“Without a connection to current disasters, global warming is the kind of problem people, and democratic institutions, have proved singularly terrible at solving: a long-term threat that can only be limited by acting promptly, before the harm is clear.” The New York Times, April 23, 2006

Sea Level Rise is Happening. Act now for the future of the Planet

Thursday, January 07, 2010

Rise in the level of Indian Ocean may spell disaster

From: MyNews.in

Thiruvananthapuram: The mean sea level rise has already rung the warning bell for the Indian coastal zone. The secretary in the Union ministry for earth sciences, Dr Shailesh Nayak informed the audience of the 97th Indian Science Congress here on Tuesday that the Indian Ocean has risen by 9 mm in the period 2004-08.

“We will launch a satellite with French collaboration, next year to monitor sea level rise along India’s coast,” he said.

According to Dr Nayak, the annual sea level rise of Indian Ocean since 2004 was 1.8 mm. The erosion of the coasts of Lakshadweep Islands may be due to the sea level rise of the Indian Ocean. The water level of river Hotly has risen and ingress of saline water into the Sunderbans on the eastern coast has been noticed.

When questioned whether this was due to the effect of Tsunami of December 2004, he said : “This may be the cause. We are trying to find out.”

Experts across the world are concerned over the rise in global mean sea level. They say that the situation is primarily due to fast melting of glaciers on account of the warming effect of climate change.

He said that coral reef was destroyed on account of Tsunami and chlorophyll content has increase in the bay of Bengal following the Aila cyclone. Chlorophyll plays an important role in ocean’s biological productivity and their impact on climate. Hence studies are needed on how much phytoplankton the oceans contain, where they are located, how their distribution is changing with time and how much photosynthesis they perform, he said.

Land and ocean play an important role in influencing climate and weather variability. In this context, Dr Nayak said that the frequency of heavy precipitation has increased over most land areas consistent with warming. An increase in atmospheric water vapour has been noticed. Also more intense and longer droughts have been observed over wider areas since the 1970s, particularly in the tropical and subtropical regions.

He suggested improved monitoring of regional climate and understanding of the regional impact of climate change particularly on the monsoon system. He urged for raising allocation for atmospheric research.

Wednesday, January 06, 2010

Study Finds Harbors Not Prepared for Rising Sea Level to Come

By: Ambrosia Sarabia

From: The Log

SACRAMENTO -- The effects of global warming will be felt worldwide, scientists say -- and Southern California harbors will be hit especially hard by rising seas, according to a published report by the California State Lands Commission.

Photo by: Port of Los Angeles

In Harm’s Way? — The Port of Los Angeles’ breakwater may be overcome with powerful waves during a significant sea level rise. Officials are conducting a study to better prepare for the effects of global warming.

The paper, “A Report on Sea Level Rise Preparedness,” projects that sea levels will rise 16 inches by 2050 and 55 inches by 2100. Coastal communities from Santa Barbara to San Diego will be dramatically affected by the rising sea.

At the request of the commission, staff members conducted a survey to assess how ports have prepared for the rising water levels ahead. Of the 104 surveys sent to major ports and harbor districts, only 40 were returned. The consensus: Most ports are not prepared.

“The survey results confirm that the commission’s major grantees and lessees are just beginning to address the issue of sea level rise,” the report states.

Among the questions asked included how facilities will be affected by a sea level rise and what actions were being considered to address the rise.

According to a report by the California Climate Change Center, nearly one-half million people, thousands of miles of roads and railways, major ports, airports and power plants are at risk from a 100-year flood event as a result of a 55-inch rise in sea level.

OC Parks, which operates and maintains marina facilities at Newport Dunes and Sunset Aquatic Marina, as well as floating dock systems with bulkhead shore protection in Newport Beach, responded that many existing seawalls would be overtopped, an increase in flooding and erosion would be expected and a change in ecosystems would occur.

When asked how facilities would be affected by a 16-inch and 55-inch sea level rise, the city of Newport Beach responded that flooding may occur over most bulkheads. As for strategies to mitigate sea level rise impacts, the city reported that increasing seawall height might help.

“We certainly need to start thinking about that, and see what options there are for the city,” said Chris Miller, manager of the city of Newport Beach Harbor Resources division.

The city of Oceanside reported that no impact would likely occur with a 16-inch sea level rise, but there would possibly be some wave run-up with a 55-inch sea level rise. Santa Barbara anticipated that a rise of 55 inches would flood or inundate the entire area, destroying most facilities as currently constructed, according to the report.

The Port of San Diego responded that its facilities’ life spans are from 30-50 years and, while many of the facilities will not be greatly affected by a 16-inch sea level increase, a 55-inch rise would cause a substantial impact. As for future preparation, the port is preparing a Climate Action Plan, and its environmental review process includes the consideration of sea level rise.

The Port of Los Angeles reported that most of its facilities are designed for a 50-year life expectancy -- and it determined that possible flooding and wave damage would occur from a 55-inch rise in sea level. The port is planning a study to identify vulnerable facilities and will be identify sea level rise consideration in future design guidelines.

The port, which has been reviewing the topic for some time now, is in the process of moving forward with a study that will identify vulnerable facilities and develop a response team. The study is expected to be completed in the next six months, explained Phillip Sanfield, director of media relations for the Port of Los Angeles.

When identifying areas of concern if a sea level rise were to occur, the port’s breakwater causes some unease with port officials, as forceful waves may make the breakwater less efficient in protecting the port’s infrastructure. The port has been working closely with the Army Corps of Engineers -- the agency responsible for the breakwater -- to continually study the condition and integrity of the breakwater.

In terms of the replacement and construction of current and future wharfs, potential sea level rises will be taken into account.

“This is not something that we just tuck away in the file and not deal with,” Sanfield said. “We need to plan for sea level rise now so that we are not doing repair work in the short term.

The report is meant to advise the state on how to plan for future sea level rises and includes information on sea level projections, impacts on state infrastructures and future areas of research.

The report used research from Scripps Institution of Oceanography; the University of California, San Diego; U.S. Geological Survey; Santa Clara University; the California Department of Boating and Waterways; and the Hydrologic Research Center.

The report is available online at www.slc.ca.gov

Tuesday, January 05, 2010

12 Million Egyptians to be Affected by Climate Change

 

Mohamed Abdel Salam
  2 January 2010 in Egypt, Environment, News

Cairo: A study conducted by the Center for Remote Sensing at Boston University, commissioned by the Arab Forum for Environment and Development, warned that Egypt would be one of the Arab countries most affected by climate change. The study analyzed a variety of scenarios of climate change impact, particularly on coastal areas, based on satellite images of the region, and showed that Egypt would be the most affected Arab country due to a rise in sea levels. The study stated that, “at least 12 million Egyptians will be forces to migrate from their area of residence in parts of Nile Delta and that with a rise in sea level by 5 meters, almost one third of the total affected Arab population would be Egyptian.

The Study was prepared by Dr. Eman Ghoneim, a research professor at the Center for Remote Sensing and devoted a large portion of its findings to the impact of rising sea levels on the Nile Delta. The study warned, “under the scenarios of rising sea levels, much of the Nile Delta would be lost forever, and the analysis of remote sensing and geographic information system, classified some areas in the Nile Delta at risk if sea levels rise by one meter” The report estimated that a rise of one meter only could engulf much of the Nile Delta. With about one third of the Delta area underwater, some of its coastal cities, such as Alexandria, Edco, Port Said and Damietta, would be in great danger.In this scenario, it is estimated that about 8.5% of the country’s population (7 million) would be forces to migrate to other areas.

The study added, “In extreme case scenarios of a 5 meter sea levels rise, more than half of the Nile Delta (58%) will face devastating effects and 10 major cities would be threatened, including Alexandria, Damanhur, Kafr El-Sheikh, Damietta, Mansoura and Port Said. Rising water would drown productive plots of agricultural lands and force about 14% of the country’s population (11.5 million) to move to areas of the more densely populated areas south of the Nile Delta region.”

The study went on to say that, “the Nile Delta, which covers about 24,900 square kilometers, and accounts for about 65% of agricultural land in Egypt, was once the largest site for sediments deposits in the basin of the Mediterranean Sea. It is an extreme example of low, flat land located in an area that is  very vulnerable to rising sea levels.” The Delta is threatened due to accelerated erosion of the coastline and the establishment of the Aswan High Dam in 1962, which subsequently sequestered large amounts of sediment behind the dam in Lake Nasser.

The study showed that coastal erosion of the Delta as a result of natural causes and the extraction of groundwater can be seen in satellite images, especially near the coastal cities of Rosetta and Damietta. The analysis of satellite images shows that the Ras Rashid, “Rosetta”, lost almost 9.5 square kilometers of area. Likewise, the coastline retreated 3 km in the last 30 years (1972 to 2003), meaning that this part of the Delta declines at an alarming rate of about 100 meters in the year.

Study also discussed the consequences of climate change on the Arab region as a whole, including the impact of rising sea levels and its effects on the growth of cities, stating that the southern part of the Nile Delta is now suffering from uncontrolled population growth in the city of Cairo. The results also showed a loss of about 12% (62 square kilometers) of the agricultural areas adjacent to Cairo, between 1984 and 2002.

BM

Friday, January 01, 2010

Fisheries and Aquaculture Face Multiple Risks from Climate Change

Happy New Year to you.

From ScienceDaily (Dec. 22, 2009)

— A new report, published by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, predicts "an ocean of change" for fishers and fish farmers. It concludes that urgent adaptation measures are required in response to opportunities and threats to food and livelihood provision due to climatic variations.

The study, 'Climate change implications for fisheries and aquaculture', is one of the most comprehensive surveys to date of existing scientific knowledge on the impacts of climate change on fisheries and aquaculture. Covering some 500 scientific papers, the picture the FAO review paints is one of an already-vulnerable sector facing widespread and often profound changes.

The report includes contributions from experts from around the world, including Dr Tim Daw and Prof Katrina Brown of the School of International Development and Prof Neil Adger of the School of Environmental Sciences at UEA. Other contributors come from the WorldFish Center, Globec, Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific, and Fisheries and Oceans Canada.

Dr Daw and Profs Adger and Brown co-authored the chapter 'Climate change and capture fisheries: potential impacts, adaptation and mitigation', which looks at the social vulnerability of fisherfolk to climate change. "Marine and freshwater ecosystems will be profoundly affected by processes like ocean acidification, coral bleaching and altered river flows with obvious impacts on fisherfolk, but it is not just about what happens to the fish," said Dr Daw. "Fishing communities are vulnerable to sea level rise and their livelihoods are threatened by storms and extreme weather. Meanwhile, the social and economic context of fisheries will be disrupted by impacts on security, migration, transport and markets."

"Fisheries are already rapidly evolving due to overexploitation and globalisation. They will suffer from wide range of different impacts from climate change, which may be unpredictable and surprising. The poorest will be least able to adapt to these impacts. For example in Kenya poorer fishers were shown to be less likely to switch to other livelihoods if catches declined."

Prof Adger added: "Climate change is going to be a huge challenge to every sector of society and what we're learning about fisheries shows how difficult adaptation will be, particularly for the poorest parts of the world."

According to the report, marine capture fisheries already facing multiple challenges due to overfishing, habitat loss and weak management are poorly positioned to cope with new problems stemming from climate change. Small island developing states -- which depend on fisheries and aquaculture for at least 50 percent of their animal protein intake -- are in a particularly vulnerable position.

Some 520 million people depend on fisheries and aquaculture as a source of protein and income. For 400 million of the poorest of these, fish provides half or more of their animal protein and dietary minerals. Many fishing and coastal communities already subsist in precarious and vulnerable conditions because of poverty and rural underdevelopment, with their wellbeing often undermined by over-exploitation of fishery resources and degraded ecosystems.

Inland fisheries -- 90 per cent of which are found in Africa and Asia -- are also at risk, threatening the food supply and livelihoods of some of the world's poorest populations. Warming in Africa and central Asia is expected to be above the global mean, and predictions suggest that by 2100 significant negative impacts will be felt across 25 per cent of Africa's inland aquatic ecosystems.

Fish farming will also be affected. Nearly 65 per cent of aquaculture is inland and concentrated mostly in the tropical and subtropical regions of Asia, often in the delta areas of major rivers at the mid- to upper levels of tidal ranges. Sea level rise over the next decades will increase upstream salinity, affecting fish farms.

A crucial issue highlighted by the report relates to how well such communities will be able to adapt to change. For example, even if African coastal fisheries do not face huge impacts, the region's 'adaptive capacity' to respond to climate change is low, rendering communities there highly vulnerable even to minor changes in climate and temperature.

Coral reef fish caught by artisanal fishers on the Indian Ocean island of Rodrigues. High water temperatures have already killed corals on reefs around the world. (Credit: Image courtesy of University of East Anglia)

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Copenhagen turns into Shamenhagen

by Takver - Climate Indymedia

Climate negotiations in Copenhagen ended with a whimper and some chaos in the final plenary. About 115 national leaders attended the Copenhagen climate talks but the final 'agreement' announced by the US, India, China and South Africa, was drafted far outside the consensus process of the United Nations and amounted to only aspirational targets and promises, falling far short of an ambitous, fair and binding treaty demanded by civil society.

climate_shame_20091218.jpg
climate_shame_20091218.jpg

"The conference of the parties takes note of the Copenhagen Accord," said a final decision announced by Danish Prime Minister Rasmussen. But Tuvalu declared the COP15 process completely undemocratic, conducted in closed door sessions, and slamed the target of 2 degrees for failing to be sufficient to ensure their survival. "We are being offered 30 pieces of silver to betray our children. Our future is not for sale." Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba and Costa Rica also raised their voices that the proposal cannot be considered as the work of COP according to Copenhagen End Game of the It's Getting Hot in Here Blog of the Youth Climate Movement.

Lumumba Di-Aping, the Sudanese leader of G77, compared the proposed Copenhagen Accord to entering a suicide pact in a discussion with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now "In all four regions of Africa, and in all seasons, the median temperature [increase] lies between 3 degrees C and 4 degrees C, roughly 1.5 times the global mean response. One hundred and fifty times, so a two degrees is not three; it's actually 3.5 and above. So, for me, it means simply I will accept the total destruction of my continent, her people, in Copenhagen. That, I would not do. That should not be asked of Africa, because it is effectively saying Africa is not the part of the human family."

Similarly The Prime Minister of Tuvalu, Apisai Ielemia, says he will not sign a climate change agreement that does not meet his demands on limiting global temperature rises. Tuvalu has had a proposal on the table for 6 months for global temperature rises to be kept below 1.5 degrees to ensure the survival of island nations. Despite bullying from Australia on Pacific Island nations, Tuvalu is standing its ground: "We have nowhere to run to because our islands are tiny, we just have to prepare ourselves individually, family wise so that they know what to do when a cyclone comes in or a hurricane blows because there is nothing else we can do. There is no mountain we can climb up, there is no other inland where we can run to like in your big countries." according to Radio New Zealand.

The negotiator for the Marshall Islands told the final plenary "Today the issue is not just about sovereignty, it is our fundamental right - that our nation is but a collection of tiny specks of corals in a vast ocean. This tiny collection of islands may be seen as navigational hazards for most people, but it is for me the land of my ancestors. Allow these islands to sink under the waves, and you will have destroyed an entire race. I leave your country, with a profound sense of loss. My country, only 2 m above sea level, is one of the biggest losers. I will have nothing to show my grandchildren for my absence the past two weeks, and I have failed to secure the future for my grandchildren and their future."

Papua New Guinea played a key role in breaking the deadlock at the Bali negotiations in 2007, when it told the USA to either commit or to stand aside. Their negotiator said in the final Copenhagen plenary "In the final analysis, we left our leaders without anything of substance to carry forward. For this reason, we support this document despite its flaws. We must identify that many of the flaws are due to us as G77; many annex 1 nations were willing to make strong commitments and yet several G77 nations were the ones who struck their flaws. Many G77 countries sent only public servants who struck much of the substance out of this document. We must move forward. The world must move forward."

To be accepted as an official UN agreement all 193 nations at the talks need to endorse the deal.

Civil Society Response

Bill McKibben, American environmentalist and founder of 350.org, said that President Obama had wrecked the UN and the planet: "This is a declaration that small and poor countries don't matter, that international civil society doesn't matter, and that serious limits on carbon don't matter. The president has wrecked the UN and he's wrecked the possibility of a tough plan to control global warming. It may get Obama a reputation as a tough American leader, but it's at the expense of everything progressives have held dear. 189 countries have been left powerless, and the foxes now guard the carbon henhouse without any oversight."

A couple of hundred people flash rallied at 1am outside the Bella Centre with banners saying "Climate Shame" and chanting "climate Justice Now", "World wants Climate Justice, U.S. Climate Shame". Watch a Youtube video including an interview with Bill McKibben where he accuses Barack Obama and China and India selling out the planet's climate and the United Nations.

Jeremy Hobbs, Executive Director of Oxfam International described the deal as a triumph of spin over substance : "This agreement barely papers over the huge differences between countries which have plagued these talks for two years. It recognizes the need to keep warming below 2 degrees but does not commit to do so. It kicks back the big decisions on emissions cuts and fudges the issue of climate cash."

"Millions of people around the world do not want to see their hopes for a fair, binding and ambitious deal die in Copenhagen. Leaders need to get back round the table in early 2010 and take the hard decisions they copped out of in Copenhagen." he said.

Bolivia's ambassador to the UN, Pablo Solon angrily denounced the released text of the agreement, "This is completely unacceptable. How can it be that 25 to 30 nations cook up an agreement that excludes the majority of more than 190 nations. We have been negotiating for months on one of the gravest crises of our age, and yet our voice counts for nothing? If this is how world agreements will now be agreed, then it makes a nonsense of the UN and multilateralism."

At about 2:15am, while discussions continued inside the Bella Centre in Copenhagen, Pablo Solon, went out to address the demonstrators holding a vigil at the main entrance. "From the substantive part, we know, we don't have the final text, but they have approved that it will be two degrees (Celsius) - the goal. And we don't accept that. Why we don't accept because that means that several islands are going to disappear. Our glaciers in the mountains are going to disappear. Africa is going to be cooked. We are approaching a situation where we cannot guarantee that we are going to be able to save whole humanity. Maybe some millions are going to die because of the decision that tonight is being taken and this is not discussed." he said.

To cheers he told the crowd that "For us, the most important thing here is that Copenhagen was a success. Not here. Outside (cheers). Because there has been a lot of awareness, a lot of conscience, and now we have to build a very big movement. Things are not going to change in the negotiation if we don't have a strong social movement, a strong civil society mobilise in the street." (Andy Bodycombe, Bolivian Statement Outside Bella Centre)

Kassie Siegel, director of the Climate Law Institute at the Center for Biological Diversity, also identified Copenhagen as a turning point with the birth the birth of a diverse global movement for climate justice: "The people of the United States voted for President Obama based on his promise of change and hope. But the only change today's agreement brings is a greater risk of dangerous climate change. And the only hope that flows from Copenhagen stems not from the president's hollow pronouncements but from the birth of a diverse global movement demanding real solutions and climate justice -- demands made with a collective voice growing loud enough that in short order politicians will no longer be able to ignore it." she said.

Friends of the Earth were one of the NGOs excluded from observing the conference in its final days, with all their credentials suspended by the UN with no satisfactory reason given.

Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth U.S said "The blame for the failure to achieve a real deal lies squarely on the rich countries whose pollution has caused the climate crisis -- especially the United States. Rich countries refused to budge from the grossly inadequate emissions reduction proposals they brought to Copenhagen, and they failed to put sufficient money on the table so that poor countries that did not cause this crisis have the capacity to cope with it."

The failure of Copenhagen is a wake up call for those who care about the future Erich Pica said: "It is a call to action. Corporate polluters and other special interests have such overwhelming influence that rich country governments are willing to agree only to fig leaf solutions. This is unacceptable, and it must change. Fortunately, while the cost of solving the climate crisis rises each day we fail to act, the crisis remains one that can largely be averted. It is up to the citizens of the world -- especially citizens of the United States, which has so impeded progress -- to mobilize and ensure that true solutions carry the day. I firmly believe that together, we can still achieve a politics in which climate justice prevails."

Carl Pope, Sierra Club Executive Director called Copenhagen but a first step with much more work needed for a fair, binding, and ambitious climate deal. He identified the US Senate and its obstruction as one reason preventing President Obama from taking the necessary leadership on this issue: "President Obama and the rest of the world paid a steep price here in Copenhagen because of obstructionism in the United States Senate. That a deal was reached at all is testament to President Obama's leadership--all the more remarkable because of the very weak hand he was dealt because of the Senate's failure to pass domestic clean energy and climate legislation. Now that the rest of the world--including countries like China and India--has made clear that it is willing to take action, the Senate must pass domestic legislation as soon as possible. America and the world can no longer be held hostage to petty politics and obstructionism."

The climate deniers were also in Copenhagen, and while their lobbyists still have tremendous financial resources and access to politicians, the science of climate change is now overwhelmingly accepted by most nations and most politicians. Members of the Youth Climate Movement succeeded in crashing a climate denier live webcast.

"What was clear over the past two weeks is that there is no argument over the science of global warming or the urgency with which we must act. A parade of developed and developing counties alike made crystal clear that they would implement their national plans to tackle global warming and build the clean energy economy not because they were required to do so, but because it was simply in their own national interest to do so." said Carl Pope.

Scientists Respond

Scientists also responded to the failure to set ambitious emission targets that matched with the the science. "Continued failure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions commits the World to metres of sea-level rise, with severe consequences for many millions of people and the natural environment." said Dr John Church, Principle Research Scientist in Australia's CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research and Leader of the Sea Level Rise Program at the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystem Cooperative Research Centre.

"A brave face on total failure. This is a triumph for the fossil fuel lobby." said Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, Director of the Centre for Marine Studies at the University of Queensland and attended the climate negotiations and gave presentations on climate impact on marine biodiversity.

Professor Tim Flannery, Chairman of the Copenhagen Climate Council and Macquarie University's Division of Environmental and Life Sciences was more postive than others saying the agreement is good but not perfect: "We've made a huge advance at this meeting on a number of fronts, one being those pledged emissions, another being the funding we've now got for adaptation and mitigation in developing countries. The third is the REDD negotiations, the world's efforts to protect the tropical rainforests and that seems to be going very well indeed."

Dr Jim Salinger, climate scientist and honorary researcher University of Auckland writing from the Cook Islands said: "I welcome the news that the big players: USA, China, India, Brazil and South Africa have committed to limit temperature increases to 2 degrees C. It is essential that all countries sign on to effective emissions reductions targets of greenhouse gases by 40% at 2020 and 80% by 2080 to prevent disruptive climate change and sea level rise later this century that so threaten peoples such as those in the tropical Pacific."

Dr Andy Reisinger, Senior Research Fellow - New Zealand Climate Change Research Institute, Victoria University of Wellington, called the agreement a crucial breakthrough as it provides verifiable emissions reductions targets by most of the world's largest emitters. He qualified this support saying "The devil is in the details though. It is worrying that even those countries that brokered the deal have admitted that the specific emissions targets will not be stringent enough to reach their stated long-term goal, which is to limit global average temperature increases to no more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels. We will have to wait until the final numbers are on table to see how far the actual emissions targets fall short of that ultimate goal, and what amount of warming we might expect more realistically once the dust and celebratory rhetoric has settled."

Professor Suzi Kerr, Visiting Professor, Stanford University, Department of Economics, Senior Fellow, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research said "The agreement on a transparent monitoring mechanism is a relief and a major step forward with respect to some key developing countries."

Global Movement

The Copenhagen climate negotiations have sparked a global justice movement on climate. Over Thirteen million signatures were collected on a global petition for an ambitious fair and binding treaty. Hundreds of thousands attended vigils, marched in the streets of Copenhagen, Melbourne or took direct action on the Streets of the United States.

The Science of climate change is clear on the impacts we face. The current emission reduction national proposals as of Dec 19, will result in a 3.9 degrees Centigrade of temperature rise above pre-industrial levels according to the Climate Interactive Scoreboard.

The Climate Crisis will deepen as more scientific studies are published. A new study on Sea Level was published in the Dec. 17 issue of Nature. Professor Michael Oppenheimer, from Princeton University said about the study that "According to the analysis, an additional 2 degrees of global warming could commit the planet to 6 to 9 meters (20 to 30 feet) of long-term sea level rise. This rise would inundate low-lying coastal areas where hundreds of millions of people now reside. It would permanently submerge New Orleans and other parts of southern Louisiana, much of southern Florida and other parts of the U.S. East Coast, much of Bangladesh, and most of the Netherlands, unless unprecedented and expensive coastal protection were undertaken."

While National leaders have not shown the necessary leadership on emssion reduction targets many local and regional Governments are taking their own actions independent of national Governments.

The Climate Justice Movement has achieved much in a short time and needs to continue to pressure national Governments to take decisive action on carbon emissions and for policies that avoid Climate Colonialism

Sources

Friday, December 18, 2009

Japan: 15 billion dollars in climate aid

Source: COP 15 Official Website
Date: 16th December 2009

Japanese pledge outbids the EU's funding for short-term climate aid in developing countries.

Japan pledges a total of 15 billion US dollars for climate aid for developing countries up to 2012, Japan's delegation announced at the UN climate conference late Wednesday. Of the 15 billion dollars, 11 billion dollars will be public money, according to a press release from the delegation.

The Japanese pledge is more generous than EU’s promise to fund 7.2 billion euro (9.39 billion dollars) for the same purposes over the next three years.

The Japanese funding is given on the condition that a successful political accord is achieved at the climate conference in Copenhagen.

“Upon the establishment of a new framework, Japan will with this assistance support a broad range of developing countries which are taking measures of mitigation, as well as those which are vulnerable to the negative impacts of climate change,” the press release states.

Thursday, December 17, 2009

SEYCHELLES PRESIDENT APPEALS FOR SMALL ISLANDS' RIGHT TO EXIST

Seychelles President James Michel has made a powerful appeal to world leaders for the protection of the human right of small island states to exist, at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen Denmark.

“Like the leaders of other small island states, I am not here to celebrate the limited progress, but to speak out once again, as we have always done, of our fight for survival, our human right to exist. We are here, to fight for a deal based on equality and fairness,” said President Michel in his address.

The President said that the current situation in the negotiation process is not satisfactory and that without legally binding and just solution countries around the world will not take action on climate change, or that action would be limited.

He said that the present situation is in effect a ‘rich man’s deal’ which will only reinforce existing inequalities between developed and developing countries.

“A perfumed declaration offers little hope to the farmer, the fisherman, the villagers and coastal populations directly affected already. An insubstantial declaration also will not safeguard the riches some have amassed in the long run. We need an agreement to save our common future.”

The President pointed out that the Small Island Developing States and Least Developed Countries as well as African countries affected by drought and desertification are the ones most affected by climate change and yet they are the least guilty of causing it.

“Today we must listen to the voice of reason, the voice of realism. We are here because we know that climate change is already with us. It is already threatening the existence of humanity....History will judge us either as courageous leaders who took measures to save humanity or as politicians who abdicated our responsibilities and brought about immense suffering and hardship.”

Amid the doubts expressed by country and group negotiators at the Copenhagen conference, President James Michel asked world leaders to reconsider the importance of this event for future generations and push forward for a resolution to the impasse.

“In Copenhagen 2009, the fate of our planet is being decided- either to let it live, or let it die an agonizing death. We must commit to a sustainable deal for the world. It is a choice we make for the future of humanity. Let us save humanity together.”

Seychelles is one of the smallest producers of emissions in the world with over 50% of its land mass declared as nature reserves. In 2007 President Michel launched the Sea Level Rise Foundation. Seychelles is aiming to be climate neutral by 2020, with investment in renewable energy as well as energy saving technology

Seychelles launched its climate change strategy at this conference, please see the document attached.

Sea level rise may be even more urgent than previously thought

From: DNAIndia

London: A new study has suggested that as a result of global warming, sea level rise may be even more urgent than previously thought.

According to a report in Nature News, Robert Kopp, a palaeoclimatologist at Princeton University in New Jersey, and his colleagues examined sea level rise during the most recent previous interglacial stage, about 125,000 years ago.

It was a time when the climate was similar to that predicted for our future, with average polar temperatures about 3-5 degrees Celsius warmer than now.

Other studies have looked at this era, but most focused on sea level changes in only a few locales and local changes may not fully reflect global changes.

Sea level can rise, for example, if the land is subsiding.

It can also be affected by changes in the mass distribution of Earth. For example, according to Kopp, ice-age glaciers have enough gravity to pull water slightly polewards.

When the glaciers melt, water moves back towards the Equator.

To adjust for such effects, Kopp's team compiled sea-level data from over 30 sites across the globe.

"We could go to a lot of different places and look at coral reefs or intertidal sediments or beaches that are now stranded above sea level, and build a reasonably large database of sea-level indicators," said Kopp.

The team reports that the sea probably rose about 6.6-9.4 m above present-day levels during the previous period between ice ages.

When it was at roughly its present level, the average rate of rise was probably 56-92 cm a century.

"That is faster than the current rate of sea level rise by a factor of about two or three," Kopp said, warning that if the poles warm as expected, a similar acceleration in sea-level rise might occur in future.

According to Peter Clark, a geologist at Oregon State University in Corvallis, if the world warms up to levels comparable to those 125,000 years ago, "we can expect a large fraction of the Greenland ice sheet and some part of the Antarctic ice sheet, mostly likely West Antarctica, to melt. That's clearly in sight with where we're heading."

Two Days and Counting

Source: New York Times

16th December 2009

Most of the news from Copenhagen is grim. With only two days left to go, negotiations for a new climate treaty were stumbling toward stalemate. We hope President Obama and other leaders will realize how much is at stake and pull off a last-minute breakthrough.

The talks appear to have produced at least one positive development: a tentative agreement under which rich countries would pay poorer countries to save the world’s rain forests. If rich countries agree to mandatory caps on emissions — still a big if — they would be able to use these payments to offset their own emissions while they make the transition to cleaner energy sources.

That would be a good deal for both rich and poor countries and an even better deal for the planet. Deforestation accounts for nearly one-fifth of the world’s carbon-dioxide emissions — about the same as China’s and America’s and more than the emissions generated by all the world’s cars, trucks, buses and airplanes.

Negotiators need to build on this progress to produce, at the very least, an interim political consensus setting the stage for a more detailed, comprehensive and legally binding agreement next year.

As of Wednesday, the talks were deeply divided over broad emissions targets and how much rich countries should pay poor countries to help them meet these targets. There are also differences over how to verify whether nations are living up to their obligations.

The idea of having rich nations pay poorer nations not to destroy their forests was floated in the Kyoto talks in 1996 and shot down by environmental groups who argued that it would allow rich countries to buy their way out of their obligations. This was a colossal blunder for which the world has been paying ever since.

Roughly 30 million acres of rain forest disappear every year, releasing huge quantities of carbon dioxide stored in the trees and exacting collateral damage in decreased water quality and impoverished biodiversity.

A deforestation agreement in Copenhagen would dovetail neatly with climate legislation passed by the House and by the Senate’s environment committee.

Under both bills, companies that cannot meet their pollution limits could win credit for investing in carbon-reduction programs abroad — including efforts to stop deforestation. That could generate as much as $12 billion in private investment. The House bill would also set aside an estimated $3 billion in direct payments to be funneled to poor countries; the Obama administration announced Wednesday that it would provide a minimum of $1 billion for that purpose over three years.

Contributions just from America would go a long way toward meeting the $40 billion a year that some experts think will be necessary to help poor countries monitor and police their forests — and to compensate their citizens for the lost income from logging, ranching and farming if they agree to leave their forests intact.

A climate bill from Congress is no more a sure thing than a new global agreement. The fact that leaders everywhere are at last facing up to the destructiveness of deforestation is reassuring. But it’s hardly enough.

Saturday, December 12, 2009

Copenhagen climate summit releases draft final text

By Richard Black
Environment correspondent, BBC News website, Copenhagen

Climate conference hall, Copenhagen (Image: AP)

Developing nations want rich nations to make deeper emission cuts

Rich countries are being asked to raise their pledges on tackling climate change under a draft text of a possible final deal at the Copenhagen summit.

Documents prepared by the summit's chairmen call on developed nations to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 25-45% from 1990 levels by 2020.

Analyses suggest that current pledges add up to about 18%.

The document leaves open the exact target for limiting temperature rise, amid disputes between various blocs.

Small island states and poorer nations of Africa and Latin America have called for the document to endorse the target of keeping the temperature rise since pre-industrial times below 1.5C (2.7F).

This is below the figure of 2C (3.6F), which was endorsed by the G8 and major developing economies in July, and implies the need for drastic emission cuts.

An analysis by the UK Met Office, released at this meeting, showed that meeting 1.5C would be "almost impossible" to meet without implementing measures to take carbon dioxide out of the air.

The temperature figures are listed as alternatives in the draft documents.

Work in progress

The texts are a long way short of constituting a final outcome document, as they leave open some of the most difficult points of the negotiations so far, including the legal form of any new agreement.

Gordon Brown (left) and Nicolas Sarkozy (Getty Images)

A pledge by EU leaders could boost chances of a deal in Copenhagen

EU makes 7bn euro climate pledge

However, in a major concession to developing countries, it spells out that pledges for further reductions for developed countries inside the Kyoto Protocol - all except the US - will be managed under the protocol.

Developed countries would prefer an entirely new agreement.

The draft also leaves open the scale of financing to assist developing countries to curb emissions growth and to protect themselves against climate impacts.

Developing countries are demanding far more than richer countries currently believe is necessary, and are likely to demand a lot more clarity on the issue.

Small island states are particularly concerned about the need for firm, predictable adaptation funding.

They also want any final agreement to set a target year for when global emissions should peak and begin to fall - a concept that is presently absent from the draft.

At a European Council meeting in Brussels, EU leaders have agreed to pay 7.2bn euros ($10.6bn; £6.5bn) over the next three years to help developing nations adapt to climate change - a figure described by delegates from small island states and the Least Developed Countries bloc (LDCs) as "inadequate".

The temperature target is the biggest unresolved item in the texts.

But controversy is also likely over proposals to allow money from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to be used for nuclear power.

CDM funds are raised through levies on carbon trading, and are designed to help lower emissions at the lowest possible cost while assisting economic development in poor countries.

Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk

The Sea Level Rise Foundation