.

That's "where we are", so Paris while nice is meaningless to actually stop anything that's going to happen, legally binding or not it's too little by many orders of magnitude.

My take is that saving what sea-ice is left needs to be the global priority right now, (albedo-loss heat-gain) = (20-years of CO2 heat-gain) = (0.21-watts/m²), it's a direct heating, it's more efficient than trapping LWIR.

Then add in that we're gaining 3-ppm/year and the big jump at the end of the ice-age was 1-ppm/180-years for context.

The rule is if you bomb this planet with enough CO2 it does its own thing, that's called an excursion, we caused one and now must live out the consequences, the rich are insane, they blew a chance we had in the late 70's when passive-solar homes were built & panels mfg began in earnest.

At that time CO2 was ~335-ppm, only 10-ppm above the maximum reached in the Pleistocene so still within "natural variation" and sea-level commitment only 10-15m at 405-ppm we're committed to 25m/82ft of sea-level rise.

Now the dream is to piddle around with the evil eye on cashing out fossil investments, Paris is a trap, a delay, it means nothing to slowing down what's going on, the priority right now should be retaining what sea-ice exists.

The only ships using the Arctic Ocean are shipping fuels, then, aircraft and shipping afaik were NOT regulated in Paris, they are needed to keep moving fossil fuels around, proving the intent of the agreement behind closed doors.

My question is, did Paris include consideration of albedo-loss accelerating, with estimates of this direct heating?
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 07, 2016, 12:18:00 PM
Modi’s visit to Washington holds the promise of action against climate change
This is the fourth time India's Modi is coming to the U.S. as prime minister
India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi hopes to talk about climate-change, a clean-energy partnership, and security and defense cooperation during his short trip to the U.S. He'll also be addressing a joint meeting of Congress on Wednesday.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/06/modis-visit-to-washington-could-set-a-new-tone-on-fighting-global-climate-change/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/06/modis-visit-to-washington-could-set-a-new-tone-on-fighting-global-climate-change/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 08, 2016, 01:33:55 PM
The United States and India Are Partnering on a Slate of Clean Energy Initiatives
[June 7], the White House announced a series of joint initiatives between the United States and India to advance clean energy in the world’s second-most populous country.

- A $20 million initiative to attract private-sector investment to bring clean energy to as many as 1 million Indian homes by 2020.

- A $40 million program that will draw up to $1 billion in private sector funding for small-scale renewable energy projects.

- $30 million for research into smart grids and grid storage.

- In September, the United States and India will launch a program focused on off-grid solar energy.
The two countries will establish a clean-energy hub to spur renewable-energy investment in India.

- The United States and India will increase financial assistance for developing countries to limit emissions of hydrofluorocarbons — highly potent greenhouse gasses used in air conditioners and refrigerators.
https://nexusmedianews.com/u-s-working-with-india-on-mammoth-nuclear-power-plant-a478e8bd32be
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on June 08, 2016, 05:42:20 PM
Per the following article the EPA is likely under-reporting methane leakage in the USA.  Will the Paris Pact put a stop to such under-reporting, or just look the other way?

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-methane-leaks-20160607-snap-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-methane-leaks-20160607-snap-story.html)

Extract: "An environmental organization filed a federal complaint Wednesday, alleging that key reports by a top U.S. Environmental Protection Agency official wrongfully stated the severity of methane leaks across the nation’s natural gas industry.

In its 68-page complaint to the EPA’s Office of Inspector General, NC Warn, a 28-year-old climate and energy justice organization based in North Carolina, alleges that David Allen, a university faculty member who was head of the EPA’s Science Advisory Board at the time of the reports, should have corrected studies about methane leaks after the equipment used for the reports was proved faulty. Allen is on the faculty of the University of Texas at Austin, according to the complaint."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: 12Patrick on June 08, 2016, 09:10:01 PM
ALL climate treaties are to slow thus far to prevent Summertime Arctic Ice melt out... AKA "Blue Ocean Event"...
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 10, 2016, 01:42:24 AM
U.S.:  Harvard Study Finds $38 Billion Economic Benefit From EPA’s Clean Power Plan
When the Environmental Protection Agency published a rule to reduce carbon emissions from power plants last year, critics quickly said the plan was too economically costly for businesses and home electricity bills. But now, a new study led by researchers from Harvard University finds that nearly all regions of the U.S. stand to gain economically from a power plant carbon standard like the Clean Power Plan, and do so fairly quickly.

Using a scenario that somewhat resembles the Clean Power Plan (CPP) — a policy moderately stringent and highly flexible — researchers calculated net benefits of some $38 billion a year, according to the study published Wednesday in the online journal PLOS ONE.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/06/09/3786018/power-plant-carbon-standard-brings-economic-benefits/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/06/09/3786018/power-plant-carbon-standard-brings-economic-benefits/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on June 11, 2016, 07:42:09 PM
Will provisions in the proposed new Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), severely undermine the Paris Pact?


http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/06/06/free-trade-will-kill-climate-movement-hundreds-groups-warn-congress (http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/06/06/free-trade-will-kill-climate-movement-hundreds-groups-warn-congress)

Extract: "Warning against dangers to "workers, communities, and our environment," more than 450 environmental advocacy groups called on Congress to reject the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).

Specifically warning against the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions, which allow multinational corporations sue nations in private, clandestine tribunals for passing laws they don't like, the groups sent a letter on Monday that stated: "We strongly urge you to stand up for healthy communities, clean air and water, Indigenous peoples, property rights, and a stable climate by committing to vote no on the TPP and asking the U.S. Trade Representative to remove from TTIP any provision that empowers corporations to challenge government policies in extrajudicial tribunals.

President Obama is hoping to have the TPP ratified before he leaves office on January 20, 2017, and Reuters reports that Congress is expected to vote on it after the election in November."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 13, 2016, 03:02:22 PM
Powerful opinion piece on 'Brexit' and climate.

If we’re to win the climate struggle, we must remain in Europe
Brexit would leave the field clear for those on the right who always hated the idea that by intervening in the economy for the public good we should build an energy system that is clean, efficient, decentralised and driven by the needs of households and communities, not overbearing private corporations.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/12/win-climate-struggle-remain-europe-paris-summit (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/12/win-climate-struggle-remain-europe-paris-summit)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 13, 2016, 09:21:16 PM
A Million New Solar Homes Projected With India-U.S. Announcement
The new $20-million U.S.-India Clean Energy Finance (USICEF) initiative will mobilize up to $400 million to provide clean and renewable electricity to up to 1 million households by 2020, the White House said. Another $40-million U.S.-India Catalytic Solar Finance Program will provide financing for small-scale renewable energy investment, "particularly in poorer, rural villages that are not connected to the grid." That initiative is expected to catalyze up to $1 billion worth of projects. Both financing projects will be equally supported by the two countries.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/06/07/3785461/modi-obama-new-climate-announcements/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/06/07/3785461/modi-obama-new-climate-announcements/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 16, 2016, 01:28:56 AM
Norway wants to increase carbon offsets to achieve neutrality -- while continuing its oil and gas business.

Norway pledges to become climate neutral by 2030
Parliament approves radical proposal of accelerated emissions cuts and carbon offsetting to achieve climate goal 20 years earlier than planned
“It is incumbent on me to underline that this proposal from parliament is really about carbon offsets,” Helgesen told the Guardian. “It is not about national emissions reductions beyond what we will contribute, through the EU process.”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/15/norway-pledges-to-become-climate-neutral-by-2030 (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/15/norway-pledges-to-become-climate-neutral-by-2030)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 16, 2016, 02:53:15 PM
France ratifies the Paris agreement on climate change
France on Wednesday became the second European country to ratify, after Hungary, and the first the Group of Seven advanced economies. The ratification was formally authorized by the French parliament last week.
...
China, the world's top carbon emitter, said it intends to ratify the agreement before the G-20 summit in China in September. The United States, the second-largest emitter, also announced its intention to ratify this year.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_FRANCE_CLIMATE_AGREEMENT (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_FRANCE_CLIMATE_AGREEMENT)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 17, 2016, 09:49:15 PM
Brexit voters almost twice as likely to disbelieve in manmade climate change
British people backing a leave vote in the EU referendum are almost twice as likely to believe that climate change does not have a human cause, according to a new poll.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/16/brexit-voters-almost-twice-as-likely-to-disbelieve-in-manmade-climate-change (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/16/brexit-voters-almost-twice-as-likely-to-disbelieve-in-manmade-climate-change)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 21, 2016, 09:59:53 PM
EU smashes 2020 emissions target six years early

Outperformance in 2014 shows the EU can set a more ambitious course next decade, say campaigners

The EU soared past its 2020 carbon cutting goal six years early, according to European Environment Agency data released on Tuesday.

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/06/21/eu-smashes-2020-emissions-target-six-years-early/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/06/21/eu-smashes-2020-emissions-target-six-years-early/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on June 21, 2016, 11:14:49 PM
Sigmetnow

Is the  European Environment Agency data cause for much optimism? The graph in that linked Climate Home article shows that carbon emissions have fallen at a rate of less than 1% a year over recent 24 years.

After updating IPCC's remaining carbon budget, I have calculated the rates at which carbon emissions must fall to make these budgets last until the second half of the century. The calculation is in Is Green Growth a fantasy? (http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/is-green-growth-a-fantasy/)

(The remaining carbon budgets are the IPCC figures divided by the number of people in the world.)

Postscript 28 April 2016

Updates for the remaining carbon budgets

More than a year has passed since Carbon Brief’s calculation in November 2014. So reducing the carbon budgets by emissions since then (7 tonnes CO2) gives

The remaining carbon budget for a 66% chance of avoiding 1.5˚C is now… 26 tonnes CO2 per person.
This requires a yearly rate of decarbonisation of 15%

The remaining carbon budget for a 66% chance of avoiding 2.0˚C is now… 108 tonnes CO2 per person.
This requires a yearly rate of decarbonisation of 4%

(The following needs checking….)

However, these budgets are too high because this only accounts for the effects of CO2 and do not take account of other greenhouse gasses. The World Resources Institute says:

“one can argue for an even smaller budget and additional emissions constraints because non-CO2 gases are not included in 1 trillion tonne C figure. For example, short-lived greenhouse gases, such as methane, are not included in – nor necessarily appropriate for – the 1 trillion tonne C budget approach because they play a secondary role in influencing long-term warming.

However, when non-CO2 forcings are taken into account, the budget is reduced and that budget may depend on the scenario studied. For example, according to one scenario studied in the IPCC AR5 (RCP 2.6), when non-CO2 greenhouse gases are considered, the budget drops much lower to 790 PgC.”

That means that the effect of other greenhouse gasses reduces the overall budget to 79% of the original.  The remaining carbon budgets are measured in terms of CO2 so, as a rough estimate they should be reduced by 21%. This now gives

The remaining carbon budget for a 66% chance of avoiding 1.5˚C becomes … 21 tonnes CO2 per person.
This requires a yearly rate of decarbonisation of 24%

The remaining carbon budget for a 66% chance of avoiding 2.0˚C becomes… 85 tonnes CO2 per person.
This requires a yearly rate of decarbonisation of 5%

But there are reasons these may be too optimistic.


Is decreasing carbon emissions by even 4% without cutting  world GDP possible?

P.S. I'd be pleased with any corrections.

Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: sidd on June 22, 2016, 06:00:41 AM
"Is decreasing carbon emissions by even 4% without cutting  world GDP possible?"

hehehehe. I laugh so as not to cry.

Here is a (possibly apocryphal)  quote:

"You know, comrades," says Stalin, "that I think in regard to this: I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this — who will count the votes, and how."

So, for example, it is entirely possible to count the GDP in websites and phone apps created, and entirely discount dead people in small faraway countries ... decreasing CO2 by mass death while GDP increases is merely a matter of accounting.

sidd
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: timallard on June 22, 2016, 06:38:50 AM
Sigmetnow

Is the  European Environment Agency data cause for much optimism? The graph in that linked Climate Home article shows that carbon emissions have fallen at a rate of less than 1% a year over recent 24 years.

After updating IPCC's remaining carbon budget, I have calculated the rates at which carbon emissions must fall to make these budgets last until the second half of the century. The calculation is in Is Green Growth a fantasy? ([url]http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/is-green-growth-a-fantasy/[/url])

(The remaining carbon budgets are the IPCC figures divided by the number of people in the world.)

Postscript 28 April 2016

Updates for the remaining carbon budgets

More than a year has passed since Carbon Brief’s calculation in November 2014. So reducing the carbon budgets by emissions since then (7 tonnes CO2) gives

The remaining carbon budget for a 66% chance of avoiding 1.5˚C is now… 26 tonnes CO2 per person.
This requires a yearly rate of decarbonisation of 15%

The remaining carbon budget for a 66% chance of avoiding 2.0˚C is now… 108 tonnes CO2 per person.
This requires a yearly rate of decarbonisation of 4%

(The following needs checking….)

However, these budgets are too high because this only accounts for the effects of CO2 and do not take account of other greenhouse gasses. The World Resources Institute says:

“one can argue for an even smaller budget and additional emissions constraints because non-CO2 gases are not included in 1 trillion tonne C figure. For example, short-lived greenhouse gases, such as methane, are not included in – nor necessarily appropriate for – the 1 trillion tonne C budget approach because they play a secondary role in influencing long-term warming.
<snip>


Is decreasing carbon emissions by even 4% without cutting  world GDP possible?

P.S. I'd be pleased with any corrections.


This is a big zombie, "For example, short-lived greenhouse gases, such as methane, are not included in – nor necessarily appropriate for – the 1 trillion tonne C budget approach because they play a secondary role in influencing long-term warming.".

CH4 is 100-times more potent for 1-2 decades what's converted turns to CO2 so doesn't disappear!!!

The remaining in the sky whatever is very long-term thousands of years as CO2 does and at 1-century later it's 23-times more potent often quoted at 25-times more potent.

It's like saying "clean coal", or that "natural gas" is a "transition" fuel when the pipelines and city infrastructure reeks of methane to the point of a health hazard not to mention mysterious total demolition of homes or businesses.

The CARVE program identified this kind of emission profile above tundra, we can't turn that off easy, eh?

Society must leave the Steam-Age or it's game-over.

Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on June 22, 2016, 09:26:08 AM
Sidd

decreasing CO2 by mass death while GDP increases is merely a matter of accounting.


Mass death of the poor doesn't decrease CO2 much. This OXFAM infographic shows that the rich (us?) must cut emissions or watch the poor die (as we are doing now) - then our descendants may die off too ..

(http://brusselsblog.co.uk/img/Oxfam_CO2.jpeg)

OXFAM kindly let me use this image in a posting about "sustainable developments" just were not sustainable: Three failed eco-towns (http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/three-failed-eco-towns/).

Does anyone know of any "sustainable developments" (for us in the rich world) that come anywhere near to being really sustainable?
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Laurent on June 22, 2016, 01:18:52 PM
Warmer winters play important role in EU emissions drop
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36588699 (http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36588699)

And they do not count the merchandises produced abroad, aren't they ?
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 22, 2016, 07:25:01 PM
Sigmetnow

Is the  European Environment Agency data cause for much optimism? The graph in that linked Climate Home article shows that carbon emissions have fallen at a rate of less than 1% a year over recent 24 years.

<snip>


I agree the article was trying to put a massive positive spin on a comparatively tiny accomplishment.  Perhaps they felt that was a better approach than saying, "Is that all you can do?"
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on June 23, 2016, 07:18:34 AM
Does anyone know of any "sustainable developments" (for us in the rich world) that come anywhere near to being really sustainable?
No.

Sweden is supposed to be one of the best ones out there, but it's now clearer than ever that our leaders are still BAU.
They really, really want to sell our/Vattenfalls earth destroying business to EPH, let's see how that goes because they have rather low support from the people who voted for them and EPH is not exactly a green mean machine with an outstanding environmental policy.
They recently decided to keep our nuclear forever (Vattenfall likes that), which is far away from what was agreed upon in 1980.
And all of the above with our green party (MP) in the government...

Some of our leaders were not born in 1980 but most of them maintain a highly positive attitude, "we will fix this" and they aim for 100% renewables.
We're more like an alcoholic, replacing whiskey with beer while talking about future sober days, which is the requirement for a liver transplant. We can't get a new earth.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 23, 2016, 07:45:27 PM
Cities forge world's largest alliance to curb climate change
Cities in six continents joined up to form the world's largest alliance to combat climate change on Wednesday, a move intended to help make ground-level changes to slow global warming.

More than 7,100 cities in 119 countries formed the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy, a network for helping exchange information on such goals as developing clean energy, organizers said.

Cities are responsible for an estimated 75 percent of carbon emissions contributing to climate change and consume 70 percent of global energy, according to the United Nations Environment Programme.

"When mayors share a vision of a low-carbon future and roll up their sleeves, things get done," said Maros Sefcovic, the European Commission vice-president and co-chairman of the new alliance, in a statement.

The coalition is the world's largest, representing 8 percent of the world's population, its founders said. It results from the merger of two groups - the European Union's Covenant of Mayors and the U.N.-backed Compact of Mayors.

The other co-chairman is former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a billionaire philanthropist who helped launch the Compact of Mayors.

http://news.trust.org/item/20160622214525-g21ao/ (http://news.trust.org/item/20160622214525-g21ao/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on June 24, 2016, 06:17:35 AM
My own municipality is not listed at Covenant of Mayors, the closest neighbouring (which I'm also familiar with) is, but has no action plan listed. I'm not surprised. Nothing's happening here.

If I look at Gothenburg instead, where I grew up, they have some really knowledgeable people there, so they should get things going right?

With proper levees Gothenburg will manage 2 metres of SLR. The attached picture shows what they have today during a storm surge at 1.8m. But the levees are still on the drawing table.

What are they doing now? They have started an enormous project, building tunnels...
It's supposed to be finished in 2026.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 24, 2016, 10:11:07 PM
Sleepy,
One can only hope that talking to other Covenant members will educate Gothenburg on what works, where to find resources, and on the need for speed....
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 24, 2016, 10:12:56 PM
Brexit Sparks Worry About Fate of Global Climate Action
While the full implications of Britain’s decision remain unclear, many fear the wave of nationalism will harm international efforts to halt global warming.
Britain's surprising vote to leave the European Union in a national referendum on Thursday sent a shock through global financial markets, and there is similar concern that the move will have profound implications for climate policy as well.

Clean energy investments, carbon markets and the Paris climate agreement weren't a major part of the calculus when Britons went to the polls, but now environmentalists fear Britain's contribution to global climate action may be compromised, with negative ramifications for global warming.

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/24062016/brexit-sparks-worry-about-fate-global-climate-action-britain-european-union (http://insideclimatenews.org/news/24062016/brexit-sparks-worry-about-fate-global-climate-action-britain-european-union)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 25, 2016, 01:04:14 AM
Britain's Brexit: How Baby Boomers Defeated Millennials in Historic Vote
LONDON — The United Kingdom's decision to sever itself from the European Union on Friday exposed something approaching an intergenerational war of ideas.

While the "Leave" campaign won the referendum with 51.9 percent of the vote, young people — the ones who will likely grapple with the decision for decades — overwhelmingly wanted to remain part of the EU.

According to data gathered by the British pollster YouGov on election day, a staggering 75 percent of people aged between 18 and 24 voted for Remain.

But this youthful bloc was outweighed by an even stronger force.

What pushed the country toward Brexit, according to pollsters, was a remarkably high turnout among white, working-class older people — most of whom who voted Leave.

"The young have lost the referendum and the old have won," according to Ben Page, chief executive of Ipsos MORI, another British polling company.

Sixty-one percent of people over the age of 65 voted Leave, according to YouGov's data.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/brexit-referendum/britain-s-brexit-how-baby-boomers-defeated-millennials-historic-vote-n598481 (http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/brexit-referendum/britain-s-brexit-how-baby-boomers-defeated-millennials-historic-vote-n598481)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 25, 2016, 06:27:05 PM
A new paper looks at the U.S. Clean Power Plan, state by state.

The Clean Power Plan and Beyond
Working Paper Summary
...Our modeling suggests that CPP compliance can be achieved cost effectively by expanding new natural gas and renewable electricity generation to replace higher emitting coal generation and by using energy efficiency to curb demand growth, thereby enabling a more affordable pace of plant replacements. Post-2030 policies requiring further CO2 emission reductions, in combination with perfect foresight today, would motivate less natural gas build-out over the next 15 years. The South’s response to the CPP is distinct, with a larger share of coal retirements and a greater proportionate uptake of natural gas, energy efficiency, and renewable resources. In addition to reducing CO2 emissions, these least-cost compliance scenarios would produce substantial collateral benefits including lower electricity bills across all customer classes and significant reductions in local air pollution.

http://cepl.gatech.edu/projects/ppce/cpp (http://cepl.gatech.edu/projects/ppce/cpp)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 28, 2016, 01:50:39 AM
Christiana Figueres to make run for U.N. secretary-general

Orr said Figueres' presence in the race would be "healthy" because it would put climate change "front and center" as an issue that candidates for the job would be questioned about and evaluated on. "Until now, it's been virtually absent," he said.

János Pásztor, Ban's senior adviser on climate change, said it is critical for the next secretary-general to make global warming a top priority.

http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060039367 (http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060039367)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on June 28, 2016, 04:11:22 PM
With regard to fighting climate change, Brexit is likely "… going to move the numbers more against an ambitious policy in Europe.”

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/06/27/eu-climate-plans-stalled-as-brexit-talks-take-over/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/06/27/eu-climate-plans-stalled-as-brexit-talks-take-over/)

Extract: "Britain voted last Thursday for a so-called ‘Brexit’, but is in no hurry to invoke Article 50, which starts formal exit negotiations.
“All key decisions will have to wait for the new prime minister,” David Cameron, who is stepping aside, told parliament on Monday.
That will take months, with the Conservative Party due to choose a new leader by October and mounting calls for a general election to follow.
The uncertainty is expected to further delay Brussels’ ratification of the Paris climate agreement and plans to put its targets into practice.

The European Commission was drafting proposals, due on 20 July, to carve up its 2030 target among 28 member states. Now it looks likely, but not certain, to be 27 – and that timeline is in doubt.
Britain has been doing more than average. If the EU is to stick to its goal of a 40% emissions cut from 1990 levels, the remaining members must make more effort.
Former UK energy and climate chief Ed Davey does not see much political will to do so, telling Climate Home: “[Brexit] is going to move the numbers more against an ambitious policy in Europe.”"
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sleepy on June 29, 2016, 09:09:35 AM
Sleepy,
One can only hope that talking to other Covenant members will educate Gothenburg on what works, where to find resources, and on the need for speed....
Sorry Sig, didn't notice your reply while reading here yesterday. Sure, speed is needed but instead they are playing a chicken race with AGW.
My point was that Gothenburg already contains all the knowlege required to convince their leaders. Gothenburg will have to build a levee inland and redirect Göta Älv as well, not only those two against the ocean. But after that they are still not safe, thanks to the other streams/rivers shown on the map (the three levees in black) during heavy precipitation.
I remember "Mölndalsån" flooding in the 70's and that part of Gothenburg, toghether with the two levees against the ocean will become an island at 3m SLR. Which is also where the tunnels will be...
The black lines on the map are drawn by me.
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: GeoffBeacon on June 29, 2016, 12:24:11 PM
Silver lining? A Brexit recession will cut carbon emissions.

AbruptSLR.

To save the climate, consumption must fall – production cannot be decarbonised fast enough to keep within remaining carbon budgets.  Is a Brexit recession is good for the climate?

See Green growth or degrowth? (http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/green-growth-or-degrowth/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 29, 2016, 08:19:15 PM
Government Think Tank Pushes Canada to Think Beyond Its Oil Dependence
Report reveals unusually frank assessment of Canada’s energy future, which it says will be shaped by falling costs of renewables as well as pollution pressures.
A Canadian government think tank is calling for the country to make a seismic shift away from its economic dependence on oil production or risk being left behind as the world moves rapidly away from fossil fuel use.

The draft report, by Policy Horizons Canada, is an unusually frank assessment by a government agency on the uncertain future of fossil fuels, especially considering the large role that oil plays in Canada's economy. The report is titled "Canada in a Changing Energy Global Energy Landscape," and says that Canada should begin to adjust its energy priorities to prepare for the significant changes in the energy landscape expected to occur within the next 10-15 years. 

The powerful drivers pushing Canada in this direction are the falling costs of renewable energy, led by wind and solar; the increasing proportion of electricity in global energy use; and the pressures on countries to grow their economies while slashing greenhouse gas emissions and dangerous air pollution.

"In combination, these drivers could lead to renewable-sourced electricity replacing fossil fuels as the dominant form of primary energy used in the global economy for most industrial, commercial and personal activity," the report said.

The authors, citing dozens of scientific papers and articles, said they foresee a near future in which the world's power plants, factories, industries and vehicles are increasingly powered by wind and solar electricity. That may happen much faster than predicted, "significantly disrupting fossil fuel markets." And while Canada "would be relatively well placed to take advantage of an electricity-based industrial ecosystem," the report said, the repercussions on its petroleum assets and economy would be vast.

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/27062016/government-think-tank-pushes-canada-think-beyond-fossil-fuel-dependence-climate-change-tar-sands-oil-sands (http://insideclimatenews.org/news/27062016/government-think-tank-pushes-canada-think-beyond-fossil-fuel-dependence-climate-change-tar-sands-oil-sands)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on June 29, 2016, 08:49:54 PM
Silver lining? A Brexit recession will cut carbon emissions.

AbruptSLR.

To save the climate, consumption must fall – production cannot be decarbonised fast enough to keep within remaining carbon budgets.  Is a Brexit recession is good for the climate?

See Green growth or degrowth? ([url]http://www.brusselsblog.co.uk/green-growth-or-degrowth/[/url])


Geoff,

I do not know whether Brexit is good for the climate, but Carbon Brief provides the linked article entitled: "Brexit: 94 unanswered questions for climate and energy policy", that discusses areas where Brexit makes the fight against climate change harder and less certain to be effective:

http://www.carbonbrief.org/brexit-94-unanswered-questions-for-climate-and-energy-policy (http://www.carbonbrief.org/brexit-94-unanswered-questions-for-climate-and-energy-policy)

Extract: "… Rudd conceded that the referendum result had made the path to climate action harder, raising a host of questions. Adding to the air of uncertainty, there is now the prospect of a new Conservative prime minister being in place by September, as well as the possibility of a snap general election."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on June 30, 2016, 09:33:46 PM
U.K. Said to Prepare to Adopt Carbon Pollution Target This Week
The U.K. government is poised to adopt this week new targets for reining in fossil-fuel pollution around 2030, a move that could assure investors in clean energy that the nation will leave environmental goals intact despite voting to exit the European Union.

Amber Rudd, who leads the the Department of Energy and Climate Change, is set to endorse a proposal to cut U.K. emissions by 57 percent below 1990 levels by 2032, according to a person with knowledge of the plan who asked not to be named before the official announcement. The government is adopting a recommendation made in November by its adviser, the Committee on Climate Change.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-27/u-k-said-to-prepare-to-adopt-carbon-pollution-target-this-week (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-27/u-k-said-to-prepare-to-adopt-carbon-pollution-target-this-week)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 01, 2016, 09:16:40 PM
City of Sydney targets 50% renewables by 2030, net zero emissions by 2050

The City of Sydney has raised the bar on its renewable energy and climate targets, with the release of a new five-year plan that targets 50 per cent renewable electricity by 2030 and net zero emissions by 2050.

http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/city-sydney-targets-50-renewables-2030-net-zero-emissions-2050 (http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/city-sydney-targets-50-renewables-2030-net-zero-emissions-2050)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 02, 2016, 07:00:46 PM
Richest nations fail to agree on deadline to phase out fossil fuel subsidies
BEIJING — Energy ministers from the world’s major economies have failed to reach agreement on a deadline to phase out hundreds of billions of dollars in government subsidies for fossil fuels — subsidies that campaigners say are helping to propel the globe toward potentially devastating climate change.

Ministers from the Group of 20 major economies met in Beijing on Wednesday and Thursday but failed to reach agreement on a deadline, despite Chinese and American efforts and a joint appeal from 200 nongovernmental organizations.

The Group of Seven richest economies last month urged all countries to eliminate “inefficient” fossil fuel subsidies by 2025. At a separate annual meeting in June, the United States and China agreed to push for a firm target date to be set at a summit of G-20 leaders in Hangzhou in September.

Nongovernmental groups are urging a “full and equitable phase-out by all G20 members of all fossil fuel subsidies by 2020, starting with the elimination of all subsidies for fossil fuel exploration and coal production.”

But energy ministers from the G-20 failed to reach agreement on a deadline this week.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/richest-nations-fail-to-agree-on-deadline-to-phase-out-fossil-fuel-subsidies/2016/07/01/7db563fb-42f0-46c8-bea4-2fcfc0f48c69_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/richest-nations-fail-to-agree-on-deadline-to-phase-out-fossil-fuel-subsidies/2016/07/01/7db563fb-42f0-46c8-bea4-2fcfc0f48c69_story.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on July 03, 2016, 05:59:11 PM
The linked reference was authored by many of the people who developed the RCP scenarios, and their ESLD analysis indicates that following the Paris Pact approach we not achieve the Paris Pact, nor the IPCC, targets (see the attached image):

Joeri Rogelj, Michel den Elzen, Niklas Höhne, Taryn Fransen, Hanna Fekete, Harald Winkler, Roberto Schaeffer, Fu Sha, Keywan Riahi & Malte Meinshausen (30 June 2016), "Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2 °C", Nature, Volume: 534, Pages: 631–639, doi:10.1038/nature18307

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v534/n7609/full/nature18307.html (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v534/n7609/full/nature18307.html)

Abstract: "The Paris climate agreement aims at holding global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius and to “pursue efforts” to limit it to 1.5 degrees Celsius. To accomplish this, countries have submitted Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) outlining their post-2020 climate action. Here we assess the effect of current INDCs on reducing aggregate greenhouse gas emissions, its implications for achieving the temperature objective of the Paris climate agreement, and potential options for overachievement. The INDCs collectively lower greenhouse gas emissions compared to where current policies stand, but still imply a median warming of 2.6–3.1 degrees Celsius by 2100. More can be achieved, because the agreement stipulates that targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions are strengthened over time, both in ambition and scope. Substantial enhancement or over-delivery on current INDCs by additional national, sub-national and non-state actions is required to maintain a reasonable chance of meeting the target of keeping warming well below 2 degrees Celsius."


See also:
http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web/home/about/news/160630-paris.html.html (http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web/home/about/news/160630-paris.html.html)

Abstract: "The study also provides a careful analysis of the uncertainties surrounding future emissions and temperature targets. For one thing, the emissions reductions from the INDCs remain uncertain, since the INDC’s themselves are not consistently framed, and some of the pledges include conditional statements, for example, that a country will only implement ambitious emissions reductions if it receives funding from others. Comparing the possible emission levels that the INDC’s could imply, the researchers found a range of uncertainties of 6 billion tons of CO2 equivalent, or roughly the entire emissions of the United States in the year 2012.
The other major uncertainty lies in how much temperatures will rise in response to various emission levels. For this reason, temperature targets are often interpreted in terms of probabilities, with the aim to have a 66% likelihood of keeping temperature to below 2°C above pre-industrial levels. The study also found that the same INDCs would only avoid 2.9-3.4°C of warming with a 66% chance and 3.5-4.2°C of warming with 90% chance until 2100."

&

http://www.businessinsider.com/cant-stop-climate-change-2016-7 (http://www.businessinsider.com/cant-stop-climate-change-2016-7)

Extract: "We've passed the point of no return when it comes to stopping a rise of 1.5°C (2.7°F) in global temperatures, a new study has found.
That 1.5°C figure was a "stretch goal" set down by the countries who signed up to the Paris agreement last December, but we've already well and truly missed the mark."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 03, 2016, 06:23:33 PM
Secretary Clinton believes that meeting the climate challenge is too important to wait for climate deniers in Congress to pass comprehensive climate legislation.”

Hillary Clinton’s Ambitious Climate Change Plan Avoids Carbon Tax
WASHINGTON — Hillary Clinton, courting young voters and the broader Democratic base, has promised to one-up President Obama on climate change, vowing to produce a third of the nation’s electricity from renewable sources by 2027, three years faster than Mr. Obama, while spending billions of dollars to transform the energy economy.

A half-billion solar panels will be installed by 2020, she has promised, seven times the number today, and $60 billion will go to states and cities to develop more climate-friendly infrastructure, such as public transportation and energy-efficient buildings. She would put the United States on track to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent from 2005 levels by 2050. And, she says, she could achieve all that without new legislation from Congress.

But Mrs. Clinton has avoided mention of the one policy that economists widely see as the most effective way to tackle climate change — and one that would need Congress’s assent: putting a price or tax on carbon dioxide emissions.

“It’s possible, theoretically, to do all this without a price on carbon,” said David Victor, the director of the Laboratory on International Law and Regulation at the University of California, San Diego. But, he added, “it’s hard to see how.”

“The problem is,” he said, “she knows the politics of this are toxic.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/03/us/politics/hillary-clintons-ambitious-climate-change-plan-avoids-carbon-tax.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/03/us/politics/hillary-clintons-ambitious-climate-change-plan-avoids-carbon-tax.html)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 05, 2016, 06:57:12 PM
Christiana Figueres:
Today is my last day in office as @UNFCCC Executive Secretary. Here's my farewell video message! #ParisAgreement
https://twitter.com/cfigueres/status/750326556824772608
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 06, 2016, 03:39:38 PM
New Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Starts Building a Green Future
People watched closely when China launched the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) last year. The new multilateral development bank boasted an initial capital of $100 billion, a founding membership of 57 countries (with 24 more waiting to join end of this year), and a mandate to be “lean, clean and green.” After its first annual general meeting and seminars this week, it appears that the AIIB is starting to move in a positive direction.

http://www.wri.org/blog/2016/07/new-asian-infrastructure-investment-bank-starts-building-green-future (http://www.wri.org/blog/2016/07/new-asian-infrastructure-investment-bank-starts-building-green-future)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on July 06, 2016, 08:06:10 PM
The linked Op-Ed piece is based largely on German's experience in trying to transform into a "Green Economy", and it indicates that this process will be harder than most people (Paris Pact negotiators) think:

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/limits-to-green-growth-by-lili-fuhr-et-al-2016-07 (https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/limits-to-green-growth-by-lili-fuhr-et-al-2016-07)
Extract: "Will reconciling environmental and economic imperatives be harder than we think?
In a word, yes. The mainstream perception is that the green economy will enable us to break free from our dependence on fossil fuels, without sacrificing growth. Many argue that the shift to a green economy can even spur new growth. But, as appealing as this idea is, it is not realistic, as we show in our new book Inside the Green Economy.
To be sure, it is possible for a genuinely “green” economy to be prosperous. But the model that prevails today focuses on quick and easy solutions. Moreover, it reasserts the primacy of economics, thereby failing to recognize the depth of the transformation that is required.
Instead of rethinking our economies with a view to adapting their functioning to environmental limits and imperatives, today’s green economy seeks to redefine nature, in order to adapt it to existing economic systems. We now attach a monetary value to nature and add it to our balance sheets, with the protection of “natural capital,” such as ecosystem services, offsetting environmental degradation, gauged by the global abstract currency of carbon metrics. New market-based mechanisms, such as the trading of biodiversity credits, exemplify this approach. None of this prevents the destruction of nature; it simply reorganizes that destruction along market lines.
As a result of this narrow approach, current conceptions of the green economy have so many blind spots that the entire enterprise should be regarded as largely a matter of faith. The most powerful talisman is technological innovation, which justifies simply waiting for a cure-all invention to come along. But, though new ideas and innovations are obviously vital to address complex challenges, environmental or otherwise, they are neither automatic nor inevitable.

If we are to decouple economic growth from energy consumption and achieve real resource efficiency in a world of nine billion, much less ensure justice for all, we cannot let the economy lead the way.
Instead, we must view the green transformation as a political task. Only a political approach can manage, through genuinely representative institutions, differences of opinion and interest, guided by the kind of open debate, engaging civil society, that is vital to a pluralistic democracy.

The real problem is the lack of political will to implement and scale up those innovations opposed by vested economic interests. The challenge is thus to overcome these minority interests and ensure the protection of the broader public good – a task that is often left to civil society.
Some might argue that calling for radical transformation, rather than incremental change, is inappropriate. At a time when the world faces so many pressing challenges, from economic stagnation to political upheaval to massive refugee flows, any progress toward sustainability should be viewed as a victory. Pragmatic, politically feasible solutions to the environmental crisis should be celebrated, not criticized.

The task that the world’s democracies face today is to continue the project of modernity, embracing the latest knowledge about planetary boundaries, while advancing broad democratic participation and reducing poverty and social injustice. This is no small undertaking, and requires passion and tenacity. But it is not beyond our capacity. The first step is to recognize the constraints that the “green economy” places on thought and action."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 07, 2016, 06:03:55 PM
Who better than a global climate champion to be the next Secretary-General of the United Nations?

Christiana Figueres: Excited to announce I’m running for #nextSG. christianafigueres.com
https://twitter.com/cfigueres/status/751055364875968512
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on July 13, 2016, 03:51:17 PM
The linked article uses ESLD assumptions to conclude that following the Paris Pact will require not only cuts in emissions but also the use of negative emissions technology by 2085 (see image), to have a 66% chance of staying below 2C:

Benjamin M. Sanderson, Brian C. O'Neill & Claudia Tebaldi (2 July 2016), "What would it take to achieve the Paris temperature targets?" Geophysical Research Letters, DOI: 10.1002/2016GL069563

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL069563/abstract (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL069563/abstract)

Abstract: "The 2015 Paris Agreement aims to limit warming to 2 or 1.5°C above preindustrial level, although combined Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) are likely insufficient to achieve these targets. We propose a set of idealized emission pathways consistent with the targets. If countries reduce emissions in line with their INDCs, the 2°C threshold could be avoided only if net zero greenhouse gas emissions (GHGEs) are achieved by 2085 and late century negative emissions are considerably in excess of those assumed in Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 2.6 (net −5 Gt CO2/yr, compared with −1.5 Gt CO2/yr in RCP2.6). More aggressive near-term reductions would allow 2°C to be avoided with less end-of-century carbon removal capacity. A 10% cut in GHGEs by 2030 (relative to 2015) could likely achieve 2°C with RCP2.6 level negative emissions. The 1.5°C target requires GHGEs to be reduced by almost a third by 2030 and net zero by 2050, while a 50 year overshoot of 1.5°C allows net zero GHGEs by 2060."

Also see:
http://www.climatecentral.org/news/negative-emissions-key-to-2c-threshold-20518 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/negative-emissions-key-to-2c-threshold-20518)

Extract: "Humans will have to not only stop emitting greenhouse gases by 2085, but also develop technology that will result in negative emissions — the removal of 15 billion tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere each year by the end of the century —  in order to prevent global warming from exceeding 2°C (3.6°F), according to a new study."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on July 14, 2016, 05:53:26 PM
It is starting look like the G20 are playing bait-and-switch on the Paris Pact pledges:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/ttip-proposal-casts-doubt-on-g20-climate-pledge-leaked-eu-draft-shows (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/13/ttip-proposal-casts-doubt-on-g20-climate-pledge-leaked-eu-draft-shows)

Extract: "TTIP proposal casts doubt on G20 climate pledge, leaked EU draft shows
Draft proposal reveals new loopholes on a pledge to phase out fossil fuel subsidies within a decade"
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: pikaia on July 14, 2016, 08:34:58 PM
In the UK, the new PM, Theresa May, has scrapped the Department of Energy and Climate Change.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-36788162 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-36788162)

"The brief will be folded into an expanded Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy under Greg Clark.
Ed Miliband, the former energy and climate secretary under Labour, called the move "plain stupid".
It comes at a time when campaigners are urging the government to ratify the Paris climate change deal."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 14, 2016, 08:59:03 PM
In the UK, the new PM, Theresa May, has scrapped the Department of Energy and Climate Change.

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-36788162[/url] ([url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-36788162[/url])

"The brief will be folded into an expanded Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy under Greg Clark.
Ed Miliband, the former energy and climate secretary under Labour, called the move "plain stupid".
It comes at a time when campaigners are urging the government to ratify the Paris climate change deal."


That looks bad. But (from the same article):
The new Defra Secretary Andrea Leadsom has re-iterated that there will be no deviation from long-term carbon targets.

Greg Clark, the man in charge of the expanded department, was a Shadow Minister for Energy and Climate and has written papers on achieving a Low Carbon Economy.

If you really intend climate change to drive an industrial transformation, why not embrace it within a powerful department that's developing the sort of industrial strategy needed to forge a genuine Low Carbon economy?


So, it could be a positive, or a negative.  (Although they should not rule out a "deviation" to stronger carbon targets!  :) )
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 14, 2016, 09:43:39 PM
While the U.K. Climate Change Department debacle at least suggests the possibility of a positive outcome... the U.S. Congress does nothing of the sort  ::) :

Exercise In Futility: There Is No Way Obama Will Sign The EPA Budget The House Wants
If you think that Congress is broken and nothing gets done, this story is for you.

The House has finished considering amendments for and is expected to pass a bill that will fund the Department of the Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, and several other related administrative offices. There is virtually zero chance that the bill will ever become law.

The bill, as written by the Republican-led House, prohibits the EPA from implementing the Clean Power Plan or the Waters of the United States rule, two key administration priorities and also helpful ways to keep our air and water at levels that can sustain human life. Even if the Senate version didn’t face a filibuster, President Obama has already said he will veto a bill that doesn’t allow the EPA to do its job.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/07/14/3798081/the-house-riders-again/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/07/14/3798081/the-house-riders-again/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 14, 2016, 11:12:06 PM
Figueres delivers climate pitch to UN General Assembly
Costa Rican diplomat says her experience forging a global warming pact fits her for the secretary general job
... it now falls to the 15-member UN security council to chose their favourite in a secret ballot.

The five permanent members – US, China, Russia, UK and France – each have a veto. The general assembly can only accept or reject the person put forward.

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/07/13/figueres-delivers-climate-pitch-to-un-general-assembly/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/07/13/figueres-delivers-climate-pitch-to-un-general-assembly/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on July 23, 2016, 05:55:32 PM
The linked report is entitled: " A BRIDGE TOO FAR: HOW APPALACHIAN BASIN GAS PIPELINE EXPANSION WILL UNDERMINE U.S. CLIMATE GOALS".  It appears that with current development plans the US will not be able to meet its voluntary Paris Pact commitments without a major reduction in natural gas leakage rates (see the attached images):

http://priceofoil.org/2016/07/22/a-bridge-too-far-report/ (http://priceofoil.org/2016/07/22/a-bridge-too-far-report/)
http://priceofoil.org/content/uploads/2016/07/bridge_too_far_report_05_web_Finalv2.pdf (http://priceofoil.org/content/uploads/2016/07/bridge_too_far_report_05_web_Finalv2.pdf)

Extract: "This report details the increasing threat to the climate from American natural gas production. We document the emergence of the Appalachian Basin as the key source of projected natural gas production growth in the coming decades. We also identify the proposed pipelines that would enable that growth, and how this gas production would undermine national and global climate goals."

Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on July 24, 2016, 04:59:22 PM
The Montreal Protocol is in the process of slowly being amended to "phase down HFC" use:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/world/europe/vienna-sequel-paris-climate-accord.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1 (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/world/europe/vienna-sequel-paris-climate-accord.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1)

Extract: "“Amending the Montreal Protocol to phase down HFCs is one of the single most important unitary steps that we could possibly take at this moment to stave off the worst impacts of climate change and to protect the future for people in every single corner of the globe,” Secretary of State John Kerry said in a speech to negotiators in Vienna on Friday."

Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015
Post by: AbruptSLR on July 24, 2016, 05:34:31 PM
The Paris Pact has not even been ratified and already key countries (including the UK & Germany) are taking actions to circumvent its objectives:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/18/un-criticises-uk-and-german-for-betraying-the-spirit-of-the-paris-climate-deal?utm_source=Daily+Carbon+Briefing&utm_campaign=0b779417dd-cb_daily&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_876aab4fd7-0b779417dd-303467725 (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/18/un-criticises-uk-and-german-for-betraying-the-spirit-of-the-paris-climate-deal?utm_source=Daily+Carbon+Briefing&utm_campaign=0b779417dd-cb_daily&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_876aab4fd7-0b779417dd-303467725)

Extract: "UN criticises UK and Germany for betraying Paris climate deal

But she said her criticism was far from limited to the two countries. “We want all countries to end [fossil fuel] subsidies,” she said.

Presidents and prime ministers across the world are making investment decisions that run contrary the Paris deal, they warned. “Some countries are even increasing subsidies to fossil fuel production. This is simply not good enough. While all countries need to act, the industrialised and wealthy countries must lead by example.”

They also said that governments needed to adopt carbon pricing. Ernesto Zedillo, one of the group and a former president of Mexico, said: “Governments and businesses may pay lip service to the transition to carbon neutrality but they need an economic imperative to ditch old models and move to environmentally sustainable investments: pricing carbon provides such an incentive.”
Furthermore, the Elders said they were concerned that the world’s top 10 biggest greenhouse gas emitters had not yet ratified the Paris deal. The US and China have both pledged to ratify the deal this year, which only comes into force once at least 55 countries representing at least 55% of global emissions have ratified."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 25, 2016, 12:47:42 PM
Patricia Espinosa is the new Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC.

.@PEspinosaC all the best on your 1st day as UNFCCC Executive Secretary & we look forward to collaborating on #COP22
https://twitter.com/cop22/status/755069394909327361

I will update the title of this thread.  Paris 2015 -- and beyond!
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 28, 2016, 02:16:27 PM
Eric Holthaus:
The graphic is inspired by Ed Hawkins, a climate scientist and data viz expert, and shows with heartbreaking clarity how quickly we're burning fossil fuels, and what that means for the climate. The 1.5°C mark, you'll remember, was the rallying cry at Paris last December. From the looks of it, we only have about 5 years to get to essentially zero emissions before we lock in that level of change.


Holthaus has started a brief daily climate e-mail newsletter.  You can view the archives and subscribe (for free) here:  https://tinyletter.com/sciencebyericholthaus (https://tinyletter.com/sciencebyericholthaus)

Link to the GIF is here:  http://www.climatechangenews.com/files/2016/07/carbon-budget_small.gif (http://www.climatechangenews.com/files/2016/07/carbon-budget_small.gif)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on July 28, 2016, 09:14:45 PM
Sydney, Australia, Targets 50% Renewables By 2030, Net Zero Emissions By 2050
The City of Sydney has raised the bar on its renewable energy and climate targets, with the release of a new five-year plan that targets 50 per cent renewable electricity by 2030 and net zero emissions by 2050.

Released on Tuesday, the Environmental Action 2016–2021 plan builds on the City’s already ambitious long-term program – including a 70 per cent emissions reduction target by 2030 – taking into account advances in renewables technology and the global climate commitments made in Paris last December.

http://cleantechnica.com/2016/06/30/sydney-australia-targets-50-renewables-2030-net-zero-emissions-2050/ (http://cleantechnica.com/2016/06/30/sydney-australia-targets-50-renewables-2030-net-zero-emissions-2050/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: AbruptSLR on July 30, 2016, 01:33:18 AM
In my opinion the linked open access reference errs on the side of least drama.

Benjamin M. Sanderson, Brian C. O'Neill & Claudia Tebaldi (2 July 2016), "What would it take to achieve the Paris temperature targets?", Geophysical Research Letters, DOI: 10.1002/2016GL069563


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL069563/full (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GL069563/full)

Abstract: "The 2015 Paris Agreement aims to limit warming to 2 or 1.5°C above preindustrial level, although combined Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) are likely insufficient to achieve these targets. We propose a set of idealized emission pathways consistent with the targets. If countries reduce emissions in line with their INDCs, the 2°C threshold could be avoided only if net zero greenhouse gas emissions (GHGEs) are achieved by 2085 and late century negative emissions are considerably in excess of those assumed in Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 2.6 (net −5 Gt CO2/yr, compared with −1.5 Gt CO2/yr in RCP2.6). More aggressive near-term reductions would allow 2°C to be avoided with less end-of-century carbon removal capacity. A 10% cut in GHGEs by 2030 (relative to 2015) could likely achieve 2°C with RCP2.6 level negative emissions. The 1.5°C target requires GHGEs to be reduced by almost a third by 2030 and net zero by 2050, while a 50 year overshoot of 1.5°C allows net zero GHGEs by 2060."

See also:
https://eos.org/research-spotlights/tackling-the-paris-temperature-targets (https://eos.org/research-spotlights/tackling-the-paris-temperature-targets)

Extract: "To achieve a stable climate, a balance will likely need to be reached between emissions and carbon dioxide removal, but the need for negative emissions later can be dramatically reduced through rapid emissions reductions in the near future. If the mitigation process begins in earnest in 2020, the researchers found that net emissions would need to reach zero by 2060 to limit global temperature increase to 2°C or by 2043 to limit it to 1.5°C. Allowing 50 extra years for Earth’s temperature to exceed goals and then cool back down increases planning flexibility, but even in an overshoot scenario, rapid mitigation in the near term remains necessary. The later mitigation begins, the fewer plausible scenarios exist that avoid 2°C of warming worldwide, let alone stick to the 1.5°C goal."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 01, 2016, 01:55:36 AM
In boost to Paris climate pact, India says it aims to join this year
India has agreed to work toward joining the Paris Agreement on climate change this year, India and the United States said on Tuesday, giving a jolt of momentum to the international fight to curb global warming.
...
"We discussed how we can, as quickly as possible, bring the Paris Agreement into force," Obama told reporters. Climate change is a legacy issue for the U.S. president who leaves office in January.

India's potential entrance into the agreement this year would help accelerate its enactment, perhaps years ahead of schedule. India is the world’s third-largest greenhouse gas emitter after China and the United States.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-usa-climate-idUSKCN0YT22U (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-usa-climate-idUSKCN0YT22U)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 02, 2016, 01:00:39 AM
New York approves renewable energy standard
New York officials approved a clean energy standard on Monday that requires half of the state’s electricity to come from renewable sources by 2030.

The initiative, passed by the Public Service Commission, also includes a nuclear power incentive under which utilities will pay nearly $1 billion over two years to subsidize three of the state’s nuclear power plants.

The plan’s supporters, including Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D), see the nuclear subsidies as a way to avoid new carbon pollution as the state works toward its goal of using 50 percent renewables like wind and solar.

“We could not possibly replace those nuclear units if they were to shut,” Public Service Commission Chairwoman Audrey Zibelman said at the Monday meeting, according to Reuters.

The plan puts New York on par with California among states with the highest renewable energy mandates.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/290017-new-york-approves-renewable-energy-standard (http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/290017-new-york-approves-renewable-energy-standard)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 02, 2016, 08:57:17 PM
The Northeast U.S. Is Considering A Major Extension To Its Emissions Program
... RGGI has been more successful, in fact, than it was ever projected to be. In the initial design process, emissions limits were set to roughly “no growth.” That is, participants were hoping to just slightly decrease emissions. They outdid themselves.
...
It’s hard to argue with an emissions reduction program that not only works but also works as an economic driver.

The revenue from the quarterly emissions credit auctions goes back into the states’ economies — largely as efficiency programs. For instance, a Maine resident might be able to replace her windows or insulate her attic. Someone in Massachusetts might be able to install a modern, efficiency furnace. These improvements have direct economic benefits — both because someone is paid to make these improvements and because, going forward, they save residents money that can be spent elsewhere.

In Tuesday’s letter, the companies write, “Our support for RGGI is firmly grounded in economic reality.”
One report estimated that RGGI had boosted the region’s economic activity by $1.3 billion.

From 2008 to 2015, RGGI states have seen their economies grow faster than the rest of the country, while decreasing emissions twice as quickly, according to the first of a two-part report from Acadia Center looking at what RGGI has done so far.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/08/02/3803740/rggi-extension-considered/ (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/08/02/3803740/rggi-extension-considered/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 03, 2016, 02:34:09 AM
Massachusetts' Ambitious Clean Energy Bill Jolts Offshore Wind Prospects
Doubling down on its commitment to renewable energy, the Massachusetts Legislature overwhelmingly passed a new energy measure that would create the nation's most ambitious offshore wind energy target.

The bill, approved in the final hours of the legislative session Sunday night, would require local utilities to get 1,600 megawatts of their combined electricity from wind farms far offshore––roughly equivalent to three average-sized coal-fired power plants. The law requires the utilities to line up contracts for that energy by 2027. They also would have to arrange for even more clean energy from other sources, including hydropower, by 2022. Gov. Charlie Baker, a Republican, is expected to sign it.

There's about 1,800 megawatts of renewable energy (mostly solar) currently installed in Massachusetts.

The bill would contribute to the state's broader effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by 2050—a target that effectively requires the state to rely almost entirely on renewables for electricity. And it could also have broader implications for the nation's offshore wind industry, which has yet to make its first splash.
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/02082016/massachusetts-ambitious-clean-energy-bill-jolts-offshore-wind-prospects
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 06, 2016, 10:02:03 PM
Global climate deal likely to enter into force in 2016
OSLO, Aug 5 (Reuters) - A global agreement on climate change looks likely to enter into force this year, a study showed on Friday, making it harder for Republican Donald Trump to pull out if he wins the U.S. presidency.

Countries accounting for 54 percent of greenhouse gas emissions have signalled intent to ratify this year, according to the tally of national pledges by the Marshall Islands which is a strong backer of the plan agreed in Paris in December.

That is just a fraction short of the required 55 percent of emissions, and support from at least 55 nations, the Pacific island nation said. The deal formally enters into force 30 days after the twin threshold is crossed.

"What we agreed in Paris at the end of last year will likely now have the force of the law by the end of this year," Marshall Islands President Hilda Heine wrote in a report compiled by her foreign ministry.

http://news.trust.org/item/20160805121707-1inrx/ (http://news.trust.org/item/20160805121707-1inrx/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: AbruptSLR on August 08, 2016, 04:53:48 PM
Theresa May appears to be trying to bribe UK voters into approving the expanded use of hydrofracking for shale gas production in the UK (leaks from such operations are a significant source of methane gas emissions).  As the UK is existing from the EU they need not comply with the Paris Pact limits if they choose not to:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/06/fracking-local-people-payments-theresa-may (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/06/fracking-local-people-payments-theresa-may)

Extract: "The prime minister has intervened to allow people who live near sites used for shale gas exploration to be given cash payments so that they benefit from the developments.
In rewriting George Osborne’s plans, Theresa May has ensured local people can share in proceeds from fracking projects. Previous proposals for the Shale Wealth Fund only included cash for community trusts and councils.

A British Geological Survey study of shale gas across northern England estimated a shale gas resource of 1,300 trillion cubic feet. This compares with the current UK annual gas consumption of around 2.5 trillion cubic feet."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: AbruptSLR on August 08, 2016, 05:13:46 PM
The linked Carbon Brief article discusses a UN report that highlights the challenges that aviation will have in controlling its CO2 emissions by 2050 (see the attached image):

https://www.carbonbrief.org/aviation-consume-quarter-carbon-budget (https://www.carbonbrief.org/aviation-consume-quarter-carbon-budget)


Extract: "The aviation industry faces huge challenges if it is to meet its own self-imposed climate change targets, according to a new UN report."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 09, 2016, 08:23:45 PM
Europe Aims to Close Loophole on Wood Energy
European officials are moving to close a loophole that promotes the burning of wood for electricity by an industry that’s felling American trees, and a new report they commissioned has laid bare the urgent need for reform.

European Union climate rules treat woody biomass energy as if it’s as clean as solar or wind energy, despite it releasing more heat-trapping carbon dioxide for every megawatt of electricity produced than coal. Producing wood pellets for fuel can also foster climate-changing deforestation.

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/europe-aims-to-close-loophole-on-wood-energy-20591 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/europe-aims-to-close-loophole-on-wood-energy-20591)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 11, 2016, 05:23:17 PM
Social Cost of Carbon upheld in U.S. federal court.

Unprecedented federal court ruling elevates environmental justice over demands of industry
An unprecedented federal court ruling this week validated the way the Obama administration measures the social cost of carbon (SCC), a decision that could have wide-ranging impacts on the future of the energy industry and the way the United States addresses environmental justice.

On Monday, the Chicago-based 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals unanimously rejected an industry-backed request to overturn a 2014 Department of Energy (DOE) regulation that set efficiency standards for refrigerators. In doing so, the court decided that the DOE has the authority to use SCC as part of its overall cost-benefit analysis when considering environmental regulations.
...
In rejecting the industry’s arguments against the DOE’s carbon price, Senior Judge Kenneth Ripple, who was appointed by President Reagan, wrote in the opinion that this “is not a close call.”

“We are convinced that DOE’s engineering analysis, including its use of an analytical model, was neither arbitrary nor capricious,” she wrote.
...
“Just last week a former national security adviser to President George W. Bush acknowledged that climate change was creating refugees and terrorists,” said Doniger. “So the damage from ignoring climate change goes well beyond what we normally think of as ‘environmental’ issues; it’s a core national security issue.”

http://fusion.net/story/335110/federal-court-elevates-social-cost-of-carbon-over-industry-demands/ (http://fusion.net/story/335110/federal-court-elevates-social-cost-of-carbon-over-industry-demands/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: AbruptSLR on August 13, 2016, 05:59:16 PM
The following article includes the statement: "The Paris text is vague about the temperature ceilings and does not say whether 1.5°C or 2°C refers to temperatures in one year, over a decade or longer."  Perhaps to sustain the integrity of our leaders we could all choose to voluntarily define these limits over the coming 10,000 years (otherwise we will collectively need to admit that we were all just kidding ourselves, and overshoot will become the new normal):

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/as-earth-swelters-global-warming-target-in-danger-20597 (http://www.climatecentral.org/news/as-earth-swelters-global-warming-target-in-danger-20597)

Extract: "In December, almost 200 nations agreed a radical shift away from fossil fuels with a goal of limiting a rise in average global temperatures to well below 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial times while "pursuing efforts" for 1.5°C (2.7°F).

But 2016 is on track to be the hottest year on record, also buoyed by a natural El Niño event warming the Pacific, according to the U.N.'s World Meteorological Organization. The first six months were a sweltering 1.3°C above pre-industrial times.

"It opens a Pandora's box," said Oliver Geden, of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. "The future debate about temperature targets will be about overshoot."
Many climate scientists say the Paris targets are likely to be breached in the coming decades, shifting debate onto whether it will be possible to turn down the global thermostat.

Climate scientists will meet in Geneva from Aug 15-18 to plan a U.N. report about the 1.5°C goal, requested by world leaders in the Paris Agreement for publication in 2018. Overshoot is among the issues in preparatory documents.

Developing nations see overshoot as a betrayal of commitments by the rich and a recipe to worsen heatwaves such as in the Middle East this year or a thaw of Greenland's ice sheet that could swamp island states by raising global sea levels.

"There is a risk that 'overshoot' is a slippery slope towards lower ambition," said Emmanuel de Guzman, secretary of the Climate Commission of the Philippines, which chairs a group of 43 emerging nations in the Climate Vulnerable Forum (CVF).

The 1.5°C threshold could be in jeopardy within five years on current trends of world greenhouse gas emissions, led by China and the United States, and 2°C within about 25 years, according to U.N. calculations of the amount of carbon that can be emitted into the atmosphere."
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: AbruptSLR on August 16, 2016, 05:16:58 PM
The following links show how the IIASA split-up the EU's Paris Pact commitments between its member states, and with Brexit it will be interesting to see whether the UK honors its prescribed burden:

http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web/home/about/news/160816-EU-effort.html (http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web/home/about/news/160816-EU-effort.html)
&
http://ec.europa.eu/clima/news/articles/news_2016072001_en.htm (http://ec.europa.eu/clima/news/articles/news_2016072001_en.htm)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 20, 2016, 08:56:48 PM
Paris climate agreement set to become law this year
> Fifty-seven countries accounting for 57.88% of global emissions have now indicated they will sign agreement before end of 20163
> The Paris climate agreement will become international law by the end of 2016 if countries stick to the promises they have made.
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/08/18/paris-climate-agreement-set-to-become-law-this-year/ (http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/08/18/paris-climate-agreement-set-to-become-law-this-year/)
Title: Re: UN Climate Agreement - Paris 2015 and beyond
Post by: Sigmetnow on August 24, 2016, 12:57:05 AM
California climate change law: Extension of greenhouse gas goals OK'd by Assembly
"Yesterday, big oil bought a full-page ad in the capital city's newspaper of record to halt action on climate," Brown said. "Today, the Assembly Speaker, most Democrats and one brave Republican passed SB 32, rejecting the brazen deception of the oil lobby and their Trump-