‘The
Polish government has done its best to turn these talks into a
showcase for the coal industry’
Warsaw
walkout: Big green groups bail on U.N. climate talks
21
November, 2013
By Ben Jervey
21 November 2013
21 November 2013
WARSAW, Poland (Grist) – For the first time ever, environmental groups have staged a mass walkout of a U.N. climate summit. Citing immense frustration with the lack of productive action in the COP19 climate talks, which have been dogged by a persistent rift between rich and poor countries on the responsibility of paying for climate damages, hundreds of people from dozens of environmental groups and movements from all corners of the Earth have voluntarily withdrawn from the talks. According to a spokesperson for Oxfam, around 800 civil society members (which is the label applied to all advocate and activist types at these meetings) have walked out. In a joint statement, group leaders offered that “the best use of their time” was to now focus “on mobilizing people to push our governments to take leadership for serious climate action.”
Participants in the walkout — which included members and organizers fromOxfam, Greenpeace International, 350.org, WWF International, the International Trade Union Confederation, ActionAid International, Friends of the Earth Europe, and dozens of other groups large and small from around the world — assembled just after lunchtime outside the main food court in the National Stadium that is hosting the meetings. After statements from the heads of a handful of international orgs, including Kumi Naidoo, executive director of Greenpeace International, members of civil society headed for the exits.
“The real hooligans are the CEOs of fossil fuel companies,” Naidoo told the crowd.
In the joint statement, the groups said, “enough is enough,” but insisted that they were not walking away from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change process entirely, promising to return for COP20 in Lima, Peru, in 2014. [more]
3
Countries That Are Bailing on Climate Action
When
Japan dramatically slashed its plans last week for reducing
greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, from 25 percent to just 3.8 percent
compared to 2005 figures, the international reaction was swift and
damning.
19
November, 2013
Britain
called it "deeply disappointing." China's climate
negotiator, Su Wei, said, "I have no way of describing my
dismay." The Alliance of Small Island Nations, which represents
islands most at risk of sea level rise, branded the move "a huge
step backwards."
The
decision was based on the fact that Japan's 50 nuclear reactors—which
had provided about 30 percent of the country's electricity—are
currently shuttered for safety checks after the Fukushima disaster in
March 2011, despite the government trying to bring some of them back
online. That nuclear energy is largely being replaced by fossil
fuels.
Japan's
announcement has cast a shadow on this week's climate negotiations in
Warsaw. Bill Hare, CEO of Climate Analytics and a former lead author
for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, described the mood
as "a downward spiral of ambition" which is "undermining
confidence in the process and the ability to move forward."
Elliot
Diringer, the executive vice president of the DC-based think tank
Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, says NGOs and policymakers
are feeling frustrated: "There was a great deal of sympathy for
Japan in the aftermath of Fukushima," he says. "And that's
now converted to disappointment."
But
Japan isn't the only industrialized country at Warsaw walking away
from previously stated climate goals and attracting criticism for
throwing a spanner in the works, an issue also explored here in
Grist. Australia and Canada are emerging as strong opponents of more
aggressive climate action and are likely to come up short on their
commitments to reduce their emissions.
Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott attends the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Colombo, Sir Lanka. Li Peng/Xinhua/ZUMA
Australia
Guts Carbon Policy
Sweeping
to power on a carbon tax backlash in September this year, Australia's
new prime minister, Tony Abbott, has wasted no time in shifting the
country's policy course—and rhetoric—on climate action.
The
conservative government is dismantling the country's market-based
carbon pricing laws in the parliament as a matter of first priority,
and replacing it with its own system, "Direct Action," a $3
billion plan to fund projects that it says will help lower emissions.
The problem is not many people believe it will work. Analysis by
Climate Action Tracker, which assesses reduction programs around the
world, shows that rather than cutting greenhouse gases by the
promised 5 percent, the policy will actually increase emissions by
2020 by 12 percent compared to 2000 levels. Independent modeling
shows that even if the government stuck to its 5 percent pledge, it
couldn't be met without coughing up an additional $3.7 billion.
Australia's
new policies are "registering shock," in Warsaw, says Hare,
who also helps run Climate Action Tracker. "It's being met with
disbelief."
At
the Warsaw talks, Australia is contributing "to a sense that
there's some unfortunate backsliding among some countries,"
Direnger says.
Abbott
asserted last week that the goal will be met, but he added that no
further money would be spent on the program if it wasn't: "We
will achieve it with the Direct Action policy as we've announced it
and that policy: It's costed, it's funded, and it's capped," he
told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. The Australian
Conservation Foundation accused the government of abandoning its
promise to scale its original pledge up to 25 percent if there's
stronger global climate action, calling Abbott a "deal wrecker."
The opposition Labor party said the government was allowing "big
polluters open slather in the future."
A
flurry of other developments Downunder have helped to cement the new
government's stance at home and abroad:
There
are plans to kill three key organs of the previous government's
climate policy entirely: the independent Climate Commission, the
Climate Change Authority, and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation.
The
budget for the Australian Renewable Energy Agency will be slashed by
$435 million over the next three years
For
the first time since the 1997 Kyoto agreement, Australia declined to
send its environment minister, Greg Hunt, to this week's
international climate talks talks, saying the business of repealing
the carbon legislation in the first two weeks of parliament was too
important.
Canada
Unlikely to Meet Its Own Targets
Australia
is among the developed world's worst polluters in terms of of CO2 per
capita. But Canada is not far behind its Commonwealth compatriot.
Lately, they seem to be enjoying each other's company.
This
week, both conservative governments opposed a push at the
Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Colombo, Sri Lanka, to
establish a green capital fund for small island states and poor
African countries to address climate change. Canada recently praised
Australia's decision to repeal its carbon tax: "The Australian
prime minister's decision will be noticed around the world and sends
an important message."
Canada's
Prime Minister Stephen Harper. James Park/Xinhua/ZUMA
When
Canada signed the Copenhagen Accord in 2009, the country committed to
reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 17 percent below 2005 levels
by 2020 (bringing it in line with US goals). But last month, the
Harper government admitted it's going to blow past that target by a
wide margin. Environment Canada, the federal ministry that looks
after climate policy, issued a report that said that without new
government action, the country's emissions will be 20 percent (or 122
megatons) higher than the country committed to at Copenhagen. This
amount is barely below 2005 figures.
It's
this trajectory that, in part, led the Climate Action Network Europe
and Germanwatch to list Canada as the worst performing country among
all industrialized nations in their annual performance
index—unchanged from last year's ranking: "Canada still shows
no intention of moving forward with climate policy and therefore
remains the worst performer," the report states. (In December
2011, Canada was the first country to formally withdraw from the
Kyoto Protocol).
Reading
the tea leaves doesn't inspire much optimism: All of this is
happening against the background of expanding tar sands development.
The report from Environment Canada predicts that without a change in
policy, CO2-equivalent emissions from oil sands are projected to
increase by nearly 200 percent by 2020 over 2005 levels. And on tar
sands, the Harper government shows no sign shifting policy direction.
The
combined effect has an "ultimately corrosive effect on the
ability to secure a strong international agreement if the major
players aren't playing," Hare says.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.