i>Click on the headline (link) for the full text.
Many more articles are available through the Energy Bulletin homepage
Ancient glaciers are disappearing faster than ever
Michael McCarthy, The Independent
Melting ice is pouring off Greenland and Antarctica into the sea far faster than was previously realised because of global warming, new scientific research reveals today.
The accelerating loss from the world’s two great land-based ice sheets means a rise in sea levels is likely to happen even more quickly than UN scientists suggested only two years ago, the findings by British scientists suggest.
Although floating ice, such as that in the Arctic Ocean, does not add to sea-level rise when it melts as it is already displacing its own mass in the water, melting ice from the land raises the global sea level directly. At present it is thought that land-based ice melt accounts for about 1.8mm of the current annual sea level rise of 3.2mm – the rest is coming from the fact that water expands in volume as it warms. But the new findings, published online today in the journal Nature, imply that this rate is likely to increase…
(24 Sept 2009)
Iraq’s marshes are dying a second death
Raheem Salman, Los Angeles Times
Vast lakes have shriveled. River beds have run dry. The animals are sick, the birds have flown elsewhere and an ancient way of life is facing a new threat to its existence. The fabled marshes of southern Iraq are dying again — only this time the forces of nature, not the hand of man, are to blame.
The man-made death came in the 1990s, when Saddam Hussein deliberately drained the marshes to prevent their use by guerrillas, some infiltrating from Iran.
After Hussein was toppled in the U.S.-led invasion of 2003, Iraqis rushed to breach the dikes he had erected, and tens of thousands of marsh dwellers who had fled returned to their homes.
Now a devastating drought threatens their livelihoods as farmers and fishermen…
(24 Sept 2009)
“The poor are burdened twice”
Vandana Shiva, New Statesman
The science of climate change is now clear, but the politics is very muddy. Historically, the major polluters were the rich, industrialised countries, so it made sense that they should pay the highest price. The Kyoto Protocol, adopted in December 1997, set binding targets for these countries to reduce their greenhouse-gas emissions by 5 per cent on average against 1990 levels by 2012. But by 2007, America’s greenhouse-gas levels were 16 per cent higher than 1990 levels. The American Clean Energy and Security Act, which was passed in June, commits the US to reduce emissions to 17 per cent below 2005 levels by 2020, yet this is just 4 per cent below 1990 levels.
The Kyoto Protocol also allows industrialised countries to trade their allocation of carbon emissions, and to invest in carbon mitigation projects in developing countries in exchange for Certified Emission Reduction Units, which they can use to meet reduction targets. But emissions trading, or offsetting, is not in fact a mechanism to reduce emissions. As the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental think tank, has pointed out, the emissions offset in the American act would allow “business as usual” growth in US emissions until 2030, “leading one to wonder: where’s the ‘cap’ in ‘cap and trade’?”.
Such schemes are more about privatising the atmosphere than about preventing climate change; the emissions rights established by the Kyoto Protocol are several times higher than the levels needed to prevent a 2°C rise in global temperatures. Allocations for the UK, for example, added up to 736 million tonnes of carbon dioxide over three years, meaning no reduction commitments. And emissions rights generate super profits for polluters…
(17 Sept 2009)
related: The Politics of Global Climate Change
Climate Summit: China Commits, Obama Not So Much
Kate Sheppard, Mother Jones
Minutes after the close of the United Nations summit on climate change on Tuesday, Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon declared the event a success. “The momentum has shifted,” he told reporters.
“For the last few months I have been very concerned by the slow pace of the global negotiations,” said Ban. “But I listened carefully to the discussions today and I sensed that something that has been missing for the past few months has returned. It is a sense of optimism, urgency, and hope that governments are determined to seal a deal in Copenhagen.”
But, if anything, the public-facing side of the summit didn’t offer much hope. Barack Obama’s speech offered nothing in the way of specific policy directives and did little to put pressure on Congress to deliver him a bill that he can take to Copenhagen. And there were no major breakthroughs on agreements between leaders.
For those determined to find signs of progress, one might have been the speech by Chinese President Hu Jintao. His promise that the country would reduce greenhouse emissions by a “notable margin” below 2005 levels within a decade was hailed as a breakthrough – though he didn’t clarify whether that would be a binding goal. Chinese leaders said they are still discussing what the actual target will be…
(22 Sept 2009)
Related: See Bill McKibben’s take on the speech here Obama on Climate: How Hard Is He Trying?,
India could halve emissions growth…but at a price
Anna Da Costa, Worldwatch Institute
Growth in India’s carbon emissions could be nearly halved by the year 2030 through the use of known practices and technologies, according to a new report from McKinsey & Company.
Through a “step-change in…efforts to lower emissions,” India’s carbon output could grow from 1.6 billion tons in 2005 to only 2.8 billion tons in 2030 as the country’s population expands and its economy develops, the report said. This is down from a previously projected 5-6 billion tons for 2030.
If achieved, this dynamic shift could significantly enhance India’s energy security by reducing energy import requirements and shrinking domestic power demand by a quarter, the report concluded. Such measures would also make India one of the world’s most carbon-efficient countries, spawning new high-growth industries, increasing environmental sustainability, and improving the quality of life, particularly in rural areas.
“Eighty percent of what India could be in 2030 is yet to be built, providing the country an opportunity to effectively manage the economic and environmental costs of growing energy requirements,” said McKinsey & Company Director Rajat Gupta, a co-author of the report…
(21 Sept 2009)
You can access the report Energy and Environmental Stability: A report for India
Met Office warns of catastrophic global warming in our lifetimes
David Adam, The Guardian
Unchecked global warming could bring a severe temperature rise of 4C within many people’s lifetimes, according to a new report for the British government that significantly raises the stakes over climate change.
The study, prepared for the Department of Energy and Climate Change by scientists at the Met Office, challenges the assumption that severe warming will be a threat only for future generations, and warns that a catastrophic 4C rise in temperature could happen by 2060 without strong action on emissions.
Officials from 190 countries gather today in Bangkok to continue negotiations on a new deal to tackle global warming, which they aim to secure at United Nations talks in December in Copenhagen.
“We’ve always talked about these very severe impacts only affecting future generations, but people alive today could live to see a 4C rise,” said Richard Betts, the head of climate impacts at the Met Office Hadley Centre, who will announce the findings today at a conference at Oxford University. “People will say it’s an extreme scenario, and it is an extreme scenario, but it’s also a plausible scenario.”…
(28 Sept 2009)
