Latest News from the Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
Harvard Kennedy School
December 7, 2009

———-
BREAKING THE CLIMATE IMPASSE WITH CHINA: A GLOBAL SOLUTION

By Kelly Sims Gallagher

The paper is aimed at finding a partial solution that would be likely to bring both the United States and China into an international climate change mitigation regime. It proposes a “deal,” whereby all major-emitting countries, including the United States and China, agree to reduce emissions through implementation of significant, mutually agreeable, domestic emission-reduction policies. To resolve competitiveness and equity concerns, a proposed Carbon Mitigation Fund would be created.

More: http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/19698

——————————–

CREATING A CLIMATE POLICY REVIEW MECHANISM

By Michael A. Levi

International climate negotiations are becoming increasingly focused on suites of emissions-cutting policies and measures, rather than solely on traditional targets and timetables, particularly for developing countries. This approach raises at least two important challenges. First, how can negotiators judge whether states’ proposed policies and measures are commensurate with ambitious global goals for controlling emissions? Second, how can policymakers evaluate whether climate policies and measures (in both developed and developing countries) are succeeding?

More: http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/19738
——————————–

CLIMATE FINANCE: KEY CONCEPTS AND WAYS FORWARD

By Richard B. Stewart, Benedict Kingsbury, Bryce Rudyk

The Copenhagen process must, at a minimum, reach agreement on a comprehensive framework and set of principles for both public and private climate finance, as well as an agenda for future elaboration and implementation. Such agreement (which should include credible arrangements for significant adaptation as well as mitigation funding) is essential to winning developing country trust and engagement and providing resources sufficient to curb, and adapt to, anthropogenic climate change. This Viewpoint examines some of the key issues facing negotiators.

More: http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/19772

——————————–
ROBERT STAVINS TO BLOG FOR THE FINANCIAL TIMES FROM COPENHAGEN

Professor Robert Stavins, director of the Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements, will be blogging periodically from Copenhagen for the Financial Times. Prof. Stavins will offer his analysis of the key issues before the climate negotiators in response to questions from the Financial Times’ editors and reporters. Prof. Stavins’ posts can be viewed at the Financial Times – http://blogs.ft.com/energysource –
or at his own blog, An Economic View of the Environment – http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/analysis/stavins/

[Comment] EU-US energy council should act as model for others

by RICHARD MORNINGSTAR AND JULIA NESHEIWAT, the US’ Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy,  and the Senior Advisor on Policy at the US Department of State

posted on  EUObserver as a comment (opinion piece) on 07.12.2009

President Barack Obama will travel to Copenhagen on 9 December to support the United Nations climate change conference, where he is eager to work with the international community to lay the foundation for a new, sustainable and prosperous clean energy future.

{obviously, that date was changed now to December 18, 2009 and accordingly the presentation the US President will be making in Copenhagen will be very different from what he would have said on December 9th. As such, we wonder what the purpose of this posting was when intended to be viewed close to that date, and how things might change after the December 18th date in case Copenhagen will have laid out the foundation for a larger scope climate, and thus energy, global horizon. (the SustainabiliTank editor)}

Copenhagen presents a critical opportunity to take decisive and immediate global action, to build the institutions that we will need to combat climate change and to speed the transition to a low-carbon global economy. Agreement on – and implementation of – a climate deal at Copenhagen is critical, but will be weakened without effective corresponding energy policies.

The right kinds of energy and their distribution across the globe will determine whether the international economy can maintain production levels while meeting the climate change goals set out in Copenhagen.

Energy is the prime nutrient that powers the global economy. It is the common thread that connects many of today’s global challenges, from rebuilding the global economy and combating climate change to forging new partnerships around the world. To ultimately be successful in combating climate change, we need a plan for clean, secure, and abundant energy not only for us for but for our friends around the world.

For these reasons, last month, President Obama, Swedish Prime Minister Reinfeldt, and President Barroso of the European Commission announced a new partnership that will help the United States and the European Union work together to meet our energy-related challenges: the US-EU Energy Council.

The Council will help drive diversification of energy sources, such as increased use of liquefied natural gas, solar and wind power and biofuels. It will facilitate cooperation in technical areas, such as energy efficiency and clean energy technology. And it will help us coordinate our approaches with other energy producers and consumers to increase sources of supply, diversify routes, strengthen energy markets in today’s financial crisis and increase transparency.

The new Council will help us address four major trends that will likely shape energy policy in the coming years: rising energy demand, increasingly interdependent markets, a growing imperative for global co-operation to reorient away from fossil fuels, and a clearer understanding that energy and climate change policy are inseparable.

First, despite the current decrease in global energy demand, increased demand over the medium term will likely result in increased reliance on fossil energy resources, with its accompanying environmental challenges. Unless we act now with fortified partnerships, these challenges will move ahead with increased demand for fossil fuels.

Second, global energy markets are interdependent. Disruptions in one market can have adverse impacts in distant places. In this global economy, countries and companies must realize that we can no longer afford “zero-sum games.” Clean energy and environmentally sustainable production are critical – as is maintaining global supply. A disruption of gas to Europe – apart from potentially severe humanitarian consequences – will have a direct effect on the supply and price of liquefied natural gas on a global basis. Instability of countries affected by climate change or by political volatility can also have dramatic effects.

Third, to ultimately reduce dependence on fossil fuels countries must work together to promote the development and commercialisation of alternative technologies and renewable energy, as well as improve energy efficiency and conservation. The brightest and most creative thinkers should be directed at this vital challenge.

The time is now to work with the European Union and other global partners and take authentic, concrete and quantifiable actions to exchange commercial ideas and address energy security challenges. Our partnerships must be standard bearers bringing about global co-operation and ultimately reduce dependence on fossil fuels. We must be leaders in promoting efficiency and developing alternative energy technologies. Together, we must pursue hydrogen and solar, wind, biomass, and geothermal energy.

One of the principal sources of alternative energy is via improved energy efficiency. Given that the largest sources of C02 are in the exceedingly inefficient thermal electricity and transportation sectors, there is a great deal of room for joint, international victories with the EU and Asia.

We are already engaging with other major energy players, such as Russia through the US-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission Energy Working Group. We will work together in technical areas, such as energy efficiency and clean energy technology. And we will discuss new investment opportunities in both countries, while at the same time encouraging diversified supply routes. By deepening the US-Russia dialogue on energy, we will increase transparency and promote stability and predictability in our relationship. While we may not agree on every issue, we can work together to foster an open dialogue that builds trust.

Fourth, our understanding of energy challenges must include environmentally suitable sources of supply that are compatible with

climate change objectives that will be outlined in Copenhagen. Addressing energy security and meeting the climate change challenge are inextricably linked. Since President Obama took office, the United States has demonstrated its renewed commitment to combating climate change both by supporting domestic policies that advance clean energy, climate security, and economic recovery; and by vigorously re-engaging in international climate negotiations.

Domestically, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act included over $80 billion for clean energy investment. President Obama set a new policy to increase fuel economy and reduce greenhouse gas pollution for all new cars and trucks. And the administration supports mandatory emissions reduction targets. On the international front, the United States is working with its partners around the world to forge a strong international agreement through the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change negotiating process.

Global issues need global solutions and we can not go at this alone. A secure energy future is fostered by building relations internationally through many cross-cutting issues that will determine peace, prosperity and quality of life, not only for Americans, but for the world.

Richard Morningstar is the US’ Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy. Julia Nesheiwat is a Senior Advisor at the US Department of State

News Releases from EPA Headquarters, Washington DC.

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

Release date: 12/07/2009

Contact Information: Cathy Milbourn,  Milbourn.cathy at epa.gov, 202-564-7849, 202-564-4355; En español: Lina Younes,  younes.lina at epa.gov, 202-564-9924, 202-564-4355
EPA: Greenhouse Gases Threaten Public Health and the Environment

Science overwhelmingly shows greenhouse gas concentrations at unprecedented levels due to human activity

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

GHGs are the primary driver of climate change, which can lead to hotter, longer heat waves that threaten the health of the sick, poor or elderly; increases in ground-level ozone pollution linked to asthma and other respiratory illnesses; as well as other threats to the health and welfare of Americans.

“These long-overdue findings cement 2009’s place in history as the year when the United States Government began addressing the challenge of greenhouse-gas pollution and seizing the opportunity of clean-energy reform,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “Business leaders, security experts, government officials, concerned citizens and the United States Supreme Court have called for enduring, pragmatic solutions to reduce the greenhouse gas pollution that is causing climate change. This continues our work towards clean energy reform that will cut GHGs and reduce the dependence on foreign oil that threatens our national security and our economy.”

EPA’s final findings respond to the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision that GHGs fit within the Clean Air Act definition of air pollutants. The findings do not in and of themselves impose any emission reduction requirements but rather allow EPA to finalize the GHG standards proposed earlier this year for new light-duty vehicles as part of the joint rulemaking with the Department of Transportation.

On-road vehicles contribute more than 23 percent of total U.S. GHG emissions. EPA’s proposed GHG standards for light-duty vehicles, a subset of on-road vehicles, would reduce GHG emissions by nearly 950 million metric tons and conserve 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of model year 2012-2016 vehicles.

EPA’s endangerment finding covers emissions of six key greenhouse gases – carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride – that have been the subject of scrutiny and intense analysis for decades by scientists in the United States and around the world.

Scientific consensus shows that as a result of human activities, GHG concentrations in the atmosphere are at record high levels and data shows that the Earth has been warming over the past 100 years, with the steepest increase in warming in recent decades. The evidence of human-induced climate change goes beyond observed increases in average surface temperatures; it includes melting ice in the Arctic, melting glaciers around the world, increasing ocean temperatures, rising sea levels, acidification of the oceans due to excess carbon dioxide, changing precipitation patterns, and changing patterns of ecosystems and wildlife.

President Obama and Administrator Jackson have publicly stated that they support a legislative solution to the problem of climate change and Congress’ efforts to pass comprehensive climate legislation. However, climate change is threatening public health and welfare, and it is critical that EPA fulfill its obligation to respond to the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that determined that greenhouse gases fit within the Clean Air Act definition of air pollutants.

EPA issued the proposed findings in April 2009 and held a 60-day public comment period. The agency received more than 380,000 comments, which were carefully reviewed and considered during the development of the final findings.

Information on EPA’s findings: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endange…

December 07, 2009
Climate auguries turn promising in Copenhagen
by Jeffrey Laurenti,  http://takingnote.tcf.org/

The Romans would read the entrails of sacrificed animals for encouragement about the prospects for success of an intended initiative.  Diplomats in our more rationalist age predict results based on delphic hints from government leaders and on subtle softenings of once adamantly held positions.  The omens for the global climate conference that opened in Copenhagen Monday have suddenly turned auspicious.

Over the past two weeks the major hold-outs from the first round of greenhouse gas reductions promised at Kyoto a dozen years ago have belatedly put cards on the table.  By apparent pre-arrangement, the United States went first, with President Obama committing to a 17 percent reduction in U.S. greenhouse emissions from 2005 levels (a feeble four percent reduction from the 1990 baseline).  China quickly followed with a promise to reduce  the carbon dioxide emitted per unit of gross national product from 2005 levels by some 40 percent over the next ten years — a sleight of statistical hand that translates into halving the increase in China’s emissions over the coming decade.

China’s opening bid was “a wake-up call” for New Delhi, India’s environment minister acknowledged, and prime minister Manmohan Singh promptly stepped forward to pledge comparable cuts in India’s carbon emissions at the meeting of Commonwealth heads of government at the end of November.

The big breakthrough, say the augurs in the office of U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, came late last week, when the Obama administration endorsed a call for immediate creation of a $10-billion international fund to support developing countries’ responses to climate change.  As proposed at the Commonwealth summit by British prime minister Gordon Brown, the fund would next year begin pumping funds into poorer countries’ acquisition of new, cleaner energy technology, their fight against deforestation, and their efforts to mitigate effects of the warming already underway.

Washington has promised it will pay its “fair share” of the fund, and Britain has already pledged $1.31 billion (thirteen percent) of the initial launch fund for 2010 through 2012.  Financing through the fund would then swiftly rise, to a cumulative $150 billion by 2020.

A virtuous circle seems to be developing, lifting even the most cynical diplomats’ expectations for a tangible result from Copenhagen over the next two weeks.  President Obama’s decision not to treat the conference as just a check-that-box stopover en route to collecting his Nobel prize this week is a further augury of likely success.  Instead, he will make a separate trip to ensure that a hard-negotiated outcome emerges from a summit of world leaders as the conference concludes on December 18.

If Copenhagen does indeed approve the political framework of a “grand bargain” to combat climate threats — built around emissions cuts from the big energy burning countries plus technology and mitigation financing for developing countries — Obama will have ended his first year in the White House with a major game-changing victory.   A global pact on climate protection, to be hammered into legally binding treaty terms next year, will rebut conservative critics’ charge that Obama’s embrace of diplomacy and the United Nations produces nothing but impotent talk.

Climate change has been a huge fault line in American politics for over a decade, with climate-holocaust deniers having seized control of the formerly ruling party.  Vice President Cheney famously derided calls for energy conservation as merely “a sign of personal virtue,” and Obama’s opponents in the 2008 election loudly vowed to “drill, baby, drill.”  There would most assuredly have been no prospect for global agreement on climate action had Obama not come to power in Washington.

But Obama will have to deliver on his Copenhagen commitments in the Congress — in an election year about which his party is increasingly nervous.  Achieving agreement with the Chinese and Indians may prove easy by comparison.  Our filibuster-disabled Senate in Washington may well prove more impervious to climate rationalism than the superstitious senate of ancient Rome.

Posted by Jeffrey Laurenti on December 7, 2009

Climate Change and International Security
15th December 1.30-3pm at DR-Byen’s Concert House, Studie 2
Open to the general public

The Danish Minister for Foreign Affairs Per Stig Møller has invited a panel of world leaders for a debate on the impact of climate change on international security. The panel will include:

·        African Union Commission Chairperson Dr. Jean Ping
·        EU Presidency, Swedish Minister for Foreign Affairs Carl Bildt
·        NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen

The moderator will be Steffen Kretz, Senior International Editor and anchor with the Danish Broadcasting Corporation (DR).

You are invited to take part. Participation is free of charge. Seats will be allocated on a first come, first served basis due to the limited number of seats. A binding registration is therefore necessary. Deadline is the 10th of December 2009. Register by sending your name and contact details to  MEK at UM.DK. You will receive a personal confirmation of registration, which you must bring with you in order to access the event.

Venue: DR-Byen’s Concert House, Studie 2, Emil Holms Kanal 20, 0999 Copenhagen C.
Nearest metro: DR-Byen (two stops from the Bella Center).
Doors open at 12.30 and close at 1.15pm, to ensure a prompt start to the debate.

For further information contact Catherine Lorenzen:  catlor at um.dk / +45 3392 1855

UNCTAD Publishes Analysis of Alternative Biofuels Policy Options

7 December 2009: The UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has released a report titled “The Biofuels Market: Current Situation and Alternative Scenarios,” which assesses six different biofuels policy scenarios, along with their possible global impacts.

The report is based on a scenario-building exercise that explicitly recognizes the contingency and volatility of biofuels viability, and frames its analyses accordingly. The report examines: the role and implications of biofuels blending targets; the establishment of a carbon dioxide price as incentive for the development of a global biofuels market; the commercial viability of second generation biofuel technology; trade opportunities for developing countries; and trade implications, including a discussion of intellectual property rights. The report also contains a chapter dedicated to biodiesel and the potential role of jatropha. [UNCTAD Press Release][The Report]

First President Obama went to Copenhagen on behalf of the city of Chicago and his host was Prime Minister Lars  Lokke Rasmussen. The man did not help him and the President came back empty handed. But now, in Copenhagen, quite a few people told me that Obama’s visit has completely overshadowed the election of the site for the Olympics. In effect the visit became an Obama festivity.

Obama will find Copenhagen consensus ‘difficult’

by Andrew White on Sunday, 06 December 2009on ArabianBusiness.com

US LEADER: Barack Obama will be joined by 100 other world leaders in Copenhagen. (Getty Images)

The President of Iceland has warned that US President Barack Obama will find it “very difficult” to achieve a consensus at the forthcoming international climate conference in Copenhagen.

At the summit, which opens on December 7, Obama will be joined by more than 100 other world leaders as well as delegations from countries including Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

On Saturday it was announced that the US leader would arrive in Copenhagen on December 18, considered a crucial period when more leaders will be in attendance, and so hopefully improving the chances of a political agreement at the event.

However, according to Olafur Ragnar Grimsson, the conference comes too early in the Obama presidency for any meaningful accord to be struck.

“President Obama is unfortunate in the fact that the conference takes place within his first year in office,” Grimsson told Arabian Business in an interview in Abu Dhabi.

“I know from over 30 years of my own cooperation with American leaders that it takes a long time to change active policy within the US administration,” he continued. “Unfortunately for all of us, [Obama] has had his hands full with the economic crisis, Iraq, Afghanistan and the battle over healthcare.

“I think he will need more time to really gather the different forces in America together with respect to a new clean energy policy, and to reverse the prevailing policies of the Bush administration,” Grimsson added.

Grimsson was in the UAE capital as a member of the judging panel for the Zayed Future Energy Prize 2010, awarded each year to individuals, companies or organisations that have demonstrated innovation and leadership in their contributions to the future of energy.

The left wing leader has been president of Iceland since 1996, having been reelected for a fourth term in 2008. He has long been a fierce proponent of green energy technology, and Iceland today generates 100 percent of its power from renewable energy sources.

“During my youth, Iceland was over 80 percent dependent on fossil fuels, imported oil and coal,” said Grimsson. “But over the last 40 years we have transformed our energy economy so that all of our electricity is from clean energy resources. We have demonstrated the benefits of establishing a clean energy economy for ordinary citizens, individuals and businesses.”

Denmark has pumped 1.2 billion kroner ( $240 million) into hosting COP15, but the country will recoup a major part of this through increased tourism and trade – most of it obviously going to Copenhagen.

The mayor is a former EU Commissioner for the Environment, so she is personally deeply involved. She will also host December 14-15 the Climate Summit for Mayors with 100 mayors in attendance. She says : “Half of the world’s population is now living in cities and the number is rapidly growing. Cities of the world are responsible for more than 75% of global CO2 emissions. Any solution to the climate crisis therefore, has to involve active participation from the cities. Her event is obviously part of the COP15 but outside the COP area of Bella Center.
Her activities are in and around City Hall and has her own press center and set of tours to show off Copenhagen’s achievements.

Copenhagen has set itself the ambitious target of becoming the world’s first carbon neutral capital by 2025. It will be known by its roof gardens. Grass will be growing on the roofs and instead of coal they will be burning wood, straw, and using also biogas. By 2015 the city will have reduced by 29% emissions as compared to today and reach carbon neutrality in 2025.

Copenhagen is already rated today with Vienna as the two most livable places in the world.
Among its peculiarities, Copenhagen is becoming the world’s best city for cyclists. 35% of all commuters cycle to their workplace daily. For those living within city borders this figure is even higher – it is 55%. The city gives priority to bicycles over motor vehicles and biking routes are all over. There is much work done here to improve further the bicycles and the cycling infrastructure. Mind you – Denmark is actually an oil producing country.

Copenhagen, looking at the Conference happening in their town, has renamed itself to Hopenhagen in light of the push the UN has created by the chant – SEAL THE DEAL. All was obviously planned with the belief in their hearts that there will be a deal by the time of the start of the Conference as per a UN driven success, and the city of Copenhagen set out to invoke, involve, and engage the entire population of the world in the climate debate. The city, rather then the State government, speaks for the people, so in a UN terminology they are an NGO as the UN recognizes only Sovereign Governments with title and responsibility of Government this as a course that turns easily into a blessing under various political regimes.    — IT IS NOT JUST FOR THE HEADS OF STATE WHO CARRY ON ENORMOUS RESPONSIBILITY TO IMPROVE THE GLOBAL CLIMATE IN THE FUTURE; THE RESPONSIBILITY ALSO LIES WITH THE INDIVIDUAL PERSON AND THE INDIVIDUAL CITY. We must as individuals realize the goals of a  greener world, and the city will then become a  city of hope – this is Copenhagen as Hopenhagen. The organization within which Copenhagen is active is the ICLEI – the UN affiliate representing local governments that want to have an impact as link between Governments and their Peoples.

HOPENHAGEN LIVE is the name of the activity that will take place in the open City Hall Square. It will involve mainly the people of the city that open up to the guests for abroad and the center piece is a big white transparent globe upon which are projected the weather conditions of the globe and registered the size of the numbers of people signing up to register their being in favor of a climate change accord.

Monday December 7, at 6:30pm, there was the official opening of HOPENHAGEN LIVE.
The first two speakers were Her Excellency the Lord Mayor and Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtlandt,
Both spoke extemporaneously – showed signes of convinction as assured people that know they fought a long fight for a just cause. Then came the Director-General of the UNFCCC, Mr. Ivo de Boer who pulled out the pages of a prepared speech as if he was going to speak before this convinced people in order to convince himself that he is indeed going to get his wishes from the governments that meet at that Bella Center location. After he read his first page, he was hauled away in a friendly but firm way by the conferencie of the evening and the laughter of the assembled crowd standing in the City Hall Square besides that Globe. OK, they felt that they have heard all of this before – just celebrate with those that are already implementing
what he is preaching – and what about the meetings that brought all those others to Copenhagen? Actually, the mainly young Danes that came to the Square, and many of the NGO delegates – mainly from Europe, did not come to listen to the UN preaching but to listen to the musicians, he threatened to delay their performance.

At a different location in town, at the Store Vega, Enghavevej 40, 1674 Kobehavn V, The Climate Action Network of NGOs from UN Member States Campaign On Energy for a changing World – “PLAY TO STOP: EUROPE FOR CLIMATE,” there was a celebration with
the famous Backstreet Boys Band and the Climate Campaign Ambassadors of the NGO world starting at 9pm.  The time set by the time honored first Monday night event was  set this time for a later start as not to interfere with the “Hopenhagen Live” concert.

The list of CC Ambassadors includes Magdalena Maleeva from Bulgaria who was also a speaker at the London Premiere of the activist movie “The Age of Stupid.” (By the way, the movie will be shown at Hopenhagen Square at City Hall on Tuesday, December 8, 2009 starting  7pm)

The ClimateAction evening – run by the European CAN that parallels the Swedish Presidency of the EU,  was introduced to the Press earlier in the day at the Radisson Royal hotel by  Claus Sorensen of Denmark, President of the DG Communication, Brussels, and Anna David, the Campaign Ambassador for Denmark.

The CAN Europe also distributed the material information for “The Copenhagen Express” the Communications links for EU delegation to COP15. We will note here their program for the 18th of December as this provides a view how the EU expects the meetings to unfold:

“At the end of the morning of 18 December it is foreseen that the Copenhagen ‘agreed outcome’ will be adopted by the Heads of State and government in short plenary sessions of the COP and then the CMP. This will be followed after lunch by closing plenaries, and then the CMP at which formal decisions and conclusions will be adopted. The Copenhagen outcome is likely to comprise a package of these COP and CMP decisions and conclusions. The close of the final CMP plenary will mark the end of the Copenhagen conference.”

For those that forgot – COP is the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC, while CMP is the former MOP or the Conference of Members to the Kyoto Protocol – which is basically all the members of the COP minus the United States. We assume thus President Obama to be free at the time there are discussions and there is voting on the CMP time.

Peter Read’s tireless campaign to inject a new dimension into climate change mitigation through the enhanced management of photosynthesis on a global scale, came to a sad end on the 24th November 2009. He died at a meeting in Brussels assessing bioenergy options in Africa, not long after making a presentation on linking bioenergy with biological carbon sequestration. Peter Read was amongst the first to publicise the idea of achieving ‘negative emissions’ by combining bioenergy production with carbon capture and storage. He presented these ideas in February 2005 at the high profile ‘Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change’ conference in Exeter. Since then, the idea has won widespread support in principle. It has been incorporated into the EU’s ‘Flagship Programme’ for carbon capture and sequestration. The IPCC fifth assessment process now includes a negative emissions scenario based on the use of biochar.

Peter’s quest, though sometimes isolated, was always marked with his infectious laugh and absolute commitment to science and the environment. Based at Massey University in New Zealand after moving there in 1980 from the UK, he travelled ceaselessly sharing his ideas of how the world could move beyond policies aimed at simply capping fossil fuel emissions to ones that promote ‘negative emission pathways’ and enhanced carbon stocks in vegetation and soils.   Using ‘abrupt climate change’ theories to inject the needed urgency and motivation for the immense scale of the land management options he promoted, he developed a set of global scenarios to demonstrate both the necessity and modality of this approach.  Whilst much of what he proposed remains highly contentious, Peter may yet be proved to have been ahead his time.

Papers on his website including:
“Biosphere Carbon Stock Management” an Editorial Essay.  Climatic Change, 87/3-4, 305-320.   (Published electronically 29.x.07.  DOI 10.1007/s10584-007-9356-y).  This Essay was published in response to an invitation from Climatic Change Editor Steve Schneider.  It presents a strategy for using negative emissions systems, that by linking bioenergy to carbon storage, could return CO2 levels to pre-industrial by mid century if adopted ambitiously.
 http://seat.massey.ac.nz/personal/p.read…

—————

We worked with Professor Read on several occasions. Some thirty years ago I came to a meeting at Massey University to present the concept of ENERGY CANE as developed with Professor George Samuels of the University of Puerto Rico in Mayaguez.

The concept was to return the cane to a state it produces more fermentable sugars and biomass rather then going for sugar crystals.

Needless to say that neither the oil nor agricultural interests in Washington, and not even the Brazilians of that time,  were ready to buy the concept. We proved it works and would recycle higher quantities off carbon while pushing out higher quantities of oil – it would have been a cane dedicated to the production of fuel rather then sugar in the tropics that are poor in fuel. Professor Read came on board and later joined NGOs involved in Sustainable Energy.

Defense of Climate-Change Consensus Continues.

From Stephen Boehm: Why Carbon Offsetting Will Not Save the Planet – Book launch

A new book has been published to coincide with the Copenhagen climate summit.

‘Upsetting the Offset: The Political Economy of Carbon Markets’
Steffen Böhm and Siddhartha Dabhi (eds)

The book can be downloaded for free at
 http://mayflybooks.org/?page_id=194

The book will be launched in Colchester, UK, and Lund, Sweden (near Copenhagen); at both events some free copies of the book will be available:

‘The atmosphere business: on the politics and organization of climate change’
Department of Business Administration, Lund University, Sweden (1 hour from Copenhagen), room EC3-109.

15 December 2009, 12.30-17.00.
The seminar is free and open to all but the number of participants is limited. Please confirm your attendance by sending an email to  sverre.spoelstra at fek.lu.se
 http://mayflybooks.org/?p=309

Press release: 1 December 2009

Why Carbon Offsetting Will Not Save the Planet

Global carbon markets may well have been hailed as the saviour of the planet by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but in many ways they are doing more harm than good, according to new evidence. In fact, two academics from the University of Essex argue that measures put in place to reduce carbon emissions following the Kyoto Protocol on climate change have only made matters worse.

Launched to tie-in with the United Nations Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen (COP15), Dr Steffen Böhm and Siddhartha Dabhi’s new book, Upsetting the Offset: The Political Economy of Carbon Markets, challenges the environmental claims made about carbon markets and carbon offsetting schemes. The book – which collates contributions from more than 30 leading experts – is another voice in the growing criticism about the business of carbon and how it has failed to deliver promised reductions in greenhouse gases.

Few would argue that climate change is the biggest challenge the world has ever faced, and reducing our carbon footprint is essential to the future of the planet. Carbon offsetting has become a multi-billion-dollar global business which has captured the imagination of organisations worldwide who want to do something to help combat global warming. The reality, however, is that many of these schemes have actually made matters worse.

Dr Böhm and Mr Dabhi, of the University of Essex-based Essex Business School, advise governments, businesses and other organisations to reduce their carbon footprint by undertaking initiatives closer to home than funding carbon offsetting programmes in deprived countries thousands of miles away.

‘Carbon offsetting and carbon markets haven’t really delivered the reductions of greenhouse gas emissions they claimed and in many ways have just made the problem worse,’ they explained. ‘These schemes have often just provided an incentive for big polluting companies to continue emitting greenhouse gases rather than to change their ways.’ ‘Often, carbon offsetting schemes have very negative effects on local communities and eco-systems in developing countries.’

The book contributes to a growing field of critics of carbon markets by highlighting several up-to-date examples of where the system has failed and often led to negative social, economic and environmental impacts in deprived countries.

‘Carbon markets simply don’t address the underlying and root causes of climate change, which is an over-consumption of finite fossil fuels,’ added Dr Böhm and Mr Dabhi. ‘We are addicted to oil, gas, coal and a whole range of other fossil fuels, which, when burned for heating, electricity generation or other usages, release greenhouse gases. It is now time to make up for the lost decade since Kyoto and start to deal with our underlying reliance on fossil fuels.’

‘This book is a very constructive and rigorous critique of CDM offset approaches to deal with carbon footprints. I recommend this book to any student, policy maker or administrator of climate change complexities in developed or developing countries.’ Professor Anil Gupta, Indian Institute of Management – Ahmedabad, India

‘If you wondered whether capitalism could ever produce the perfect weapon of its own destruction, try this heady mix of carbon fuels, the trade in financial derivatives, and more than a dash of neo-colonialism, and boom! But this book is far from resigned to that fate. After examining the case against carbon trading. the book turns to alternatives, to hope, to sanity, and to the future.’ Professor Stefano Harney, Queen Mary, University of London, UK

‘The politics of carbon trading is a subject far too important to be left to politicians, industrialists and technocrats. This is an issue that is affecting everyone on the planet. In this important book, a series of well known commentators explain the perverse economics that lies behind the impossible idea of trading our future for profit.’ Professor Martin Parker, University of Leicester, UK

‘Anyone concerned about the future of the planet (is anyone not?) should read this book. The contributors give powerful evidence and argument to show that the carbon trading regimes favoured by the world’s elites will not work – and are, indeed, set to make things worse. But the message is not negative. There are alternatives, both effective and desirable.’ Professor Ted Benton, University of Essex, UK

____________________________________________

Dr Steffen Boehm
Reader in Management
Essex Business School
University of Essex
Colchester CO4 3SQ UK
Rm 5NW.4.4
Tel. +44(0)1206 87 3843

News Alert
04:57 PM EST Friday, December 4, 2009

“After months of diplomatic activity, there is progress being made towards a meaningful Copenhagen accord in which all countries pledge to take action against the global threat of climate change,” White House spokesman Robert Gibbs announced Friday afternoon. “Based on his conversations with other leaders and the progress that has already been made to give momentum to negotiations, the President believes that continued US leadership can be most productive through his participation at the end of the Copenhagen conference on December 18th rather than on December 9th. There are still outstanding issues that must be negotiated for an agreement to be reached, but this decision reflects the President’s commitment to doing all that he can to pursue a positive outcome.”

Obama changes date for trip to Copenhagen climate talks

For more information, visit washingtonpost.com - http://link.email.washingtonpost.com/r/Q…

——————–

from: event secretary to Climate, Hiraoka.Hisaka. — We thank him for taking the event outside the Bella Center compound where it would have been closed to the real people. Let others also open the meeting to the world electronic press.

Dear Climate-L readers,

Please join us in the afternoon of Monday 7 December for COP15 Side-event Symposium: “Towards Green Growth & Green Innovation: Environmental Science and Technology Cooperation between Developed and Developing Countries.”

This symposium co-hosted by JICA and JST is about how to achieve both emissions reductions and economic growth through environmental S&T cooperation between developed and developing countries.

Dr. R.K. Pachauri (Director-General of TERI, India) will make the keynote speech.

Representatives from AU, Brazil, China, EC, Japan, US, and media will also be speakers/discussants.

Monday, December 7th, 2009, 14:00-16:45 (Doors open at 13:30)
Venue: Reykjavik Conference Room, Radisson SAS Scandinavia Copenhagen, Denmark
<Topics> “Strategies and Initiatives for Green Growth” and “International Collaboration on Environmental R&D for Green Innovation”

<Languages> English
<Admission> Free (no pre-registration); sandwiches and coffee/tea will be served

For more details, please refer to the event homepage:
 http://www.jst.go.jp/global/sympo091207/…

Please feel free to forward this email to those who may be interested.

Yours Sincerely,

Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)
Event Secretariat
……………………………………….
S&T Research Partnership for Sustainable Development Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)
Address: 5-3, Yonban-cho, Chiyoda-ku
Tokyo 102-8666, Japan
Phone: +81-3-5214-8085
E-mail:  g_events at jst.go.jp
URL: http://www.jst.go.jp/global/english/

Europe Bypassed on Climate Summit.

Europeans claim great strides in moving toward a low-carbon economy, but their political bloc will be tested in Copenhagen.

By JAMES KANTER
Published online December 1, 2009 but various versions are in existence – the printed version of December 3, 2009 has as title: “EUROPE STEWS AS ITS CLOUT DIMINISHES ON CLIMATE.”

BRUSSELS — No political entity has pushed harder for the Copenhagen conference on climate change to succeed than the European Union.

But just days before the opening of the United Nations-sponsored meeting, the Europeans have been largely pushed to the sidelines, watching as the world’s two largest emitters of greenhouse gases, China and the United States, seek to set the rules of the game.

“That’s of course the unfortunate situation for Copenhagen,” said Jo Leinen, a German member of theEuropean Parliament who is leading the chamber’s delegation to the conference that is intended to follow up on the soon-to-expire Kyoto Protocol. “It’s turning into a bit of a ping-pong match between China and the United States, with each just looking at the other,” he said.

Europeans say they have gone further than anybody else in moving toward a low-carbon economy that could serve as a model for the rest of the world. But the bloc’s ability to exercise global influence through progressive standards and moral leadership, rather than through superpower status, is facing a key test.

“The E.U. frankly doesn’t have the political clout to determine the outcome at Copenhagen,” said Peter Haas, a professor of political science at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

The E.U. still has much at stake in Copenhagen, however. It is facing huge pressure, Mr. Haas added, to “keep the prospects of a global deal alive so that European business leaders and voters believe they are on track to take advantage of green technology markets of the future.”

That will be a challenge. The E.U. remains internally divided on key issues, among them how much to pay developing countries to limit emissions and how deeply to cut their own output.

So far, New Zealand is the only country outside Europe to have passed into law a national plan to trade emissions, leaving the bloc looking increasingly isolated. Jürgen R. Thumann, the president of BusinessEurope, a powerful confederation of industry and employer groups, has criticized the system as the most “costly climate policy program in the world.”

Last year, in a bold move to stamp its environmental policies on the rest of the world, the E.U. required all airlines arriving or leaving from its airports to buy some pollution credits beginning in 2012. But the move infuriated Washington, which said it risked breaking international aviation rules by forcing non-European airlines into the system.

Mistrust between Europe and the United States lingers even after President Barack Obama pledged right after his election victory that the United States would finally tackle greenhouse gases.

This summer, the Europeans were particularly irked by a U.S. decision to negotiate with China bilaterally rather than to come to Bonn, where climate talks under the U.N. umbrella were under way at the same time. The Europeans regard the United Nations as the best forum to ensure developing countries rally behind the treaty-making process.

When President Obama omitted any mention of money for developing countries last week, the European Commission tartly responded that finance was “one element we need to continue to discuss.”
Brussels also has taken a lukewarm view of Mr. Obama’s provisional commitment to reduce U.S. emissions by 17 percent by 2020 compared to 2005 levels, which it views as falling far short of what is needed to secure a global agreement to prevent the Earth’s temperature from rising too much.

Todd Stern, the chief American climate negotiator, noted several months ago that some people “across the pond” did not fully understand how difficult it was to move the U.S. Congress to approve economy-wide greenhouse gas measures.

In an interview Monday, Mr. Stern said his counterparts in Europe had gained a more sophisticated understanding of the limitations and frustrations of the American system through the process of negotiating over the climate treaty.

E.U. officials also expressed disappointment in a Chinese offer, made last week, to slow emissions growth, saying that it did not appear to go beyond “business as usual.”

Despite the setbacks, E.U. officials maintain that their first-mover strategy encouraged Brazil, Russia, Japan, Indonesia and South Korea to make more ambitious bids than they would have done otherwise ahead of the Copenhagen meeting.

The bloc’s environment commissioner, Stavros Dimas, has called for Europe to keep up that momentum by unilaterally cutting emissions by 30 percent from 1990 levels, from the current agreed offer of 20 percent, rather than wait for other nations to sweeten their bids.

“The moral pressure would be much stronger on the developed countries and developing countries alike,” Mr. Dimas said.

According to diplomats, Britain, Denmark, the Netherlands and Slovenia are among member states that would support cutting emissions further at an E.U. summit in Brussels on Dec. 10 and Dec. 11, which will take place during the first week of the Copenhagen conference. They see it as a way to improve the chances of producing a treaty to replace Kyoto before it expires in 2012.

But leaders in Italy and Poland, which has a big coal mining industry, plus a number of East European countries, fear that such a step would be far too expensive. That has created the potential for an embarrassing public dispute among E.U. nations right when the bloc most hopes to assert its leadership.

India To Slow Greenhouse Growth In Step To What may become the Copenhagen U.N. Deal.

Date: 04-Dec-09
Author: Krittivas Mukherjee, Reuters.

NEW DELHI – India set a goal on Thursday for slowing the growth of its greenhouse gas emissions, the last major economy to offer a climate target four days before the start of U.N. talks on combating global warming.

The unilateral announcement contrasted with a harder line on Wednesday when diplomats said India, China, Brazil and South Africa opposed the setting of goals advocated by the Danish hosts, including a halving of world emissions by 2050.

The big emerging economies have often insisted that rich nations have caused global warming by spewing out greenhouse gases since the Industrial Revolution, and want to see deep cuts by these rich nations before joining the effort.

“This means that all of the world’s biggest emitters have reacted to the deadline in Copenhagen. It is very good news that India has brought numbers to the table,” said Connie Hedegaard, Denmark’s Environment Minister who will preside at the talks.

India’s goal will let emissions rise, albeit at a slower rate than gross domestic product growth (GDP).

“Under this intensity target…the absolute level of Indian carbon emissions might still rise by around 90-95 percent between 2005 and 2020, according to our GDP growth model estimates,” PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP said in a statement.

Still, it called the target “very encouraging.”

RICH-POOR DIVIDE

Fault lines between rich and poor about sharing out the burden of combating global warming — projected to bring more floods, droughts, wildfires and heatwaves — are likely to dominate Copenhagen, where about 100 world leaders will gather on the final two days.

In London, the climate consultancy Ecofys said global greenhouse gas emissions would almost double from 1990 levels by 2040 with current emissions promises.

And rich nations are far from united in their approach.

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said on Thursday he would not rule out calling an early election to end a political deadlock over climate change policy, after parliament rejected for a second time his policy on cutting carbon emissions.

In Brussels, a European Commission official said the European Union wanted more from China.

China last week said it would aim to cut its carbon intensity goal by 40-45 percent by 2020, from 2005 levels. Some analysts say that could still mean a doubling of emissions.

“There’s an expectation they could go further,” the EU official said.

Summit hosts Denmark reiterated that it was now too late to agree a full, legally binding treaty in Copenhagen. Hedegaard said nations would have to set a deadline for completing work “as soon as possible in 2010.”

“I think that right now the biggest obstacle for Copenhagen will be finance,” she told Reuters. Developed nations have yet to put cash on the table to help fund a deal.

In Italy, environmentalists accused Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of doing too little to avert climate change, and put up an ice statue of him in the ancient Roman Forum. It is timed to melt away on the day the conference opens.