It was a continuation of the theme that emerged on Monday, when world leaders, including Mohamed Nasheed, the president of the Maldives, criticised the Copenhagen accord for its lack of ambition. That meeting, held in the Danish capital, was supposed to result in a treaty mapping the way towards a low-carbon world. Instead, the result was a political agreement to limit global warming to a rise of no more than two degrees above average temperatures before the beginning of the industrial era in the 18th century.
Dr bin Fahad said that major polluters such as China and the US, in absolute terms the world’s largest and second-largest emitters of greenhouse gases respectively, needed to do more.
The US has pledged to cut emissions 17 per cent from 2005 levels, rather than lower 1990 levels, the baseline used by the other countries.
China, on the other hand, refused to adhere to emission targets and deadlines, Dr bin Fahad said, and such contradictions make it hard to reach agreement.
Dr Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, agreed with Dr bin Fahad that it was vital to agree on targets soon. Without 2020 targets, he said, “it is absolutely hollow to talk of targets for 2050”.
A key date is January 31, the deadline set by the accord for countries to submit their specific actions and emission reduction targets. An analysis by the International Energy Agency (IEA) shows that the existing pledges will not be enough to ensure the two-degree target is achieved.
Richard Jones, the deputy executive director of the IEA, told the summit that a business-as-usual scenario would result in greenhouse gas concentrations of 1,000 parts per million by the turn of the century, almost three times higher than it is now. Such a level would result in a catastrophic warming of six degrees, he said.
Delegates yesterday suggested that clues to the future of the treaty were to be found in US politics.
“Without some sort of a firm commitment from the United States, there will be no commitment from other countries such as China,” said Richard Stewart, a professor of law at New York University.
Last year, the US Congress passed a climate-change bill detailing emissions reductions, but it has faced stiff opposition in the Senate. Senator Timothy Wirth, the president of the United Nations Foundation, said there were “extremely powerful interests” at work, from large utilities, energy companies and the transport sector, that want to see the bill fail.
“President Obama in Copenhagen made very clear his own deep and personal commitment to the climate issue and the need for the US to lead,” he said. “He now has ahead of him a very important and difficult year.”
More informations:
http://www.worldfutureenergysummit.com/userfiles/wfes__daily_news_day1lr.pdfwww.worldfutureenergysummit.com/userfiles/wfes__daily_news_day1lr.pdf
http://www.worldfutureenergysummit.com/userfiles/wfes__daily_news_day2_lr.pdfwww.worldfutureenergysummit.com/userfiles/wfes__daily_news_day2_lr.pdf
http://www.worldfutureenergysummit.com/userfiles/wfes__daily_news_day3_lr.pdfwww.worldfutureenergysummit.com/userfiles/wfes__daily_news_day3_lr.pdf
http://w1.siemens.com/entry/cc/en/w1.siemens.com/entry/cc/en/
