Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
World Must Fix Climate In Less Than 10 Years: UN
BRASILIA - Unless the international community agrees to cut carbon emissions by half over the next generation, climate change is likely to cause large-scale human and economic setbacks and irreversible ecological catastrophes, a United Nations report says on Tuesday.The U.N. Human Development Report issues one of the strongest warnings yet of the lasting impact of climate change on living standards and a strong call for urgent collective action.
"We could be on the verge of seeing human development reverse for the first time in 30 years," Kevin Watkins, lead author of the report, told Reuters.
The report, to be presented in Brasilia on Tuesday, sets targets and a road map to reduce carbon emissions before a U.N. climate summit next month in Bali, Indonesia.
Emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere help trap heat and lead to global warming.
"The message for Bali is the world cannot afford to wait, it has less than a decade to change course," said Watkins, a senior research fellow at Britain's Oxford University.
Dangerous climate change will be unavoidable if in the next 15 years emissions follow the same trend as the past 15 years, the report says.
To avoid catastrophic impact, the rise in global temperature must be limited to 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius). But carbon emissions from cars, power plants and deforestation in Brazil, Indonesia and elsewhere, are twice the level needed to meet that target, the U.N. authors say.
Climate change threatens to condemn millions of people to poverty, the UNDP says. Climate disasters between 2000 and 2004 affected 262 million people, 98 percent of them in the developing world. The poor are often forced to sell productive assets or save on food, health, and education, creating "life-long cycles of disadvantage."
A temperature rise of between 5.4 and 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit (3 and 4 degrees Celsius) would displace 340 million people through flooding, droughts would diminish farm output, and retreating glaciers would cut off drinking water from as many as 1.8 billion people, the report says.
In Kenya, children 5 or younger are 50 percent more likely to be malnourished if they were born during a drought year, affecting their life-long health and productivity.
Countries have the technical ability and financial resources but lack the political will to act, the report says. It singles out the United States and Australia as the only major Western economies not to sign the Kyoto Protocol, an agreement signed by 172 countries to reduce emissions. It expires in 2012.
Ethiopia emits 0.1 metric tons of carbon dioxide per capita, compared to 20 metric tons in Canada. U.S. per capita emissions are over 15 times those of India's.
PROPOSED ROAD MAP
The world needs to spend 1.6 percent of global economic output annually through 2030 to stabilize the carbon stock and meet the 3.6-degree Fahrenheit temperature target. Rich countries, the biggest carbon emitters, should lead the way and cut emissions at least 30 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050. Developing nations should cut emissions 20 percent by 2050, the UNDP says.
"When people in an American city turn on their air-conditioning or people in Europe drive their cars, their actions have consequences ... linking them to rural communities in Bangladesh, farmers in Ethiopia and slum dwellers in Haiti," the report says.
The UNDP recommends a series of measures including improved energy efficiency for appliances and cars, taxes or caps on emissions, and the ability to trade allowances to emit more. It said an experimental technology to store carbon emissions underground was promising for the coal industry, and suggested technology transfer to coal-dependent developing countries like China.
An international fund should invest between $25 billion and $50 billion annually in low-carbon energy in developing countries.
Asked whether the report was alarmist, Watkins said it was based on science and evidence: "I defy anybody to speak to the victims of droughts and floods, like we did, and challenge our conclusions on the long-term impact of climate disasters."
(Editing by Mohammad Zargham)
© 2007 Reuters

93 Comments so far
Show AllLets just tell it like it is and see what humanity is capable of.
Peace,
Ken Hausle
Hey, apparently I have been correct about something. One out of ten ain't bad.
I know what i am trying to do and i am working on it. It is more than just talking, but if we can talk instead of "fight" than that is a first step.
Peace is what we need.
Peace,
Ken Hausle
The world economy is a capitalist economy that can stay afloat only by continual expansion, so there is not a chance on earth that global carbon emissions can be cut 1/2 as needed. We are in big trouble because the world is nowhere ready to deal with this crisis with what is needed.
Oh, they'll be cut by these amounts in about this time frame, bet on it. The question is, will we choose how to do the cutting or will it be forced on us, and the cuts come from local to global collapse?
The economy can dominate the ecology only as long as the ecology keeps functioning. Since externialities like fresh water, air, arable soil, etc are not in the economy, as soon as these stop being free the economic assumptions also collapse and then it's a question of whether our political and social structures can change as quickly as our environment. That, I would not like to bet on.
Craig
There is most definitely a "chance on earth". You do not know what you are talking about. You don't know the future so why are you trying to dismiss some hopeful ideas. Some of these ideas are only going to happen if folks start recognizing the possibilities instead of just griping about what is wrong.
Lets just drop the capitalist economy. There that is a chance.
Peace,
Ken Hausle
I just bought a Lotto ticket, ___ I have a 'chance'. There is also a "chance" Bush will admit he was wrong about Iraq and resign.
Ten years is a very brief time period, one day our kids are ten years old, and before we know it, they are driving our cars, pregnant, or marrying their high school math teacher and are graduate nuclear scientists.
KEM PATRICK - that was the best laugh i've had in awhile.
Of course, when things get "nuclear" a lot can happen in 10 years.
Peace,
Ken Hausle
Charlotte, NC
son of a navy commander....
Hi Ken, how ya doin? When the qualified scientists combine the words dramatic, irreversable and catastrophic, I have their rapt attention.
Kem - I just want you to know, that i have appreciated all your input in these many conversations.
The times are upon us. Don't you think?
Me, as a younger fella, i'm going to try to start my own business again. Anyhow, kem - Peace.
Ken Hausle
Charlotte, NC
There are so many benefits from using alternatives to fossil fuels and any one of them is a good enough reason to do so. I think that people are starting to realize this and are looking for leadership in themselves to make this happen.
A simple change has to happen first in the heads of folks that have lost the connection to the "Mother" Earth! Make the "Mother" sacred once again and we may have a chance. And this is not about male female either, rather our "Mother" Earth and all her children and what is really sacred. Maybe we should worship "Life" rather than some long dead male figure, seems to make more sense. And this coming from a male.........
The last two commentors were spot on. Of course as noted, our world leaders have ten years, maybe less, some highly respected scientists fear we have already passed the point of no return.
but the corporatists want to be able to charge you for your ration of potable water, breathable air and rent/mortgage under the UV shield dome. can't afford it? too bad. out into the desert with you.
Been watching to many movies my friend, no-one gets out of this one. There will be a new world order, you can bet on that, with or without us.
The biosphere in Arizona was a flop. We're all gonna die, ___ eat drink and feel Merry.
.
.
.
BTW, Merry is a Playboy centerfold.
To paraphrase another era in our history, "The People fiddled while Earth burned."
Here's the problem with this 10 year horizon. Measured the way the people with the power count these things, that's 40 fiscal quarters. Says the average CEO, "That is a really long time to raise my earnings per share, get my options fully vested, and then, bang, a nine figure golden handshake when I walk out the door. I'll have enough money that I could air condition Hell, let alone my three houses."
And THAT dear boys and girls was the tipping point we have been warned about. Ten years is the flick of an eye in both biological and geological time.
The Acrtic IS melting. So is the Antarctic. Tropical storms ARE increasing in number and severity. Weather patterns are shifting. The Gulf Stream is slowing and cooling.
And there isn't a damn thing we can do but try to minimise the damage to human civilization. We are standing in the path of a runaway multi-billion ton heat engine.
Now is the time to shut down the failed experiment of corporatisation, of consumer culture, and go back to living in a small scale, close to the land. Keep those technologies absolutely vital to human health, ditch the rest.
Make copies of truely vital information and laminate them, so our decendants will not have to re-discover simple things all over again.
Good luck people.
Only three VINLANDER? A piker of a CEO.
Air condition Hell? I dunno, but Tammy Faye and Jim baker had an air conditioned $8,000 dog house. Cheney is their type.
If it said we had 100 years we would still be doomed. The worst part is when the polar bears are sinking to the bottom of the ocean and the penguins burst into fire balls at the south pole, people will still be denying global warming. Sigh...
Did you know that all polar bears are left pawed? The solitary males also often have an arctic fox for a travelling companion.
Oops ___ different subject there.
All this hopelessness is not only tiresome, but at some "point" it becomes self-fulfilling. If you are hopeless, why don't you just keep it to yourself. But if you must share your despair, it makes me think you are not really hopeless.
Anyhow, some of us want to find solutions and in my humble opinion, the incredible amount of energy that can be unleashed "nuclearly" can go both ways. We have already witnessed the chaotic way. There is an orderly way where things can change rapidly. Don't you think?
Peace,
Ken Hausle
imagine the clean power generated if…
windmills lined the median strip of every interstate highway
all the area covered by suburbia were covered with solar panels instead
coastal cities floated a few dozen simple mechanical tidal generators
unfortunately the corporate coal & oil lobby will never, ever allow it
what a shame
stinger_28 - yes so it has been.
BUT, maybe it can change. Maybe.
That is my hope and hope is free for all.
Peace
As I have mentioned before on this site, the solution is available right now. It would cost very little up front and create an economic boom a la the New Deal.
The crisis needs to be tackled with a broad portfolio: energy conservation, better gas mileage, gas/carbon/energy taxation, increased public transport, better city planning, wind power, solar power, climate treaties, geothermal, biofuels, carbon sequestration and, yes, some nuclear power. If we implement all these strategies, the planet survives.
The Apollo Alliance has studied this in detail, and has a detailed plan of how to do it: http://www.apolloalliance.org/ Yes, we're up against Big Oil and the military machine, but this can be done. We have the technology!
I have reduced my driving by 90 percent by getting a new job close to my home and by using the subway to commute to work.
I take lights off whenever I am not using them, especially when I leave my house.
I hardly buy bottled water anymore because of the use of plastic bottles that are made from petroleum.
So much more can be done, especially by our government and corporations.
Hey, Stinger_28, you've been reading my mind! Particularly "coastal cities float a few dozen simple mechanical tidal generators..." working models of which have already been deployed off the English coast. This is a real sleeper in the energy field. As is geothermal, using heat exchangers. In fact, we already HAVE all the technology we need to stop burning fossil fuels.
And bidelo, thanks for mentioning the Apollo Alliance. It amazes me that this group, which has had detailed plans on alternative energy for years now, seems to be unknown to most Commondreams readers. Hope they follow your link.
Lastly, know why I'm optimistic that this "revolution" will be done? Because there's money to be made. Pick up today's paper and there's bound to be an article about some corporation getting "green." Even though the bucks look plentiful in coal/oil/gas right now, those CEOs have already seen the handwriting on the wall.
I've heard it said that we will run out of uranium within 50 years at current usage. Now I understand that not nearly as much effort has been spent looking for uranium than has been spent looking for oil. But lets say they're wrong and we have 1000 years of usable uranium. At current usage, so we need to build 20 times more reactors across the world so we can obtain an appreciable amout of power from nukes. So we're back to 50 years agian. Who knows, maybe there really is an unlimited supply that will last until the end of time. We can't figure out how to safely store the nuclear trash we have now so that doesn't sound like such a very good idea.
If we can figure out how to make fusion work, we could probably figure out how to get rid of that nuke trash.
But none of it really matters, in the long run we're gone. Unless you believe in heaven or nirvana, if we don't kill ourselves off the sun will bake us when it's fuel starts to run low.
It would be so much nicer to say that we lasted until the sun went red giant, but then again, there won't be anyone around to say how stupid we were.
nondescript - what can be said about u after you say "in the long run we're gone"? I'd say you are nondescript.
You know just the other day i was talking with someone in america and they said something about IQ. I said i would much rather have love than IQ.
Stupidity is relative.
Peace is not.
Peace,
Ken Hausle
Did anyone see any mention of the planet being overpopulated with the human species. If every one would realize that overpopulation is causing all these adverse effects and that we could really get close to the 10 year goal if we would just quit having children for 10 years. Along with natural deaths that would probably get close. But wait that would be to easy. Besides all your investments in housing and stocks would probably become pretty near worthless. On second thought lets just keep pretending that technology is going to save our asses and keep on consuming and expanding.
Laffingbear: Watch the film 'Children of Men' for a good idea of what the general population would go through if there was an enforced ban on human births. Maybe Larry Niven was right when he predicted UN peacecorps conducting 'Mother Hunts' of illegal preganancies that violated population control measures...
The gravest danger is that some environmentalist Einstein will develop environmentalist theories and science to such an extent, someone will be able to make an environmentalist weapon of war out of what has been learned.
Knowledge is a dangerous thing.
It is the science that is always the danger.
Scientists build knowledge sets.
Humanity driven by human nature uses these knowledge sets to wage "moral" wars. Does that ring a bell, Dinga-Ling?
And environmentalists are not scienitific moral monks. These environmental scientists are not the "good guys".
Environmental scientists are right now tinkering and building a knowledge base in a science that is EXACTLY about the destruction of the planet, your planet, the one and only planet upon which human life is known to exist, or likely to exist.
Given history, any sane person would say, "Don't go there."
Science is witchcraft.
Listen up all you stinkin' believers in the religion of science!
There are no empirical messiahs.
StarTrek is a fictional story. You are not going anywhere.
Humanity's only moral hope is lassoing all these lying, "amoral" scientists who calim they have all the answers, and who immorally want to make our lives so much better, but who nonetheless universally have ALWAYS MADE LIFE MUCH, MUCH WORSE.
Don Robertson, The American Philosopher
Racheal Carson was a scientist, Jacques Costeau was a scientist, George Washington Carver was a scientist, Nspire who blogs here is a scientist, are and were they witches too?
We are all going somewhere Don, where of course is the great mystery.
Don Robertson - this is just your opinion.
The People will choose.
Peace,
Ken Hausle
Charlotte, NC
Hey Ike, thanks for your mention, but i can't read all your capital BS.
It is not necessary to scream, I have a hearing aid. I am delighted to know, that my opinions, based upon scientific accounts of people who have spent ther entire adult lives studying the problem, are wrong.
~We have nothing to fear but idiots themselves~. ___ By Snakeshit.
Thank you for offering a diverse and argumentative opinion, in such a polite manner IKE.
Hmmmm, ten years. That's a dem presidency, sabatoged by the '63 junta, followed by two terms of scorched earth repubican presidents, and I do mean, scorched earth... Think this country has the moral courage to face the biggest challenge facing the human race since the rise of the axis powers? When the powers that be - cannot depart from their GROWTH IS GOOD paradigm?
I weep for my grand daughter.
jjpeter - i weep for my grandchildren that are not even born yet, but nonetheless, i am going to hold onto hope.
Peace, and signing out for the evening:
Ken Hausle
BIRD FLU -- There. I said it. That is the solution to global warming. Cut the population in half. If human's can't manage themselves, nature will do it for them.
When I wrote this, I was thinking of Iraq. Then I got to thinking about the world in general. Now I am not so sure about even that.
---------------------------------------
It Will Go On
The red, setting sun, casts long shadows of the rocks and hills.
When the guns are silent and the napalm has burned out,
The desert still exists, silent save for the susurration of the sand
Blown by the winds, slowly covering the wounds of war.
Forgotten monuments again becoming homes and shelter.
Small creatures creep out in the gathering stillness
To carry on their own lives, eating and being eaten
In the long dance that predates man and will continue long after.
As the climates change, volcanoes and tsunamis rend the land and shore,
With the melting of the ice the seas rise; temperate zones become steppes
Encased in permafrost. Man's vaunted civilization may crumble away.
Man, himself, may run crying into the limbo that holds the dinosaurs.
The desert, silent save for the susurration of the sand, will still exist.
The red, setting sun, will cast long shadows of the rocks and hills.
Small creatures will creep out in the gathering stillness
To carry on their own lives, eating and being eaten as they always have...
Steve Osborn
21 November 2005
---------------------------------------
As I've said before, it may be that the forgotten footprints and piles of junk on the moon may simply be our mark to whatever may set foot there in the far future, saying "Kilroy was here."
10 years is a scare tactic. The north ocean's ice cap is as good as gone, and the West Antarctic ice cap could easily fall apart just like the Larsen Ice Shelf did in a 3 week period.
Laffingbear wrote at 4:04PM about our ceasing to breed as a form of emergency climate repair. No doubt that would help in the near term.
But even better, think of it as the most radical form of consumer boycott.
Gee, I took the time to go back and read all of the posts here, a very interesting read too, lots of good comments. What ones were the ones where I was giving mis-information on, could you be a bit more specific there IKE KAY?
For example, I got that polar bear info from a well written book about polar bears, which was written by a man who studied them for several years. And those scientists I mentioned were real people who were wonderful scientists. Then what I wrote about the Bakers is accurate. On the actual subject matter, it is clear that most here agree with me and Ken. Why are you picking on us? Do we have bad breath or something?
If you have a different opinion on the subject, just write it, don't get personel, unless someone attacks you for no good reason. This is a forum to learn from one another, not to be an ignorant prick.
safiyyah November 27th, 2007 12:42 pm :'The world economy is a capitalist economy that can stay afloat only by continual expansion, so there is not a chance o earth that global carbon missions can be cut 1/2 as needed.'
So true. Without this carbon and nitrogen producing 'economic growth', our population growth (from 3 billion in the 1960s to 6 billion now) cannot be sustained.
Perhaps we should come at this problem from the opposite direction: lower population growth so that we can afford to lower economic growth. The stone cold fact is, if we do not do it by family planning, Nature will do it for us by funeral planning.
No more sex, everyone celebate.
10 years? Phew...I was afraid that Bush's 'forever' war would never end. I wonder what all our bible thumpers will do after they have destroyed the Earth. As I recall that Jewish prophet, hay Zeus, said that the 'kingdom of heaven' is on the Earth but our 'christians' can't see it.
Well - this convinces me about my preferred ticket for 2008 - Gore/Kucinich. May be our only hope (and a slim one at that).
Anyone else been having trouble logging in today?
One way I personally help young people grow up with a love of the earth is by being a scoutmaster.
I lead hikes on city trails. I lead overnighters. I help boys turn into competent outdoorsmen.
Let me recommend renewed vigor in volunteering in youth groups like scouts, 4H, etc. that stimulate a love of nature.
http://www.unconventionalideas.com
Lester Brown, whom some call the father of the environmental movement, has written a book which describes how we have all the technological and financial instruments that we need, and all the money required, to reduce our carbon emissions on the planet to a sustainable level. It is a wonderful resource for those who are looking for constructive hope in the face of these daunting climate change realities. The current edition is called Plan B 2.0, but Plan B 3.0, the latest edition, will be coming out in January and can be pre-ordered now. It was a wonderful education for a layperson such as myself, and I recommend it.