Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Carbon Emissions Must Peak by 2015: UN Climate Scientist
PARIS - The UN's top climate scientist on Thursday urged a key conference on global warming to set tough mid-term goals and warned carbon emissions had to peak by 2015 to meet a widely-shared vision.
Rajendra Kumar Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), pictured in June 2009, on Thursday urged a key conference on global warming to set tough mid-term goals and warned carbon emissions had to peak by 2015 to meet a widely-shared vision. Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Nobel-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said the talks in Copenhagen in December must focus on 2020, a far more important target than mid-century.
"Strong, urgent and effective action" is needed, Pachauri told a meeting of ministers of the International Energy Agency (IEA) in Paris.
"It is not enough to set any aspirational goal for 2050, it is critically important that we bring about a commitment to reduce emissions effectively by 2020," he said.
Pachauri added that over the last two years he had witnessed "a massive explosion of awareness and therefore willingness to take action" in climate change.
But, he said, the deal in Copenhagen had to be consistent with the findings of scientists, who say greenhouse gases that trap heat from the Sun are already affecting the climate system, and grave potential problems lie ahead.
The Group of Eight (G8) and other countries have endorsed the target of pegging warming to no more than two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial times.
Pachauri said this target "is not without some fairly serious impact."
"If this path of mitigation is to be embarked on, to ensure stabilisation of temperatures at the level that I mentioned (2 C, 3.6 F), then global emissions must peak by 2015," he said.
The December 7-18 Copenhagen talks are taking place under the 192-nation UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
The objective is a treaty that will tackle carbon emissions and their impacts, and encourage a switch to cleaner energy after 2012, when the current Kyoto Protocol pledges expire.
But UN talks have been bogged down by what is largely a divide between rich and poor countries, complicated by the US position.
President Barack Obama is sweeping away many of George W. Bush's legacy climate policies but has been unable to satisfy demands for deep, swift cuts in US carbon emissions.
He also faces a race against the clock to steer cap-and-trade legislation through Congress before the Copenhagen conference opens.
Pachauri told a press conference that it might take until next year for Washington to formulate its commitments on 2020.
"A reasonably good agreement" could emerge in Copenhagen, Pachauri said, adding though that he would not be dismayed by a delay if this provided a better outcome.
"If we are not getting a good agreement, then the global community really has the option of meeting again six months later or three months later or whatever," he said.
"I think we really have to keep at it until we can hammer out an agreement that meets the requirements of what science has clearly placed before us. It means a delay, it means some degree of disappointment all around, but who knows in the end you might get a much better agreement six months later."
15 Comments so far
Show AllA climatologist from Germany has said that the US needs 100% cuts to carbon emissions by 2030.
http://www.alternet.org/environment/143256/without_drastic_co2_cuts_immediately%2C_the_world_faces_a_massive_%27oh_shit%27_moment
But we all know what will happen...
The US will scream and throw a tantrum about how important their economy is, and how they are the leader of the free world, blah, blah, blah. The other countries will say they will not cut unless the US cuts, and in the end...
We all fry.
It's time to stop the half measures.
If the big polluters won't cut back voluntarily, it's time to make them.
Direct action.
It's coming.
This is the problem. Many countries' politicians will scream and throw tantrums. Right now both the U.S. and China are building out coal plants like there's no tomorrow, like the coal industry owns the government. The other governments are sulking about the work needed to be done.
On the business end, we need people of vision. They need various business skills and they need invention skills. Then we need to put together businesses that respond to their communities, to their customers, to their workers and to their inventors. A multinational bottom-line investor corp. is unacceptable.
How about a single proprietorship that sells out? The money is nice and sometimes the proprietor does good with the cash, but then the corporation runs rampant.
We'd be happier with something sustainable in our society, a business that grows jobs and fairness. The business has to look forward, not just pay off the current workers. Perhaps it backs down in a recession but it doesn't die. Oh, and it's not the personal financial playground of uppermost management, whoever they may be. These are the kinds of businesses that will go after global warming.
So, what kind of direct action will get one of those going? It's hard to sit down in the street but harder to build something up.
Do Something About it! Go to www.350.org. Pester, hound and harangue your local, state and federal legislators! Hassle your employer about telecommuting, carpooling and bus passes. Demand that your local building code and Planning Dept allow work/live development, increase density in busy corridors, plus urban/suburban ag, etc.
I know, I know...They won't listen. Maybe not, but I can't face my kids unless I go down shouting.
The main concern in the US seems to be jobs- that pay a "living wage" which means a job that pays enough that you can afford to buy lots of crap you don't need. I think there are plenty of us who would gladly quit our jobs if we didn't have a mortgage hanging over our heads. The "real estate as an investment" idea has backfired completely- that requires a continually growing economy to be true, and a growth economy is what is devastating to the environment as well as to indigenous and poor people everywhere.
I had a professor years ago (1984?) who said he had been on the city council in Cambridge (UK) in the 1970s and they had tried to outlaw selling property for more than what you paid for it. The real estate industry went nuts and that was the end of that. This is why we are all had by the balls- home ownership has gotten so incredibly expensive we owe the bank for the rest of our lives. How can we do anything else but bow down and trudge to our mundane jobs so we can make those payments? Paying rent to a landlord makes more sense, but is still outragously expensive too. Who has energy for direct action? I would be the first in line, but my family is counting on me to help pay the bills and after I work all day (and then do lots of volunteer work on top of it), I just want to veg.
you are right, kate...the whole system is built on top of the violent conquest of, and subsequent leasing of, land...unfortunately, due to the inter-relatedness of many systems, you correctly state that, at this point, it is virtually impossible for the individual to stop participating...but for one way: all individuals together, all around the world...unanimously and simultaneously...
the big Stop, and the big Start...there will be violence, but the only way forward is through...
Global Start Day: September 22, 2012...acoustic, agrarian living...local food and governance...minimal use of shared resources...individual engagement in the providing of one's own sustenance...that gives us 3 years to brainstorm and grow food...let's get those gardens growing!
Just some general advice to anyone who reads this thread. It worked for us. Don't buy any houses at full price. Always look for good deals. Foreclousers, short-sales, relocation properties, fixer uppers etc. Also, always keep the term of the loan as short as possible. Have you ever run a mortgage calculation on how much more you will pay in interest on a 30 year loan compared to a 15 year loan? The difference is staggering. Why give any more money than you have to to the the evil banksters.
We never really looked at a house as an investment to make a killing on. It was always just to end up with a house we could own free and clear to live out our lives in. I followed the advice I laid out above and it worked great for us.
Why not try blending in gasoline with switchgrass instead of corn ? You can reduce dependence on foreign oil and cut back drastically on global warming and still drive an SUV.
Great. Unfortunately Pachauri's answer is more nukes and cancer forever increasing.
The glaring answer is to grow marijuana everywhere for food, fuel, fun and just about everything else that is now done using chemical and radioactive pollutants.
that is right...yes...absolutely...marijuana, the wonder plant and carbon sink...
do good and feel good doing it!
OUR "LEADERS" know that they have to produce some meaningful results in COPENHAGEN because there will soon be definite and scary climate events. Without results to make it look like they have it under control, there will be panic that will threaten chaos and the end of their influence over events.
Maybe their policies will be enough to keep the apple cart right side up.
What a line-up of quite startling ignorance and myopia. Truly mind-boggling; the bright side being that none of you have the cerebral capacity to influence events.
First, the concern over a living wage is people wanting to feed themselves and their children; to provide food and shelter; a crisis faced by America's 20% unemployed, and by the bottom 40% demographic.
In other countries the picture is much the same, with unemployment at 23% in Australia thanks to US control of our government. Meanwhile, self-absorbed and gullible academics actually believing that plant food is a danger to life.
Reality check: Phone NASA and ask what was the hottest year on their records. They will tell you 1934, not 1998. Global temperatures plateaued lower, and are now falling.
And so what? This has been happening for millions of years, with 5 times more CO2 in the atmosphere during the Jurassic. Last year, 31,000 climate scientists condemned AGW as a UN-contrived hoax and since then this number has risen by more thousands. AGW was not science-based, but politically-driven.
The real crisis is the erosion of oxygen, in both the atmosphere and oceans. Then look at exactly who is promoting AGW/ETS, H1N1 vaccines, Codex Alimentarius, and all the wars on this planet. The same global bankers who own the funds of the USFR, the WB, IMF and BIS.
Next reality check... count the number of nations engaged in the Afghanistan/Pakistan war. This clearly is WWIII, yet you are anguishing about a non-existent phenomenom... AGW.
Curious. Although stunning in the scope of its stupidity, not a single typo in the above drivel.
Climate Change is a exponentially looming danger, but it is not a fact. It cannot be the latter unless it has happened. Nevertheless the recent pattern of observations increasingly show it is almost certain and possibly far worse than presently estimated. Given the scale of the threat it takes a certain kind of mind to ignore it.
As to this mind? Well, Mr Tonyran, now, he is a real expert. We can see he knows better! I mean he sure can count--- right up to 31000---and counting---and that is the fact! And he, I mean HE knows! Take that he says!
Is he paid? I do not think so. This means he is a believer with all that entails.
We need to see what this entails. I hope he comes to see this too.
Although it is tiresome, even childish, it has to be dealt with. His pattern of inconsequential drivel is repeated remarkably consistently all over the net. It is associated with psychopathy, as we all are to some degree, but is his extreme psychopathy concerted? Or is it a relatively random mental illness?
It is both. The present US wars have no discernible reason other than a related American desperation. They have indisputably been concerted and suckers always follow. We need to identify and isolate the people at the core. Right now they are most obviously under the American's noses with many of them residing in the Republican Party like mushrooms that are the flower of a rot that stretches throughout the American society and economy.
The world is forced to confront them. America cannot be allowed to get away with this. We must understand that a psychopath does not recant, cannot be trusted. If you do trust them enough to grant them human reason they will as easily pamper you as kill you or have you killed, and in the latter cases will firmly believe, as only the unique self confusion of the psychopathic mind allows, that it is your fault(damn terrorist!).
In the case of global warming the ones given over to the psychopathic way say it is the weather's fault. Scientists clearly stress that it is to do with climate. The psychopaths amongst us have been simply ignoring this as if it has not been said. The psychopaths strenuously say it is the weather and they know and they would never allow Global Warming to happen to you, and 'either you are with us or you are against us'. But that is what psychopaths do. It is their modus vivendi. They always know, and they are very certain. With this very certainty they indeed do fool themselves as they are now.
As Cicero said, 'Consistency is the refuge of fools.'
So it is the climate, not the weather, which is why it is called Climate Change.
America you are in trouble. Your size troubles us all profoundly. Even worse, many of us follow your example and are one with you. But as with the leaders, there are too many followers in America. Not one of them all can be trusted.
Originally written in anger, this has been edited.
Direct action of some kind is coming, but as in so many parts of the world and at so many times in history it may come at the death and with death.
Pachauris' warnings are probably short of reality. Given his position and the recent pattern of information in which each year sees the conclusions of the past year having to be revised sharply upwards, his figures are probably conservative and very likely out of date.
(Comment has been edited)
2020 and even 2015 is still way to slow to work in the United States, for administrative reasons.
CEO's and stockholders easily ride out distant goals, taking the windfall from violations then selling out holdings before the devaluation to follow.
When the time comes, power and petrol companies will likely find "too big to fail" more profitable than compliance, and nationalization will likely remain a difficult sale in the American media environment.
To have teeth, goals must be annual, even quarterly, with penalties that involve loss of private control of operations and seizing profits to pay for government oversight.
In Chavez' Venezuela, partial nationalization of petroleros one may see a near-model response to psychopathic corporatocracy.
Chavez allowed the petroleros to sufficient profit that they did not call for immediate invasion, yet took enough of their money control of their operations to change their activities\
-- with the option of taking the rest on failure to cooperate.
Action from below would be better, but may not become available.