GLOBAL WARMING: Climate Change Countdown and the Kyoto Summit September 97

The Earth is heating up. Last year, the climate scientists advising the world's governments confirmed this, and named our industrial civilisation as almost certainly the culprit. Our burning of "fossil fuels" (coal, oil and gas), and the destruction of forests, pumps billions of tons of gases (mainly carbon dioxide) into the air every year...

The Earth is heating up. Last year, the climate scientists advising the world's governments confirmed this, and named our industrial civilisation as almost certainly the culprit. Our burning of "fossil fuels" (coal, oil and gas), and the destruction of forests, pumps billions of tons of gases (mainly carbon dioxide) into the air every year. These gases trap the sun's heat in the atmosphere.

The scientists predict that the world could heat up by as much as 3.5 degrees C (6 degrees F) over the next century-the most severe climate change since the end of the last ice age. The results could be devastating: a sea level rise of up to one metre, drowning coastal lands and island nations; drought, hunger and the spread of deserts; destruction of forests and extinction of species.

At the "Earth Summit" in 1992, most of the world's industrialised countries agreed to return their emissions of "global warming" gases to 1990 levels by the year 2000. Few are doing so. In any case, this isn't enough: global emissions need to drop by 50–70% below 1990 levels just to stabilise the level of these gases in the atmosphere.

From 1st to 10th December this year, the world's governments will meet in Kyoto, Japan, to discuss targets for reducing emissions beyond 2000. It's vital that the industrialized countries adopt strict targets at Kyoto, as a first step towards averting a climate crisis.

But a first step isn't a solution. To avoid devastating climate change, the world's nations have to agree on a yearly global limit of global warming gas emissions, which must steadily decline year by year to the point the scientists say is safe. This raises a hard question: Who makes what reductions in their use of fossil fuels?

Perhaps the fairest way to decide who reduces emissions by what amount is to divide the annual global limit among countries on the basis of population. Right now, the world's richest countries with 20% of the world's population emit 60% of the world's global warming gases. The goal should be, after a transitional period, for no country to emit more than its fair share. At recent negotiations, the African countries called for an approach along these lines.

To reduce emissions world-wide, we must conserve energy and invest in renewable energy such as solar and wind, in public transport and in forest protection. There have been growing calls at the UN for global revenue sources-such as an international levy on aviation fuel-to help fund these priorities.

Meanwhile, oil and coal companies and some oil producing nations are working hard against any serious steps to reduce consumption of fossil fuels. Public pressure is needed now to make governments act.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

Please write to one or more of your representatives in your national parliament or congress. Ask him or her to urge your government in the Kyoto negotiations to actively support:

    * The proposal of the Alliance of Small Island States for all industrialized countries to cut their emissions of global warming gases by 20% below 1990 levels by 2005.
    * The call from the African Group for an agreed programme to ensure that no nation emits more than its fair share of a safe global limit for global warming gas emissions.
    * The creation of global revenue sources-such as a levy on aviation fuel-to help generate resources for ecologically sustainable development.

(Insert address of your Parliament if you are reprinting this for your organisation)

BACKGROUND

What is climate change?

Ever since life first appeared, natural emissions of water vapour, carbon dioxide and other gases have helped maintain the temperature of the Earth within a range at which life can exist. They act like a glass greenhouse to trap the sun's heat in the atmosphere.

Human activities are now adding to the natural "greenhouse effect." The burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas) emits carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, which are all "greenhouse gases." The destruction of forests, which retain carbon from the atmosphere within their vegetation, emits further carbon dioxide. Over the last century, humans have significantly altered the chemistry of the air: the level of carbon has increased by 25%, the level of nitrous oxide by 19%, and the level of methane by 100%. As a result, the planet is heating up fast.

The evidence for climate change

Although global warming has been suspected for decades, it has always been difficult to be absolutely certain that it was happening, and scientists have been cautious in reaching firm conclusions.

Last year, that changed. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is a body of 2,500 experts from all over the world, appointed by governments in 1988. Early in 1996 they produced their second major report. It stated-for the first time-that global warming was a scientific fact, and that the "balance of evidence" suggested human activity was a cause. It warned that the rate of warming predicted for the next century could be "greater than any seen in the last 10,000 years."

Studies of the climate over the last century indicate that the world is already warming. Sea levels are already rising. The ten hottest years in history have all occurred since 1980. Global warming is already here.

Why climate change matters

It is no exaggeration to say that climate change could bring about a catastrophe as big as any in human history. The 1996 IPCC report predicted that the world could warm up by as much as 3.5 degrees C (6 degrees F) over the next century. That may not sound like much, but at the height of the last ice age, 15,000 years ago, the planet was only 3–5 degrees C (5–9 degrees F) colder than it is today.

The IPCC estimated that oceans may rise by as much as a metre by the end of the next century, as ice caps and glaciers melt. This would mean the total disappearance of entire island nations, and the flooding of coastal zones.

There are many other dangers too. Global warming could affect ocean currents which regulate the temperatures of particular regions. Regional climatic variations, according to the IPCC, could lead to drought and famine in many parts of the world. The UN has even warned that, during the next century, nations could be going to war over scarce water supplies.

Extreme weather patterns such as hurricanes are predicted to become more frequent. Global warming could lead to forest destruction and species extinction as habitats change. Deserts will spread.

Put simply, humanity is conducting a gigantic scientific experiment with the planet, and the consequences could be disastrous.
What are our governments doing about it?

At the Earth Summit in 1992, 150 governments signed a "Framework Convention on Climate Change". However, even as they signed it, many governments sought to avoid committing themselves to action. The result was a weak Convention.

Most industrialised countries promised to return their emissions of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by 2000-hardly a major reduction! Developing countries undertook to try to minimise their emissions as their economies grow.
The Kyoto Conference

The Third Conference of the Parties to the Climate Change Convention takes place in Kyoto, Japan, from 1 to 10 December this year. It is the most significant international meeting on climate change since 1992. The world's governments will decide what targets to set for industrialised countries for reducing greenhouse gas emissions after 2000. Adopting the target proposed by the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) of a 20% cut below 1990 levels by 2005 would be a first step-though only a first step-in the right direction.

Meanwhile, the IPCC says the world needs to cut total emissions by between 50% and 70% just to stabilise the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at current levels. Since even today's levels appear to be causing global warming, even this may not be enough.
How can greenhouse gas emissions be reduced?

There are three key elements in a solution to the problem of global warming. We must:

    * Shift from fossil fuels to renewable energy such as solar, wind, biomass and small-scale hydro.
    * Use energy more efficiently, including shifting from the private car to improved public transport.
    * Halt the destruction of forests.

All of these things are technically feasible, given the political will. These steps would not only prevent climate change, but would improve the quality of life, with less traffic, less road accidents, less air pollution, and the preservation of our last great forests for future generations.
What agreements are needed?

The world's governments need to agree on a global limit to greenhouse gas emissions, and reduce the limit year by year until it is low enough to prevent dangerous interference with the climate system.

The first question this raises is: within the global limit, who can emit what share of the total? Today, the richest 20% of humanity emits most of the greenhouse gases that threaten our future. The less affluent nations are highly unlikely to agree to reduce their already low levels of emissions per person in order to make space for the rich to continue their high levels of fossil fuel consumption.

In order to be agreed by everyone, a long-term solution has to be fair. Perhaps the simplest and most equitable solution is to divide the global limit between nations based on population. A programme should be agreed to ensure that, after a transitional period, no nation emits more than its fair share of the total.

This would mean that the richest nations would have to reduce their emissions rapidly year by year, while the poorer nations could still increase towards-but not beyond-their fair share of a safe global limit.

Since it is unlikely that everyone will have exactly the same emission levels in the future, there may be possibilities for trading of emissions rights between countries within the overall global limit.

At recent negotiations in Berlin, the African Group of countries pointed the way in this direction, stating that "a globally agreed ceiling of greenhouse gas emissions can only be achieved by adopting the principle of per capita emissions rights."
Who pays?

One key problem is how to generate the financial resources needed to assist developing countries in promoting renewable energy, improving public transport and protecting the forests, among other priorities. This is crucial, since within a matter of years the "Third World" countries are projected to be emitting more greenhouse gases than today's industrialized countries.

At the Earth Summit in 1992, the industrialized nations promised "new and additional resources" for these tasks. Most of them have broken that promise. At present there is little sign that the necessary resources will be forthcoming from national budgets alone.

As a result, there has been growing discussion at the UN of creating international revenue sources to pay for ecologically sustainable development. The most widely discussed idea at the "Earth Summit plus 5" conference in June 1997 was an international levy on aviation fuel. Such an approach may offer the best hope of generating reliable resources on the scale needed to protect the Earth.

The political obstacles are many. The fossil fuel industry is lobbying hard to continue with business as usual. Major oil producing governments are denying the dangers of climate change.

But while the governments argue, global warming is already happening. Only world public opinion can ensure that real action is taken in time.