Heard it here first? Those of you familiar with Levi's Goat of Mendez have read it on his arms Solve & Coagula Fred
On Friday, Dec 12, 2003, at 06:49 US/Eastern, Keith Addison wrote: > "Contraction & Convergence" - you read it here first, folks, three > years ago: > > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/1539/ > Subject: climate change, 10 Dec 2000 > > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/27393/ > Subject: Contraction and Convergence, 23 Aug 2003 > > Check out Aubrey Meyer's Global Commons Institute (GCI): > http://gci.org.uk/ > > For an introduction to the ideas behind Contraction and Convergence, > see: > http://www.gci.org.uk/contconv/cc.html > > Some info about the book, "Contraction & Convergence - The Global > Solution to Climate Change": > http://www.gci.org.uk/ccbook.html > > ------------- > > http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994467 > New Scientist > > Greenhouse gas 'plan B' gaining support > > 19:00 10 December 03 > > The Kyoto protocol is dying a death of a thousand cuts. Last week, > the US reiterated that it wants nothing to do with the sole > international agreement designed to save the world from runaway > global warming. > > The European Union, Kyoto's main promoter, revealed that most of its > members will not meet their treaty's obligations. And Russia once > again seemed to be on the point of wrecking the protocol completely. > > These blows follow a history of bureaucratic squabbling and political > posturing by the protocol's signatories, and many observers now fear > that it has been damaged beyond repair. So does the world have a plan > B for bringing the emissions of greenhouse gases under control? > > > Contraction & Convergence model > > The answer is yes, and it goes by the name "contraction and > convergence", or C&C. The idea has been around for a decade, but > lately it has been gaining ever more influential converts, such as > the UK's Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, the UN > Environment Programme, the European Parliament and the German > Advisory Council on Global Change, which last week released a report > supporting the idea. > > A source within the German delegation in Milan said this week that > his government was taking the idea "very seriously indeed". Even > observers outside the environmental establishment, such as the World > Council of Churches, back the proposal. > > Simple and fair > > For the past two weeks, representatives from around the world have > been in Milan, Italy, for COP9, the ninth annual meeting of > signatories to the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change. Many > of them now privately admit that C&C is what we have been waiting for. > > While Kyoto has become a convoluted, arbitrary and short-term measure > to mitigate climate change, C&C could provide a simple, fair, > long-term solution. And above all, it is based on science rather than > politics. > > The "contraction" in C&C is shorthand for reducing the total global > output of greenhouse gases. At the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, the > world's governments agreed to act to prevent dangerous climatic > change. The Kyoto treaty was their first fumbling attempt to meet > that pledge, and if implemented would set emissions targets for > industrialised nations for the period 2008 to 2012. > > But increasing numbers of delegates are viewing Kyoto as part of the > problem, not part of the solution. Its labyrinthine rules allow > nations to offset emissions with devices such as carbon-sink > projects, and are so complex they are virtually unenforceable. Even > if Kyoto becomes international law, it cannot be the blueprint for > future deals beyond 2012. A new start is needed. > > These delegates argue that it is time to get back to first principles > to find a formula to fight the "dangerous" climate change mentioned > in the Rio treaty. And there is an emerging consensus that > "dangerous" means any warming in excess of 2 ¡C above pre-industrial > levels; so far temperatures have risen by 0.6 ¡C. > > Drastic cuts > > To keep below the 2 ¡C ceiling will mean keeping global atmospheric > concentrations of carbon dioxide, the most important greenhouse gas, > below about 450 parts per million. But because CO2 and other > greenhouse gases linger in the atmosphere for a century or more, > staying below that ceiling will mean drastic cuts in emissions over > the next 50 years. > > The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution has decided that a 60 > per cent cut in global emissions by 2050 is needed, which the British > government has adopted as its national target. But if the world is to > manage such a transformation, then hard choices will have to be made. > > And that is where the "convergence" part of C&C comes in. > Industrialised nations have so far done most of the polluting. The US > emits 25 times as much CO2 per head as India, for example, but if > pollution is to be rationed, that cannot carry on. > > So under the C&C proposals, national emissions will converge year by > year towards some agreed target based upon each country's population > (see graph). In effect, by a target date that the Royal Commission > and Germany's advisory council agree should be 2050, every citizen of > the world should have an equal right to pollute. > > Emerging technologies > > The average global citizen is responsible for pumping just over a > tonne of carbon into the air each year. To prevent dangerous climate > change, while allowing for some population increase, the world has to > reduce that figure to around 0.3 tonnes per head. > > That target is not quite as daunting as it sounds. Emerging > technologies for generating energy without burning fossil fuel and > for increased energy efficiency suggest it is achievable within a few > decades without serious damage to the world's economic health. > > But because some nations will find it harder than others to meet > their targets, especially early on, the C&C formula also embraces the > idea of countries trading emissions permits. This is already part of > the Kyoto formula, but with every nation in the world involved, and > with far more stringent targets, it would be a much bigger business. > > Many of the politicians and diplomats most intimately involved in > negotiating the Kyoto Protocol targets six years ago have emerged as > supporters of C&C in Milan. "We should not be fixated on Kyoto but on > the climate change problem itself and what comes after Kyoto," said > Raul Esatrada, the Argentinian diplomat who chaired the crucial Kyoto > negotiations. And that, he says, is likely to mean C&C. > > The chief climate negotiator for the US under President Clinton, > Eileen Claussen, says that "almost any long-term solution will embody > a high degree of contraction and convergence." She predicts it will > become "an importance force in the negotiation". > > Pollution for sale > > On the face of it, C&C seems anathema to countries like the US, which > would have to buy large numbers of pollution credits in the early > years. But it does meet most of the criticisms made by the Bush > administration of the Kyoto protocol. > > In particular, Bush called it unfair that Asian trading competitors, > as developing nations, had no targets. Under C&C every nation would > ultimately have the same target. Some, such as China, already have > per-capita emissions in excess of targets they might have to meet by > mid-century. > > But perhaps the greatest attraction of C&C is the complete break it > would make from the horse-trading, short-term fixing and endless > complications that have plagued efforts to bring the Kyoto protocol > into effect. In 2002, the US shocked the world by refusing to ratify > the treaty, and just last week the EU, its biggest cheerleader, > admitted that only two member states, Sweden and the UK, were on > course to meet the targets laid down in 1997. > > As business grinds on in Milan, the bureaucratic tangles of the Kyoto > protocol are becoming ever more convoluted as nations discuss matters > such as whether rubber plantations might, like forests, count as a > "carbon sink" for which they can claim credit. > > Six years after the heady Kyoto night when 171 nations thought they > had signed up to save the world, the disconnect between the science > and the politics remains huge. > > > Fred Pearce > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ---------------------~--> > Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark > Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & > Canada. > http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511 > http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/9bTolB/TM > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > ~-> > > Biofuels at Journey to Forever > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: > http://archive.nnytech.net/ > Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > "If you tremble with indignation at every injustice then you are a comrade of mine." Che Guevara Same struggle same fight Human freedom, animal rights ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511 http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/9bTolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
